Re: five teams of two wanted
 

Ringworld is severly unbalanced. There are several areas of vast wastelands in places. Several of us recently played that map for the current slugfest game and about half the players had starting spots that were so bad, the game was mostly hopeless on the first move.

Re: five teams of two wanted
 

Well, I guess we *could* edit Ringworld to have less expansive wastelands... :-)

Also it would have to be edited to be symmetric all the way around, instead of having a "jump" in the station connection pattern...

Re: five teams of two wanted
 

Hm. The Ringworld graphics file -- Ringworld.tga -- doesn't show different graphics for different terrain types. I dislike maps like that, where you have to right click on a province in order to know what kind of terrain it has.

Re: five teams of two wanted
 

any ideas for another map?

Re: five teams of two wanted
 

I think Inland will do. I'm working on laying it out.

DOWN WITH SCOREGRAPHS
 

My brother Arc just pointed out to me that if we have score graphs *off* then two things will happen:

1. People will have to hire scouts.
2. People will want to gossip with one another in order to find out what is going on.

I consider that latter feature to be extremely important to the game as I envision it, so unless several people object (sorry, Griffin!), let's have score graphs off.

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Here's a proposed map. Start a game with Abyssia as a human and with the next 10 land nations as players, then play a round as Abyssia. That way you can see the 10 starting locations. Note that which nations go in those locations is not determined yet -- Alneyan has agreed to act as an impartial person to assign the five teams to the 5 pairs and assign each team-member to one of the two locations in that pair. The pairs are the starting locations which are closest to each other. They are northwest-southeast from each other.

If that doesn't make sense just pipe up and I'll try to explain it better.

If there's something inherently unfair about this layout, given that the teams will be randomly located to these five pairs, then speak up now!

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Our second pick is Caelum!

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Okay! We're almost ready to let the war begin!

Final steps:

1. Have a look at the map I attached to see if the starting spots are acceptable to you.

2. Settings: all default settings except:
* Zen's Pretender Mods 2.01
* Zen's Scale Mods 1.2
* Zen's Spell Mods 1.8
(Honestly I don't care for these mods, but everyone seems to like them so I decided to use them.)
* 45% magic sites (instead of default 40%)
* Magic research difficult (instead of default magic research normal)
* Independent strength 9 (instead of default independent strength 3)
* Score graphs OFF (instead of default score graphs on)

3. After people have a chance to object, Alneyan will place the ten nations with allies near each other on the map, and send me the ftherland file, and I'll set up the server but I won't look at the contents of the file. Nobody including me will know who their enemies are at first!


By the way, I have only four e-mail addresses in my list of e-mail addresses who get automatic notifications of new turns. If you want e-mailed notifications of new turns then please send me your e-mail address.

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Do you really mean the fatherland file? It could be done too, in a game where I set up the full game, including the master password and the .map file: such a set up is best if you would rather lower your opportunities of cheating as much as possible, to avoid suspicion at a later date.

That way or only the .map file is fine with me, and will only take a couple of minutes at most.

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Is there any reason that I would need the master password? Only if we have to do something like set a player to AI, right? And we almost certainly won't need to do anything like that.

So please create the whole game and set a master password.

By the way, how can we arrange it so that players can log in to view their team-mate's turn?

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

By the way, you guys should really examine the layout before we start. Here is an easy way to view it:

http://zooko.com/map.png
(Or see smaller image embedded in first post on this thread.)

In that image you can see where the nations start, although the nations in that display are not the ones that we have picked and that we are actually going to play with.

The teams are the ones connected by blue lines and the enemies are the ones connected by red lines.


As soon as the war begins you will know which of these positions you and your team-mate occupy, and you will know exactly which four *locations* are occupied by your two enemy teams, but you will not know who lives there until your scouts get there. :-)

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Tomorrow morning (2005-07-14) in the Atlantic Time Zone I'll check for any change requests from the players, make any final decisions, and then ask Alneyan to assign the starting positions and generate the ftherland file.

So the war will begin tomorrow!

Zooko the Just Host

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

sounds good

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Just for my benefit, please dear friends, I have tried looking at the scale mod to see what it does. but with little success. Anyone here able to clarify it for me, as that would influence (slightly) my choice of pretender.

Oh, and while i'm at it, I would enjoy indi 8 a twinge more; gives a little more chance to have a mage that's not such a super combatant, and put more points into scales.

But I am simply one of many. =)

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Scale Mod 1.2:
- Production/Sloth alters income by 4% a tick and resources by 15% a tick (was 2% and 10%, if memory serves).
- Growth/Death alters income by 4% a tick and population by 0.3% a turn per tick.
- Changes to the events, with Misfortune increasing the odds of getting a bad event more sharply, and less frequent rare events (I think).

