azzaman333
meh
Yep, that's the reason.
Now, let us stop trying to analyse it in public and scamper back to our private forums and relentlessly analyse it til the cows come home.
The Great Lighthouse
- Thread starter DaveMcW
- Start date
Yep, that's the reason.
Now, let us stop trying to analyse it in public and scamper back to our private forums and relentlessly analyse it til the cows come home.
I encourage everyone to keep analyzing (and complaining about it) in public.
So now it's a race to Colossus you say?
So now it's a race to Colossus you say?
azzaman333
meh
Fine then.
It's actually a clever counter-ploy by Dave to make us think the GL would be OP on this map, but actually it's all a trick. The real important wonder will be Chicken Pizza (aka Chichen Itza)
It's actually a clever counter-ploy by Dave to make us think the GL would be OP on this map, but actually it's all a trick. The real important wonder will be Chicken Pizza (aka Chichen Itza)
Lord Parkin
aka emperor
Or it's all a trick, and the Great Lighthouse is really still enabled, but Dave's trying to deter us from heading there too soon. Who's going to research Sailing and Masonry first to find out? 
Because he's going to continually insert barbarian units right outside our cities with world builder, and we'll need every defence point we can get!
I'm disapointed that the lighthouse is gone, because I really wanted to go after it, but I'm excited to see what the map conditions are that justify it. In fact I think the map will look like...[contents reserved for the Sirius Team Forum]... oh and lots of bears.
AlphaShard
Emperor
Or it's all a trick, and the Great Lighthouse is really still enabled, but Dave's trying to deter us from heading there too soon. Who's going to research Sailing and Masonry first to find out?
You know it could be an April Fools joke lol.
Exactly
We cant get the GLH because the big fire at the top would scare away the bears for miles and miles.
We cant get the GLH because the big fire at the top would scare away the bears for miles and miles.
Indiansmoke
Deity
Something off topic......Azzaman's avatar freaks me out!
Maybe we should have replace GLH with a wonder called "azzaman's avatar"... that will really scare the bears away
Moderator Action: Stay on topic, please.
ash88
Hail to the King Baby -DN
I feel compelled to agree with the case as it has been presented by Lord Parkin, with no disrespect to others who are working diligently towards our common goal: a fun game.
This disagreement is caused by poor definitions. "Mapmaker given freedom" to me doesn't mean that the map maker can edit anything but the map. To others it seems that his powers are more liberal. This is a clarification that needs to be made in future games.
It seems reasonable to me that a map maker should not be able to alter anything but the map. He is the map maker. In my mind this does not give the person free rain to use all the tools within the world builder utility. Someone could argue that a map builder has free rain to build an entire world with all the tools (visibility, cities already settled, techs already researched, units already in play, etc.) I would make a distinction between someone who creates a map for us to play the game on, and someone who builds a scenario for us to play in.
If I would have logged in to find myself with all techs to the Modern Age discovered and a complete civilization of cities to rule I don't believe that any of us would disagree that the map maker had done more than "make a map." The line between making a map and providing a scenario needs definition; I don't think anyone wanted a scenario. For future reference I suggest that as soon as a map maker uses a tool besides the terrain tool, or the tool to place anything but the default starting units, then he is creating a scenario.
To emphasize: I'm not saying anyone is at fault here, I am saying this should have been better defined. I appreciate the work that the map maker has done! Live and learn.
I put my trust in the statement that there are no more deviations. Whats done is done this time. So I suppose the King of Team Merlot will be charging a modest admission for tourists to see our Colosus?
Cheers
This disagreement is caused by poor definitions. "Mapmaker given freedom" to me doesn't mean that the map maker can edit anything but the map. To others it seems that his powers are more liberal. This is a clarification that needs to be made in future games.
It seems reasonable to me that a map maker should not be able to alter anything but the map. He is the map maker. In my mind this does not give the person free rain to use all the tools within the world builder utility. Someone could argue that a map builder has free rain to build an entire world with all the tools (visibility, cities already settled, techs already researched, units already in play, etc.) I would make a distinction between someone who creates a map for us to play the game on, and someone who builds a scenario for us to play in.
If I would have logged in to find myself with all techs to the Modern Age discovered and a complete civilization of cities to rule I don't believe that any of us would disagree that the map maker had done more than "make a map." The line between making a map and providing a scenario needs definition; I don't think anyone wanted a scenario. For future reference I suggest that as soon as a map maker uses a tool besides the terrain tool, or the tool to place anything but the default starting units, then he is creating a scenario.
To emphasize: I'm not saying anyone is at fault here, I am saying this should have been better defined. I appreciate the work that the map maker has done! Live and learn.
I put my trust in the statement that there are no more deviations. Whats done is done this time. So I suppose the King of Team Merlot will be charging a modest admission for tourists to see our Colosus?
Cheers
AlphaShard
Emperor
I agree with ash88, that was all I wanted really.
I for one don't care whether it's technically part of his mandate or not. Stepping outside the box a little bit and applying good judgement is called showing initiative, which is usually considered a good thing. We're running a game not a law firm here.
