Nobles' Club Bullpen: Fourth Cycle

[AcaMetis]

True, but some leader/mapscript combinations can be seen as wasting a civ's UU or UB (putting Willem on an Inland Sea map, for instance, is basically throwing away the EIM), which NC is supposed to show the value/strengths of. In that respect Stalin makes for a good candidate for a map where Russia's UU/UB take a backseat to just playing a map to the leader's traits, since Catherine and/or Peter can show off the UU/UB instead. I do agree that that narrows down the "valid" map/leader combinations to less than it's possible to play the game as (I.E: Willem on an Inland Sea map), but the alternative would be throwing away UU/UBs from time to time, which I think is a worse alternative. Of course that all said it's only a suggestion of mine.

As for the map details, it's true that Augustus wouldn't have been a bad surprise choice for what I suggested for Stalin, but I just wasn't a fan of the idea of having four Fractal maps in a row. Otherwise I absolutely could have just rolled random Fractal maps until the dice gave me something that looked interesting/fun, regardless of the exact details of the map beyond it's script, but three Fractal maps in a row is enough I feel like. Me not openly mentioning those details probably would have been a good idea, that said .

In any case, Nobles' Club 221: Augustus Caesar of the Romans is up !

 

[Tobiyogi]

I agree that it would be really a waste to play a civ without ever having the possibilty to learn about the special power of a UU (like Khmers w/o ivory whatsoever or China with no Iron in sight, Dutch or Portugal completely inland....). On the other hand, when we chose that leader A should be Iso, leader B semi-iso and C on a pangea, the game becomes too much "drafted", imo. Yes, would be better not to speak about it beforehand
I will still try out Nr. 221, as I really like Augustus.

 

[AcaMetis]

I wouldn't suggest scripting NC to that degree either. I just thought that Stalin would fit well for such a map (someone leader should at some point, just for variety's sake if nothing else) and he was next in line traits-wise, but didn't think that having four Fractal maps in a row would be very fun, not enough variety, so I went with the Augustus map instead. Later on, even if I do end up rolling Stalin's map this cycle, it's entirely possible that the game gives me something completely unexpected that I go with instead of what I suggested after all. Wouldn't be the first time the game's RNG surprised even me.

 

[sampsa]

didn't think that having four Fractal maps in a row would be very fun, not enough variety

I think fractal has enough in-built variety that people shouldn't complain even if every game was fractal.

 

[AcaMetis]

212 Hannibal (FIN/CHA)
213 Bismarck (EXP/IND)
214 Catherine (CRE/IMP)
215 Hammurabi (AGG/ORG)
216 Suleiman (PHI/IMP)
217 Lincoln (PHI/CHA)
218 Asoka (SPI/ORG)
219 Gilgamesh (CRE/PRO)
220 Pacal II (EXP/FIN)
221 Augustus Caesar (IND/IMP)

Next up is Alex (AGG/PHI). I've got an idea in mind, but we'll see if the RNG actually wants to give it to me before it gives me something else interesting first .

 

[krikav]

Agg-Phi, now that is a lovely combiation of traits!

 

[Snowbird]

Any chance to have unrestricted leaders game? One in in hundred surely would not hurt too much

 

[AcaMetis]

Any chance to have unrestricted leaders game? One in in hundred surely would not hurt too much

If it's reasonable to do in terms of the scenario files it'd be possible to have a separate "challenge" version of a map, like the Lincoln map had the option of starting with Democracy, in which case it definitely couldn't hurt too much to give people the option. No clue if Unrestricted Leaders can be done as easily, though.

Also, luck was had once again - Nobles' Club 222: Alexander of Greece is up!

 

[Tobiyogi]

Any chance to have unrestricted leaders game? One in in hundred surely would not hurt too much

I do like the format personally, but don't think it fits well with Noble's Club, because it would consume 2 leader/civ at the same time and we want to play everyone at a time, in my opinion.

 

[Snowbird]

212 Hannibal (FIN/CHA)
215 Hammurabi (AGG/ORG)
219 Gilgamesh (CRE/PRO)

but don't think it fits well with Noble's Club, because it would consume 2 leader/civ at the same time and we want to play everyone at a time, in my opinion.

Just do Hammy of Sumeria (can be legitametely fun) and Gilg of Babylon. Nothing gets 'consumed' and it is 2 games out of 220, less than 1%.

 

[Tobiyogi]

It's true, would be a perfect combination, as I said before. In that case, we could use a historical introduction that explains (in a funny way) how Hammurabi took over the lead of Sumeria and vice versa. For me, the NC is also a way to get familiar with history of ancient civs, and I built up my own hosted games in that manner.
If leader and civ are too far from each other though, that would be difficult.
So if you find a fitting combination for the future, i would support it.

 

[Excal]

Hi All

Is there a list of upcoming leaders you are following now ?
(sorry been away from Civ4 for about 6 months)

 

[krikav]

No, there is no schedule, we just wing it.
What we try to do, is to spread out traits as much as possible, so that we don't play several spi leaders in a row and such.
But right now, I think it's quite open, as we have done most traits...?

Here is a list of the leaders played so far.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/nobles-club-bullpen-fourth-cycle.537926/page-30#post-15666201

 

[krikav]

You want to roll a map @Excal ?

 

[Excal]

@krikav - I usually just play old Nobles Club games of upcoming leaders for practise so I generally don't roll my own maps very often.
I tend to do this because it allows me to compare against what others have done and to gain further insight from their posts after I have finished the game. I find it to be a useful way to improve and at the moment I am still a bit rusty after a 6-month break.

 

[krikav]

@Excal yes, I remember that you lifed up a couple of nice NC games from ages past that I tagged along for too, very nice!
What leader would you like to play next then?


Anyone else has any preference for leader or anything else?

 

[AcaMetis]

For the record, next on the docket trait-wise is either Brennus (CHA/SPI) or Napoleon (CHA/ORG). I don't have a particular preference either way, but if anyone does I can see about rolling a map for him/her if no one else wants to .

 

[krikav]

I prefer both!

I have played quite abit of Brennus lately and he is always good fun to play because the sucky starting techs always ensures a challenge in the start, and his traits make for a interesting and flexible game after that.

Napoleon is arguable the worst of the three french leaders, but something about him makes me enjoy going for cannons even more than I usually do.

 

[AcaMetis]

Brennus ended up working out better for me, so I decided to go with him . So Nobles' Club 223: Brennus of the Celts is up! And, for the record, the leader list:

212 Hannibal (FIN/CHA)
213 Bismarck (EXP/IND)
214 Catherine (CRE/IMP)
215 Hammurabi (AGG/ORG)
216 Suleiman (PHI/IMP)
217 Lincoln (PHI/CHA)
218 Asoka (SPI/ORG)
219 Gilgamesh (CRE/PRO)
220 Pacal II (EXP/FIN)
221 Augustus Caesar (IND/IMP)
222 Alexander (AGG/PHI)
223 Brennus (CHA/SPI)

Next on the docket, trait-wise, would be Zara (CRE/ORG).

 

[krikav]

NC is really on a hot streak now thanks to your efforts AcaMetis! I really appreciate the effort you put into this.