So the Scale mod improves the two "weaker" scales of Production and Growth, and taking Sloth-3 or Death-3 should hurt you more. Luck is now a more appealing option, and Misfortune should be a bit more dangerous.

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Ok, a very very bad problem:

My brother Hacker Pschorr is not able to play, so we would like to make the slot free for another team http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

We are really sorry about this, but it is just not possible!

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

Let's vote on the question of Independent Strength 8 vs. Independent Strength 9. If there's a tie, it'll stay at 9. I vote for 9, so currently it is a tie with King Lear in favor of 8 and me in favor of 9.

And by the way if you know of a team of players looking for a game, point them to this thread. :-)

Zooko the Fair Host

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

We could change the game to a 4 way battle royale?

Team Hubris votes indies 9.

Re: two vs. two vs. two vs. two vs. two (full)
 

No, I'm going to hold out for a fifth team.

Currently it is 2 votes for indies 9, 1 vote for indies 8.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

So is there any way to advertise on this BBS for another team, or is the mere existence of this thread with "one team wanted" in its title the standard way to advertise?

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

having the thread with one team wanted in title is standard procedure

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

I would be part of a replacement team. Would you consider trying my Moderation mod?

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

I vote indy 8, just to be different from having 9 in pretty much every other game being played.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

I´d like to be the other part of the replacement team.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

So now you two newcommers =) get to chose your nations. What fun =)

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Okay! Two votes for indies 8 and two votes for indies 9!

Welcome to quantum_mechani and Turin!

Sorry, quantum_mechani, but I do not want to try your mod this time.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

No problem, but would you mind giving a reason?

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Sure.

(a) I haven't looked at it, and am loathe to take the time.
(b) I don't really like "balance" mods at all. We're currently planning to use all of the Zen's mods, not because I like them, but because I believe everyone else to like them.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

(b) -- explained -- I think that there is a wide demand for "balance" mods because the "All vs. All" format punishes aggression and leads to lots of lurking/hoarding/diplomacy. I think that the basic unmodded game is well-balanced for a contest in which there is a good reward for aggression, but not well-balanced for a game in which there is extended lurking/hoarding/diplomacy etc. before the aggression starts.

So I think for *this* game -- pentagon format -- that balance mods actually "unbalance" the game more than balance it.

But I decided to use Zen's mods just so I wouldn't have to argue with people about what mods to use. :-)

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Fair enough. However, I like to argue so if will indulge me...

My mod is not to limit hoarding or any other tactic(well, almost, the one and only thing reduced in power is Caelum's mages, but almost everyone agrees they are overpowerd to some degree). It is it to open up strategies that would be highly inadvisable unmodified. When was the last time you purchased light cavalry? Or for that matter any troop with less than 10 armour and no special ability (flying, sacred, ranged troop, etc.)? Now, other mods have tried to do this, but they always ended up turning off players because they boosted things that were already used, and thus made them unbalanced (i.e., cherry's boosted white centaurs). I have tried to strictly limit myself to the obviously unused troops (in some cases I also made slight tweaks to mages of themes that were used, but the theme on the whole rated very low), and even then to only boost them in small steps.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Well, it sounds like a good idea to me the way you put it, but I'm still only a little interested. How about we put it to a vote, and I abstain for the voting for now?

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

I looked over the mods briefly today and was impressed. For example, I studied the mods on Marignon, the race I have in this game and the one I tested extensively in SP last night to make a pretender.

I was initially disappointed that QM did not change the cost of ANY of the troops that I was buying nearly exclusively in the SP test (namely Xbows, flagellents, and Chalice Knights). But then, it dawned on me that this was the exact purpose of the mod, in that it would make the other choices a bit more attractive than they currently are.

I also looked over a few of the other mods, namely the mages for C'tis and Caelum. I was pleased to see the grossly overpowered Caelum mages were nerfed a bit, for that is the correct thing to do. However, I was very dissapointed that he did not nerf the overpowered C'tis mages, for those guys are far too cheap to be a build-anywhere mage.

Overall, I would say that I am impressed with the mod and initially favorable. In fact, I would like to test it out at some time, though I doubt we could get sufficient support in this current game with our unusual format. Perhaps the next Slugfest game would be great for this.

In fact, I would even support the QM mod in this game as a test, though I will go either way.