Really, at this point it is what it is. Time to go back to your team forums and decide what changes in your strategy are needed, if any.
ash88
Hail to the King Baby -DN
I hope no one is getting their britches in a bunch, afterall I don't think anyone is calling foul here. People have come forward and seem disappointed. I can understand their point. I can also see the point of the people that put absolute power in the map maker (whoever he is). The only thing that is needed to make everyone happy in the next game is communication. No?
Let's not confuse the issue about the role of the game admin and the mapmaker. I believe that the changes were made while creating the map, and not as the game admin. I'm not aware of a game admin who takes it upon himself to make a barbo city and put a wonder in it for no particular reason. If it was a game admin decision and this was part of the designed scenario from the begining it could have easily been advertised as such - from the begining. This seems to be an issue of balance tied with the map, not an issue of maintaining the administrative function of the game. Just because someone wears more than one hat doesn't mean we need to confuse the point.
We all know that the difference between "showing initative" and "being disruptive" is in the result. Although we have all heard your point before the fact is that some people here seem disappointed. That disappointment could have easily been avoided by many things, like a simple poll before the game started for example, "Can the Map Maker change more than the terrain? Yes/No" If the answer was "No" and removing the GLH was needed to balance the map perhaps this wasn't a great map in that situation.
Again - this is all discussion for how to handle this in the future I think. I don't think anyone is questioning the actions of the current mapmaker at this point. In fact people regard him highly.
imho.
Let's not confuse the issue about the role of the game admin and the mapmaker. I believe that the changes were made while creating the map, and not as the game admin. I'm not aware of a game admin who takes it upon himself to make a barbo city and put a wonder in it for no particular reason. If it was a game admin decision and this was part of the designed scenario from the begining it could have easily been advertised as such - from the begining. This seems to be an issue of balance tied with the map, not an issue of maintaining the administrative function of the game. Just because someone wears more than one hat doesn't mean we need to confuse the point.
We all know that the difference between "showing initative" and "being disruptive" is in the result. Although we have all heard your point before the fact is that some people here seem disappointed. That disappointment could have easily been avoided by many things, like a simple poll before the game started for example, "Can the Map Maker change more than the terrain? Yes/No" If the answer was "No" and removing the GLH was needed to balance the map perhaps this wasn't a great map in that situation.
Again - this is all discussion for how to handle this in the future I think. I don't think anyone is questioning the actions of the current mapmaker at this point. In fact people regard him highly.
imho.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
Somehow, I find the uproar over this a little silly. Dave doesn't want the advantage skewed one way, and he was given the right to choose how to set the map up.
Haven't some of you realized that map layout can cause a FAR GREATER impact on the game than any single wonder, even that one? What if Dave hands only one civ marble/stone? What if one side is given bfc metal and a close spawn to someone else? Every single decision about the map has influence on the potential for traits and civs to influence the outcome of the game. And yet for one singular decision that if we guess the reasoning is not even the biggest deciding factor on the map, we're hitting multiple thread pages.
Someone who picked IND or ORG can whine over this all they like, but keep in mind that a water map puts others at a disadvantage too, if it is a water map. More importantly, if this wonder is so strong based on his decisions that it gives one side a controlling advantage, it makes sense to curtail the game being decided or largely decided in the 1000's BC.
The map, as a controlled setting, is different from random generations, and therefore we are expected to adapt...and the complaint is over a WONDER, one which we're informed from turn 0 that we can't attain?
Haven't some of you realized that map layout can cause a FAR GREATER impact on the game than any single wonder, even that one? What if Dave hands only one civ marble/stone? What if one side is given bfc metal and a close spawn to someone else? Every single decision about the map has influence on the potential for traits and civs to influence the outcome of the game. And yet for one singular decision that if we guess the reasoning is not even the biggest deciding factor on the map, we're hitting multiple thread pages.
Someone who picked IND or ORG can whine over this all they like, but keep in mind that a water map puts others at a disadvantage too, if it is a water map. More importantly, if this wonder is so strong based on his decisions that it gives one side a controlling advantage, it makes sense to curtail the game being decided or largely decided in the 1000's BC.
The map, as a controlled setting, is different from random generations, and therefore we are expected to adapt...and the complaint is over a WONDER, one which we're informed from turn 0 that we can't attain?
Amen
I mean honestly... The Great Lighthouse?
The Lighthouse?!?
I recently joined a pitboss mid-game and am playing right now with 16 players... Some of whom have teched things like Music and Paper...Music!, and there was no GLH Built. I started building it as a way to amass some quick cash, because I was sure that I would miss out on it... I had to build a lighthouse first... and I still got it No chopping, no micro to max 
... I just got it... the point? Nobody cares about the GLH... I'm surprised anyone even responded to this news TBH.I mean you're talking about... The Lighthouse?!?... The Playoffs?!? Don't talk about... The Lighthouse?!? Are you serious? You gotta be kidding me...The Playoffs?!?... The Lighthouse?!?
Similar threads
