UN Polls

[RickFGS]

Barbarian Poll
No barbs. No goody huts.
Map Style Poll
The Great Rik Meleet decides.
Map Size Poll
Standard
Ruleset Poll
MTDG1 Rules
Custom Rules Changes Poll
No SGL's. No Respawn Civs.

All good to me

 

[Daghdha]

We should cast our vote on the SoZ in the UN. This is what we have so far:

Statue of Zeus
-No (Bugsy, TimB, Daghie, RFH)

3 teams have voted Yes so we'll have to stick with that. What we can influence is the cost. 2 teams say default cost 200 shields. The Council says >200 and I think we should support a higher cost.

If no one opposes I will say No Ivory Required and 300 shields.

 

[Ansar]

Actually, arent most teams saying 300 shields?

But anyways...sure, lets have a Statue to this man called Zeus.

 

[SimpleMonkey]

No Ivory and 300 shields, but still produces AC? Can I change my vote to playing France?

 

[Sir Bugsy]

Since they want to have it, let's make it as hard as possible. I'm with you Daghie.

 

[Daghdha]

No Ivory and 300 shields, but still produces AC? Can I change my vote to playing France?

Yes you can. I have stalled the pm on civ selection for exactly this reason. As UN votes completes (an we have a hint on map style) we can make an even better list.

EDIT: Then we have the vote on CivAssistII. Does anyone here have it? I lean towards allowing it but only if we have access/knowledge within our team.
UN thread HERE

Side Note: I've noticed the change in profile RF. Gooood that we have a bean counter on our show

 

[RFHolloway]

For SOZ no ivory and 300 shields looks OK (would we still built it at those rates? - that's little better than 3% per turn if you value the AC at 50 shields)

With regards to civassist II, I play with it all the time, it does reveal some information that wouldn't be available direct from the multiplayer game (number of cities, which technologies and resources are available from the opponents, how much gold they have). The difference comes from the fact that in multiplayer you don't see the other people's half of the trade screen. The choice comes down to flavour, do we want it to seem more like a multiplayer with mystery surrounding the trading, or a more analytical game closer to the single player version. I prefer analysis (and would have to keep reminding myself not to use it) so I vote yes, but I do understand the reasons for not allowing it.

 

[RickFGS]

I vote yes for Civ Assist II and any other soft program that can help us win.

 

[Ansar]

I usually use CivAssist to assist me in city planning.

Yes, I believe we should be able to use it.
Is there a reason not to (such as revealing information to other teams) ?

 

[Daghdha]

IMPORTANT​

After lengthy discussions in the UN, a ruleset is about to be polled on. Those who whish to do so can find it HERE and make comments. If no one disagrees I will vote OK so we can get the show on the road.

 

[madviking]

seems good.

 

[SimpleMonkey]

The ruleset most recently posted seems workable to me. I had to read the section on breaking into the build sequence a couple of times to get the gist of it. (I originally thought it meant that you couldn't prebuild and or change your build orders in any way.) Anyway, the only time that's been an issue for me is when I've been playing it tight with tech research and have to change a prebuild in the build sequence after research completes but before the build completes. (Forgetting to do this has gotten me a couple of inadvertant palace jumps. ) Anyway, the rules seem fine.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

Looks good to me.

 

[RFHolloway]

agreed .