Nominated Players Tourney, Round 3 (MP)

What annoys me is that in our duel you destroyed my barb trap. Those guys were like blue helmets man! The whole world condemns you
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited May 08, 2000).]</font>

[cavebear]

As finbar points out, my only intention is to create a level playing field (as far as I can determine what "level playing field" means at the top level of play).

To me, "level playing field" means that one player doesn't get all of Europe while the other is locked up in Spain, or on a deserty island while another has rivers with gold to build on.

It also means a chance for the player's skills to be the deciding factor, not an imbalanced harrassment by barbs.

It *doesn't* mean "easy", it doesn't mean identical maps, and it doesn't mean being loaded up with resources at the start. It doesn't even mean that the different maps will be similar.

It only means that each specific game will start its players off with about the same conditions and opportunities. What you do with them is up to you. The challenge is what you do relative to your opponents with similar land, against human players.

Oh, and there will be huts. It was an interesting idea, but they should remain

[KenThur]

Sorry, but i continue to have a problem with & fail to understand why we can't just play the game as designed? If it was so ill-conceived, why is it so popular & continue to be played so much?

This is all begining to sound like a debate between liberals & conservatives! Unfortunately, will probably have about as much impact on changing people's mind(s).

I personally LOVE barbs. They...
&gt; keep the rapid expanders honest.
&gt; do TEND to balance out things because they TEND to attack the leading player(s) & leave the weaker 1's alone.
&gt; create tradeoff's (the secret to this whole game's success); "poor" starting places= good defensive areas / barb trapping areas. Not building cities immediately & looking for a better area = no barbs.
&gt; great source of much-needed early gold, IF one knows how to get it.
&gt; despite earlier comments, they DO NOT jump into the game rite away, usually not until 3000bc or so. Unless...____________

I personally LOVE huts. They...
&gt; add spice & realism (think about how early civ's made jumps).
&gt; create tradeoff's; should or shouldn't I? How & more important, when, to open these is all part of the skill of the this contest (& if U do not understand what i mean by that, then perhaps U R not as good as U thot U were).
&gt; they too seem to hand out "rewards" according to one's relative position in the current "powerchart".

No AI civ's i certainly agree with in a tourney.

Made-up maps... i personally have a major problem with. It simply smacks of socialism or worse, communism. "We know what's best for everyone / we want everyone to be equals." Sorry, that IS NOT a personal attack on anyone... just the idea that equality can be pre-created.
Ponder the "fairness" of this: i & many others, have NO IDEA of map-making, what can & can't be done. I'v never even opened that program. In fact, not only have i not opened to see what it can do, i long ago deleted it from my hard drive to save wasted space.
Is THAT fair to us non-manipulators? (actually, it's fear of what I/we don't know)
To continue with our golf... i spent my time & gold to play the game not design the course.

Switch analogy to the real world: would U judge the success of the UK or Netherlands by their "starting positions"? On the other hand, look what Argentina & parts of Africa started with. Sure there's USA, but it was BUILT, bought(thank U France & Mexico & Russia), & fought(sorry Mexico, :-P Canada) into world dominance. And it started in a "poor" spot; it's first cities had few "specials".
Of course, there's Australia's in any world (sorry, blokes). But then, they got a late start & didn't go there by choice. Besides if the world hadn't got so civilized, U guys are tough enuf to have taken all those great "specials" to your NW. Plus U'v always traded & allied w/ those nice islands off your east coast, aye? Why take them over when U get all U can from each other thru cooperation?
==========================================
Enuf rambling!
As suggested... Put the various issues to a vote.

As for pre-election posturing, if i havn't made myself clear:
those that vote for Machivellian manipulation of the forces of freedom & good must be pinko, Commie, whinning wimps!

!! Let the specials & barbs fall where they may!!

&lt;font size=1 face=Arial color=444444&gt;[This message has been edited by KenThur (edited May 09, 2000).]&lt;/font&gt;
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by KenThur (edited May 09, 2000).]</font>

[finbar]

Milo? You haven't seen barbs before 3000BC? Truly?

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

Well Frank hasn't.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited May 09, 2000).]</font>

[SmartFart]

To me, "level playing field" means that one player doesn't get all of Europe while the other is locked up in Spain

[/quote]

Thats exactly what happened to Empress in our duel. Plus if you got all 'Europe',you got 'Asia' as well.
Even if you have MapMaking,you still have no chance,not only because you need Trireme+Settlers while your opponent only needs 40 shields to expand further,but because your core cities will be separated from other cities.

AH...your games probably weren't ever spoiled by barbs.
I used to talk haughty about barbarians until i saw my 3rd or 4th fresh build city surrounded by 2 barb archers,usually on mountains or hills.
There's not much to do against it,even if you have bronze or hbr,particulary in x1x1 games where you cannot pumping out units rapidly.
They really could decide a winner early.
It happens rarely,but it indeed happens sometimes.

p.s. This is my 1st time i tried to quote someone. I hope i did everything right.