BTW, I cannot even imagine playing a game without the Zen mods anymore. Our currently-running Song of the Blade game is living proof, as the air/astral nations with their cheesy Wrathful Skies tactic look to be the final two nations at this point.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Well, that is much more debateable than the Caelum issue. The thing is, it is not that C'tis mages per se that are so good, it is skeleton spamming - they just happen to be very good at it. Changeing battle spells is beyond the scope of this particular mod.

Second, nerfing the sauro is difficult. It is really the teeth of C'tis, without it they would rank among the weakest of nations. As they stand now sauromancers does not automatically catapult C'tis to the position of top nation the way Caelum's does- it is quite possible for any nation to counter the spam, however annoying.

Thirdly, it goes against the philosophy of the mod, namely to make what was unusable usable. Caelum was the unique exception to the rule of boosting in that it was unusable because of being _too_ powerful. In any case, I'm quite sure nerfing C'tis would bring down a legion of annoyed dominions players- exactly what this moderate mod is trying to avoid.

Anyway, glad you liked the mod, hope you don't mind my long winded defense of saourmancers http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Actually, the sauro/marsh masters are probably OK, and certainly not as bad as the High Seraphs. It is mostly the fact that the best C'tis mages can be recruited in any castle which makes them terribly unbalanced.

That is pretty much the ONLY reason that C'tis is greatly superior over a nation like Man, which has the penalizing restriction of having its good mages being capitol only. Were this to be balanced, both nations would be much closer to equal. The Crones are a powerful mage indeed, just as good as or better than a sauromancer (though more expensive).

I would even go so far as to say that Caelum just might not be the best nation in the game if the High Seraphs were not recruitable everywhere. Getting only one per turn just does not scare me like an opponent getting 4-5 per turn. I won my only game I played as Caelum by doing precisely this.

But as it is, Caelum and C'tis are pretty much in the top 4 of the rankings of just about any experienced player and Man is usually near the bottom. In fact, Man has no chance against either of those nations in a 1 on 1 except on the smallest of maps.

Unfortunately, I don't think this can be changed in a mod, though I could be wrong.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Yes, capital onlying is not moddable. I agree that making the high seraph capital only would be ideal, though a nerf to the lower seraph would probably be needed as well.

I disagree with your assessment of Man though. Stronger on smaller maps, true, but formidable nonetheless as long as you are not on faerun or something.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Bah! I couldn't fight a war and win it if my life depended on it, so you shouldn't worry about me, I think; Vanheim could be another matter altogether though.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

As I haven't done a whole lot with either mod, I'm happy to accomadate whatever the majority decides. In other words, I abstain =) Although I'm glad to see that at least one other likes the novelty value of indi 8 =)

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

I'm tired of waiting, so I hereby declare that as soon as quantum_mechani and Turin announce their nation choices, then we'll proceed with the game with whatever settings are currently winning the vote.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

I want *you* to recount the ballots! Right now! I'm waiting!

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Um, I think there's one vote for quantum_mechani's mod and three abstentions. So if quantum_mechani and Turin hurry up and submit their nation choices then I'll agree to use QM's mod. :-)

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Currently it is 2 votes for indies 9, 2 votes for indies 8. Tie goes to the setting which I originally announced, which is independent strength 9. However, the polls will not close until quantum_mechani and Turin both post their nation choices.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

We decided on Arco and Pan. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

yeah fear our awesome affliction healing power! =)

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

THAT'S IT! THE POLLS ARE CLOSED!

We will use QM's moderation mods!

I'll go download them.

Independents will have strength 9.

More news as it develops.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

So where do we get QM's mods?

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Belay my last, I followed my nose, i.e. the (clearly marked) link.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

Final notes about the rules for this game:

Alneyan will assign teams to the spots as indicated by the beauooootiful image at the top of this thread. The winning conditions are that your team wins when both of your enemy teams are dead (a team is dead when both of its pretenders are banished permanently from the world).

As per the beauooootiful map:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
color of team color of enemies
------------- ----------------
blue red, green
green blue, purple
purple green, yellow
yellow purple, red
red yellow, blue
</pre><hr />

As soon as Alneyan creates the game and I set up the server and you connect and see your starting location then you will know what color your team is, but you won't know who is playing your enemy colors. :-)

Needed mods:

Zen's Conceptual Pretender Gods 2.01
Zen's Conceptual Spells 1.8
Zen's Conceptual Scales 1.2
QM's Moderation

Game settings:

Independent Strength 9
Magic sites 45%
Magic research hard

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

P.S. If you want e-mail notification from the server whenever a new turn becomes ready, please send me your e-mail address.

Re: two v. two v. two v. two v. two (one team want
 

You'll have my pretender by late monday. Sorry for the delay, but my laptop is in the shop and i'm house-sitting so I don't have my desktop. Sigh.