Team Sirius

[Lord Parkin]

Could be fun, but I think generally we try to avoid mods because it makes joining the game that much more difficult. We don't even use some of the great mods like BUG, because it makes it too annoying to load the game. (Once you've got involved in a few pitboss games, you'll understand the frustration of having to switch mods between games every time you play your turn.) So it's a nice idea, but unfortunately I don't think it'll happen.

 

[T. Claudius]

Hi...

Team Demogames have always interested me, but as a fairly new player I don't think I'd really have anything to add to this team, however I definitely looking forwards to lurking this game(and team, specifically-I've been lurking this thread for a few days now, actually, seems like a great team you've got gathered here.)

 

[Lord Parkin]

Sure, welcome aboard T. Claudius.

 

[caveman1917]

How long does it usually take for something like this to start? I can't wait

 

[Toch]

Do we have some privat forum ?

 

[AlphaShard]

Not yet but they are working on it.

 

[Lord Parkin]

Yeah, I'll let you guys know as soon as the private forum is up. My guess is we should be started on the game by April, but we can certainly get started on discussions before then (and maybe even our private team pitboss game).

 

[caveman1917]

I was wondering, suppose the idea of having two civilizations gets into the game, what would be the optimal strategy for choosing them? Is it ok to start such a discussion before having private forums?

Assuming they would start next to eachother, that kind of comes down to giving us the choice which 'type' of city we want on each spot.
So a city with good production and military modifiers to settle our production spots, and a city with good commerce modifiers for the commerce/scientific.

I suppose then it's best to look for trait combinations that lend themselves to that sort of specialisation.

For UU's i believe there would be three strategies. Either put them in the same age to use as some sort of superstack, place them in consecutive ages for a prolonged, but still quite good stack, or have them in totally unrelated ages.
The difference in probability of winning any battle is only one factor which decides on a war, we might also be diplomatically isolated, technologically behind, etc.
So putting them in the same age i think would be risky as it might just not be time for us to go to war.
Having them in unrelated ages would be not using any advantage we might get out of it.
I think it's best to look for them in consecutive ages. In a way using the momentum and great generals we got from waging war with the first one to enhance our war with the last one, while chances are still higher we're ahead as we've been using our first UU for this.

Any thoughts?

 

[T. Claudius]

To my understanding you only start with one city but have 2 UUs, 2 UBs, 4 starting techs and 4 traits.

 

[caveman1917]

In the polling thread it says it would be like the game documented here
Which is with two different settlers/cities, like having two civs in a permanent alliance.

 

[T. Claudius]

Well that shows for my understanding... I just read the first post, which didn't mention anything about playing two separate civilizations at a time, sorry.

 

[pindicator]

Exactly the game I was thinking of, caveman. They did a very good job of specializing their civs and gifting cities between civs depending on how cities aligned to those purposes.

 

[azzaman333]

I was wondering, suppose the idea of having two civilizations gets into the game, what would be the optimal strategy for choosing them? Is it ok to start such a discussion before having private forums?

Assuming they would start next to eachother, that kind of comes down to giving us the choice which 'type' of city we want on each spot.
So a city with good production and military modifiers to settle our production spots, and a city with good commerce modifiers for the commerce/scientific.

I suppose then it's best to look for trait combinations that lend themselves to that sort of specialisation.

For UU's i believe there would be three strategies. Either put them in the same age to use as some sort of superstack, place them in consecutive ages for a prolonged, but still quite good stack, or have them in totally unrelated ages.
The difference in probability of winning any battle is only one factor which decides on a war, we might also be diplomatically isolated, technologically behind, etc.
So putting them in the same age i think would be risky as it might just not be time for us to go to war.
Having them in unrelated ages would be not using any advantage we might get out of it.
I think it's best to look for them in consecutive ages. In a way using the momentum and great generals we got from waging war with the first one to enhance our war with the last one, while chances are still higher we're ahead as we've been using our first UU for this.

Any thoughts?

The two main things I would probably want from the two civs (without getting too specific before private forums) are;
4 different traits
4 different starting techs

 

[Lord Parkin]

Yeah, I wouldn't want to get too specific before we get the private forums, since otherwise the other teams might be able to pick counter-civs (e.g. if we had Egypt and Mongolia, our opponents might lean towards picking Maya or Zulu). But I'd certainly like to get these discussions going. I don't quite understand what the hold-up is on the private forums... we'd have a lot more freedom to discuss as soon as they're open, so I don't know why they aren't already open.

 

[AlphaShard]

What we need is secret text, that's what we could use. If this forum supported that.

Or we could all try and chat in Skype.

 

[HUSch]

You can speak but I wouldn't understand; so you 've transscript the sermon later.

But I would like to get a forum for unrestraint discussions. Perhaps the admins are overworking.

 

[AlphaShard]

Sermon?

I didn't mean Voice chat...

 

[caveman1917]

Yes, it's walking a thin line right now. I didn't mean to get too specific on choosing the civs themselves, but more like figuring out good 'guidelines'. Private forums would make it a lot easier to discuss freely of course.

There's a thread here by DaveShack listing the order in which things ought to be done, but creating private forums is only number 6, after several days of preliminary sign-ups and 'advertising'.

However i wonder why? I don't really understand the decision in what would be gained by putting of private forum creation for so long. Perhaps the reasoning is that it gives new players the chance to check out all the teams a bit before deciding which one to join? But then why don't we just create extra private forums already, besides the threads we have going on now, which can still be the 'public face' of the teams for recruitment and getting to know the teams a bit better before deciding which one to join?

EDIT i noticed from DaveShack's post

Notes:
1. Private forums are not created until after the #teams is finalized. The reason for delaying is to allow free movement between teams until the official signups start, so that no player can be "contaminated" by team private information.

 

[Lord Parkin]

How many players actually change their choice after choosing their team though? I don't think I've seen it happen...

Anyway, I'll have to get to work on a potential "advertising" post in the hopes that we can move forward soon.

 

[fed1943]

I would like to join this team, if I'm accepted.