------------------

[cavebear]

I'm hoping this debate is only a tempest in a teacup, brought on by my poor explanation of what I meant by a "made-up map".

Most importantly, a "made-up map" is exactly like a computer-made map. Same resources, terrain, huts, barbs, polar ice, etc.

Second, it favors no particular strategy. Not warfare over development, not exploration over stealth, not food over trade, etc.

Third, I provide the map. No one has to know the least thing about making one. The host merely chooses "start with a premade world" and loads the one I sent. Any host could do that anyway with one of their own maps and no one would ever know.

If this is causing contention, I will back off the idea immediately. My only desire was to make the start of the tourney games fair to all players. That *can* be done without altering any aspect of the game except the initial "luck" factor, which I had gotten the impression was a concern of some of the players in the first 2 rounds.

The "default" decision in this is letting the computer generate the maps regardless of equity.

Smarty, yes I've had disastrous probs with barbs too.

Small point: 1 player can't have "all of Europe" while the other has Spain

[SmartFart]

True

[finbar]

Go for it, cavebear. As always, your intent is admirable. The reality is that the game is twisted and tweaked all the time - no city bribe agreement, etc - so feel free.

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[arii]

I like the idea of a made map with equal ressources to all the players. A lot of the early game depends on what ressources are available.

So, when does round 3 start? Hpw many duels still alive?

Question: What happens if a player wants to concede and still has cities left? Can those cities become ai? You could say give them to the agressor but what if 2 civs are attacking? I'd hate to see remaining cities destroyed on surrender.

[finbar]

What?

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[Crustacian]

Good question on what to do with left over cities from someone who conceeds.

Some possibilities are:

a) the one conceeding could determine that and give them to whom he wants.

b) let them become an ai civ in place of the human

c) make it a to the last city game, the only conceeding would then be from the next to last player at the end to the victor.

d) just giving them to the victor might make it unduly easy for someone to double their power in the world too easily. It alone might determine a game. (what if someone conceeded easily after say loosing one city or so, and all the rest simply went to the victor?)

I do not vote for d.

------------------
The journey itself is the thing~Odysseus

[SmartFart]

Host can erradicate retired civ from cheat menu if all passwords are known or if there aren't any.

[Curumbor Elendil]

I would vote for b), letting the AI take 'em over. I wouldn't want to risk the time and complications and potential cheating involved in letting the host kill the civ.

FWIW I also think it's a good idea to eliminate huts and barbs. It's not communism because it's not equality of outcomes; it's just equality of opportunity.

------------------
Curumbor Elendil
jason.sorens@yale.edu
ICQ 56126989

Smarty, that's what I want to avoid. I dunno whether the ai option or the leave it up to defeated player is better. The latter option has a high potential for a revenge factor. Look at the duels, you might only take 2 or 3 cities (but the right ones) and your opponent concedes while still holding many more. If they are allowed to give them to a another player that could give the recipient a real advantage over the player who caused the resignation.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited May 11, 2000).]</font>

[markusf]

Turn on tournoment mode. When the civ retires all his cities are destroyed.

Also about the hut thing and fair map play. Its seems to me the only ones complaining are austrialians... Go figure huh?

I say we can decide when we find out what the teams are.

Teams?

[markusf]

I didn't mean teams in that sence.
I ment groupings.


man i swear those aussi's are really backwards.

At least we can spell

[SmartFart]

Indeed....Rasputin is perfect example

[markusf]

What good does spelling do you, when you think, speak and write in gibberish?

Hope Horse boy is in our next game, i haven't had a good horse sausage in a while.


<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by markusf (edited May 11, 2000).]</font>

errr markus, I think that is meant to be gibberish rather than "gribberish"?
LOL
[Edited after markus did]
------------------
*THE DEITY*
#8388924


<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by iadkins (edited May 11, 2000).]</font>

[markusf]

I think someone needs a stronger prescription.

markusf, I've heard you're very good. I'll try not to upset you any more okay

IMO to the victors the spoils, no destruct cities

Oh and I'm 1 for 2 so bad luck markie boy, I'll be in another group in the next round

[finbar]

Yeah, Markus, spell pteridology ...

Um ...

I'll go away and rethink the challenge.

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by SmartFart on 05-11-2000 10:52 PM</font>
Indeed....Rasputin is perfect example
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

That was a low blow.

[markusf]

Don't worry horse boy, there will be many more to join you in the Aussie support group.


WHO HASN'T FINISHED YET!!!! I WANT TO PLAY ROUND 3 *lol*

aussie support group? Australians are about as supportive as the cast of Seinfeld. But I agree, BRING ON ROUND THREE!!!!