|
|
|
 |

January 12th, 2007, 04:15 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
|
|
Re: It\'d make a reasonable game configuration opti
@TwoBits:
Its hard to tell but yes you should get some. However, Johans idea of little, some, many a lot, is quite abit different from the players.
@HoneyBadger:
The turns limit on bad events at 36 seems crazy to me. Ive seen many blitz games of 2-4 players that are considered to be over by that time. A setting of 36 turns would make taking -3 luck a total no-brainer.
I agree it could use some balancing since at the moment +3 luck seems pretty automatic for many people.
__________________
-- DISCLAIMER:
This game is NOT suitable for students, interns, apprentices, or anyone else who is expected to pass tests on a regular basis. Do not think about strategies while operating heavy machinery. Before beginning this game make arrangements for someone to check on you daily. If you find that your game has continued for more than 36 hours straight then you should consult a physician immediately (Do NOT show him the game!)
|

January 12th, 2007, 04:34 PM
|
 |
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 2,162
Thanks: 2
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Well, if he\'s only protecting with Luck +0 - +3...
...Misfortune of any kind still doesn't become automatic.
I really wouldn't mind seeing SEIV-level event modding, where individual events could be tweaked in magnitude and were rated as to severity. It'd probably please some of the more grognardish players who seek more predictability... some of the events can be quite lucrative or destructive (free items can be as high as Cons 6, if memory serves; 3000 gold AND items is nice; if you've been using Growth +3 in a long game to get lots of pop and it gets wiped out by Ancient Presence, that's ugly).
3 years -is- a very long time, 'tho; by that time, it would seem rather reasonable to have another fort/temple/lab complex and at least some cash reserve, unless it's a custom map with absolutely brutal independent forces that slow everybody down.
__________________
Are we insane yet? Are we insane yet? Aiiieeeeee...
|

January 12th, 2007, 06:26 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,445
Thanks: 85
Thanked 79 Times in 51 Posts
|
|
Re: Well, if he\'s only protecting with Luck +0 - +3...
Gandalf, you're right, 3 years is everything on a small map in a blitz game. And it's NOTHING on an enormous 1500 province map with gold, resources, and supplies set to 50-which is how I normally play.
And if 3 years is too much for some people, that's ok, give us the option to decide what's too much and what's too little and that will have me whistling dixie.
And I'm not talking taking Luck -3 (or Misfortune 3), I'm talking taking Luck 0 PLUS. There's a big difference. I keep pointing this out, Micah keeps pointing this out, and nobody else seems to understand that all I'm suggesting is, if you don't take any misfortune, you shouldn't suffer apocalyptic events before a certain user-defineable turn.
I'm fine with bad events. I'm fine with taking any amount of misfortune and losing my temple on turn 1. I have no issue with that.
I just don't want to set up a gigantic game with a 1500 province map and have to worry about inconveniencing 20 people at a time for days in the case of PBEM, just because one of them happened to roll an illusionary 1 on the mighty computer dice.
__________________
You've sailed off the edge of the map--here there be badgers!
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|