New Version - January 15th (1-15)

[CppMaster]

No doubt, I thought it was pretty clear that I was joking...


G

Alright, sometimes it's just hard to tell from mere text, that's all.
Anyway, as always, great job with the patch!

 

[Gazebo]

Alright, sometimes it's just hard to tell from mere text, that's all.
Anyway, as always, great job with the patch!

Mere text? These are the words of a Lord!

G

 

[CppMaster]

Isn't Lord somewhere between a Warlord and a Prince? I expected more from you

 

[Gazebo]

Isn't Lord somewhere between a Warlord and a Prince? I expected more from you

I haven’t played in awhile. I do my best.

G

 

[Minh Le]

The +1 Science on resource is too strong. If I happen to have 2 copy of these resources in my capital, I have almost 33% science increase in the very early game. Maybe science should at least be moved to improvement, not raw resources.

 

[Leondegrance]

The +1 Science on resource is too strong. If I happen to have 2 copy of these resources in my capital, I have almost 33% science increase in the very early game. Maybe science should at least be moved to improvement, not raw resources.

You have indeed but the AI also has indeed

 

[Minh Le]

You have indeed but the AI also has indeed

Its on 2 resources in the game, and because of how resources are placed in VP, if you have one of these as monopoly you will always get 2 in the capital. Its random and its too strong so it creates imbalance in game play. Please dont quote my post I cant follow your logic and Im tired of replying you.

 

[Leondegrance]

Its on 2 resources in the game, and because of how resources are placed in VP, if you have one of these as monopoly you will always get 2 in the capital. Its random and its too strong so it creates imbalance in game play. Please dont quote my post I cant follow your logic and Im tired of replying you.

Good morning. I see you slept good.

Why did you reply ? I didn't ask you a question.

 

[Rekk]

Good morning. I see you slept good.

Why did you reply ? I didn't ask you a question.

Because it sounded like you were refuting him.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Good morning. I see you slept good.

Why did you reply ? I didn't ask you a question.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe his post, which was as follows:

The +1 Science on resource is too strong. If I happen to have 2 copy of these resources in my capital, I have almost 33% science increase in the very early game. Maybe science should at least be moved to improvement, not raw resources.

was him asking you a question either, and yet you responded anyway. Why display such hypocrisy in that others can combat arguments you present only when you directly ask them for it, but you can freely say whatever you want whenever you want to whomever you want, whether you're asked for it or not? I say you should be the beacon of values you try to propagate and, therefore, avoid writing to others on this public forum when they do not ask you any questions. Be the shining example of behaviour you expect from others.

 

[Leondegrance]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe his post, which was as follows:

was him asking you a question either, and yet you responded anyway. Why display such hypocrisy in that others can combat arguments you present only when you directly ask them for it, but you can freely say whatever you want whenever you want to whomever you want, whether you're asked for it or not? I say you should be the beacon of values you try to propagate and, therefore, avoid writing to others on this public forum when they do not ask you any questions. Be the shining example of behaviour you expect from others.

Have you lost your mind ?

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Have you lost your mind ?

Sanity is for the weak, or so they say. My question is going to be similarly nice, are you sane enough to notice how weird your behaviour here is or are you merely content with double standards, where one is for you and one for lowly others saying stuff you don't like, who should only be posting in answer to your posts when you deign to benevolently give them permission to respond?

 

[Leondegrance]

Sanity is for the weak, or so they say. My question is going to be similarly nice, are you sane enough to notice how weird your behaviour here is or are you merely content with double standards, where one is for you and one for lowly others saying stuff you don't like, who should only be posting in answer to your posts when you deign to benevolently give them permission to respond?

Please dont quote my post I cant follow your logic and Im tired of replying you.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Please dont quote my post I cant follow your logic and Im tired of replying you.

If writing a sentence composed of 19 letters and a question mark like the post before tires your gentle hands and even gentler mind so much, I must question why you're on a forum to begin with. They're generally places where people share beliefs, ideas and points with a variety of other, unknown people. On the other hand I must agree that my logic and basic internet code of conduct might indeed be beyond your understanding, so I suppose stopping our little conversation might be for the best of everyone involved.

edit: lul i just noticed what you did here

 

[Txurce]

The +1 Science on resource is too strong. If I happen to have 2 copy of these resources in my capital, I have almost 33% science increase in the very early game. Maybe science should at least be moved to improvement, not raw resources.

I tend to like the fun of getting a +1 science resource, the same as I like finding a bunch of ruins. But I agree that both can unbalance the game (which is why some people play without ruins). I like your suggestion of moving the science to the appropriate tile improvement.

 

[Gazebo]

The +1 Science on resource is too strong. If I happen to have 2 copy of these resources in my capital, I have almost 33% science increase in the very early game. Maybe science should at least be moved to improvement, not raw resources.

I was on the fence about where to put the science. It didn’t affect AI imbalance negatively, but perhaps it’s abusable in human hands?

G

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I was on the fence about where to put the science. It didn’t affect AI imbalance negatively, but perhaps it’s abusable in human hands?

G

How are you able to abuse it? Reloading till you get those resources?

 

[tu_79]

I tend to like the fun of getting a +1 science resource, the same as I like finding a bunch of ruins. But I agree that both can unbalance the game (which is why some people play without ruins). I like your suggestion of moving the science to the appropriate tile improvement.

I miss them too. There are games where you have no iron, and games where you start with +2 science by the face. The game is long enough for things to become even, later.

 

[pineappledan]

But I agree that both can unbalance the game (which is why some people play without ruins).

What I understood is that people are disabling ruins because the AI gets Pathfinder I promotion for free. The double movement means players can't compete with the AI for ruins, so ruins just end up being a direct early game steroid to the AI.

 

[Gazebo]

How are you able to abuse it? Reloading till you get those resources?

Yes, but I used an unclear word. I guess I meant ‘exploit’ better than the AI. If that makes sense.

G