Quote:
|
Well I dont agree that CBM applies to any MP game. Some of the changes play up the player-vs-player at the detriment of some of the more fun aspects.
|
Are you being deliberately obtuse? Squirrelloid said that the
problems apply to all games, not CBM.
Quote:
|
But I think its not that they didnt. I know for a fact that they put alot of work into it. But much of it would be in parts of the game that encourage alliances and role playing and variations beyond dueling. The perfect dueling balance is chess (everything matches except color of pieces and even the effects of that are arguable).
|
KO has explicitly stated that balance was a secondary consideration. Also, you obviously haven't noticed that the majority of the games on these forums are 8-20 players and use CBM. The claim that the people who want balance only play duels and blitzes is utter BS.
Quote:
Quote:
|
And since everyone is going to tart farm, the person who can do it best wins.
|
I havent really seen that in my games.
|
How many MP games have you ever played Gandalf? SP has no place in a discussion on balance, since a) it doesn't matter and b) the AI is just too dumb.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Also, 50 provinces/player is *insane*. How many games like that have you seen start? Actually end? Without rampant quitting and general unhappiness about the game?
|
Many. Obviously small games are more numerous than large ones but thats part of the definition. Small equals fast and large equals long.
|
Links to threads please? I would love to see who enjoys games with 50 provs per player.
Quote:
|
I understand that you are mad that the devs didnt balance your game but they did at least provide the means for that which is more than many developers do.
|
Wait, didn't you say that the devs DID balance the game? I'm confused now. You are correct though that they did better than most developers in giving us the tool to balance it.