MP: Noobs vs. Vets II: Mysterio's Revenge, EA, CBM, Game Over. Vets defeat Noobs.

[viccio]

I'm interesting to play with noobs... i will Try EA abissya

[namad]

your settings don't seem to agree with your description about the game....


massive gem incomes and easy research do not make for a long strategic game but for a shorter game....


anyways I'd be willing to play for either team.

I've been in 4 PBEM games total including the one I am in now
but i'm also on IRC like 8hours a day 5-7days a week...

in all honesty i probably am slightly too good to be a noob and slightly too bad to be a vet but if you wanna play the bigger map or get desperate filling slots.. or whatever.....


also what's with the non-standard timing? don't most games play 24h for the first 10-20turns 48h for the next 10-30turns and then 72h for turns above like 40or50?

the first dozen turns really should only take 15minutes each... assuming you practice a bit in single player against the independents the multiplayer game is very simple until the first war breaks out?

[ano]

I think that such timing is quite good. Team game is very different from normal and even in simple team game players NEED to constantly discuss and make decisions together. If they want to be successful, of course. 6 hours per 10 turns is a bit little though, IMHO. 8 might be better.
Also, from what I read at the previous game topic, it was mainly cooperation, discussion and coordination what won that game. Smaller team will always be a subject to rush and without proper discussions when each nation is left on its own it has no chance at all. Each arrow on the map may be crucial and so is each soldier's life. It is not nearly an exaggeration.
I also think that vets should be given some advantages (for example, more capital pop or selecting nations first) have a chance to be successful.

[llamabeast]

Thanks for the invitation to be a vet! I won't take you up on the offer because I'm writing up my PhD thesis at the moment (and will be for the next few months), so I'm not starting any games. When I finally finish though, I'll definitely be signing up for some!

[Illuminated One]

Originally Posted by rdonj

In the previous game it didn't quite work out coordinatedly. We had fixed starts but did not know them until the start of the game and some people were given access to the enemy, and some were not. This one will be on a larger map, with fixed start locations also. It should allow everyone access though. So it would be more possible to play for the team by having some players forge and others take up other duties as theri primary responsibilities.

Yeah, that's what I mean. If I knew my starting location and that I was protected by other players I'd love to take a supportive role. Given the huge impact this would have on overall strategies this would really make a kind of new game.

[Lavaere]

yeah i think maybe 3:2 would be more fun. is there a way to make fixed start locations, but who starts at those locations random. if so I say we go with that for the game.

[Lingchih]

Well, I suppose I should play, since the game is named after my previous Pretender, but something has to change. Either 3:2 player ratio, or either of the suggestions by QM and IH. And this is early age, so it's a whole different ballpark for Pan, though I could still use the same Gorgon build.

[Septimius Severus]

Originally Posted by Lingchih

Well, I suppose I should play, since the game is named after my previous Pretender, but something has to change. Either 3:2 player ratio, or either of the suggestions by QM and IH. And this is early age, so it's a whole different ballpark for Pan, though I could still use the same Gorgon build.

Yes you should play Lingchih, otherwise I'll have to change the subtitle and this way provides a continuum from the last. Mysteria must get what is coming to her!

I will grant you and all the vets first choice of nations to give you an additional advantage. This should ease your feelings regarding 2:1, also some vets seem not to have an issue with it. Remember, your knowledge of the magic system and the time to use it will certainly level the playing field.

I do not wish to repeat the rush type of game in cramped quarters with no development that contributed to the vets loss last time. I do not want a game that is going to end 20 turns in.

I will see to it, that there is quite some distance between both camps to prevent any early hostilities. I want everyone to have room to spread and time to research.

[Septimius Severus]

Originally Posted by namad

your settings don't seem to agree with your description about the game....


massive gem incomes and easy research do not make for a long strategic game but for a shorter game....

As I'm a noob and not experienced with all of the magic system beyond level 4 or so, tell me why you believe this will shorten the game? especially when both teams have equal access?

Yes, there are global enchants and spells to wreak havoc in distant provinces, but is this really a concern with regard to game shortening?. In the previous game, noobs learned primarily battle tactics in a rather frenzied environment, with almost no experience towards spell research and use. This game is meant to quickly allow noob players access to the spell system and give them a chance to familiarize themselves with it and indeed use it against the vets.

With regard to hosting interval:

As ano pointed out, we are using a non standard hosting interval larglely to allow time for discussion among team members, and also to accomodate my sometimes busy schedule and those of others (selfish, I know, but what can I say). Turn completion time has nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, I think we might begin at 32 rather than 30.


I'll put you down as a standby for the noob team right now.
Should you end up in the starting roster, the vets will have final say as to whether you are "Too good".

[Septimius Severus]

Originally Posted by quantum_mechani

So, I'm on the fence about playing again, I thought the last one was lots of fun, but that was largely due to the small map.

Would be possible to find some kind of compromise map? Last time was around 7 provs per player, the current selections are I think around 20. Maybe something like 14 per player?

Also, I disagree about reducing the odds, I think 2 vs 1 is fine, especially on a bigger map than last time.

QM, some players saw action and some did not, I was forced to place 15 players on a tiny map, largely attempting to accomodate yourself and the vets. I think the prov/player ratio is fine and will tend toward what I had originally intended, a longer playing game.

I was upset with the last game, because it was totatly not what I wanted, but went along for everyone else's sake. I am willing to compromise, though, if there is absolutely no other alternative. I urge you, and the any other vets on the fence, to go ahead and join us, and not fret about the prov/player ratio.

Btw: do we have a new version of CBM compatible with the latest update to Dominions?