Balance 3 - Signups! - Page 2

Immaculate · #11 November 26th, 2009, 01:25 PM

What does 'lab-filling' mean? This better not be any more of that anti-scientist propaganda thats been springing up lately...

AlgaeNymph · #12 November 26th, 2009, 01:28 PM

Lab-filling means filling an opponent's lab with junk items, meaning at best a tedious cleanup.

Off-topic, where have you seen aforementioned propaganda?

ghoul31 · #13 November 26th, 2009, 01:35 PM

Chris is only taking 1 turn every 9 days in Balance 2. So that game probably won't be finished for about a year.

Immaculate · #14 November 26th, 2009, 01:35 PM

OT: nowhere- i just know a lot of academics play games like this and i thought it would get a rise out of some people.

OT: So lab-filling means you gift a bunch of items to the enemy? Thats stupid; no wonder its banned.

vladikus · #15 November 26th, 2009, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Immaculate

OT: nowhere- i just know a lot of academics play games like this and i thought it would get a rise out of some people.

Watch it! ;-)

chrispedersen · #16 November 26th, 2009, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghoul31

Chris is only taking 1 turn every 9 days in Balance 2. So that game probably won't be finished for about a year.

Hey ghoul...

I am sorry about recent delays. We are on turn 78 or so - I have something like 240 mages... these turns take time.

Plus it hasn't been helped with having to script a huge number of battles each turn.

But the real issue the last bit has been a funeral, a trip out of town, and picking up and delivering family for the same funeral etc.

Additionally, I have not been the delay for most of the last turns - I've had to round up others ...

Anyway.. I wish all a happy thanksgiving!

chrispedersen · #17 November 27th, 2009, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Immaculate

OT: nowhere- i just know a lot of academics play games like this and i thought it would get a rise out of some people.

OT: So lab-filling means you gift a bunch of items to the enemy? Thats stupid; no wonder its banned.

well for example if you have forge, its relatively easy to build items for a cost of 0-1. If you give your opponent 50-75 of them
you can *totally* hose that production he intened to make.

Its just abusive = ).

Ossa · #18 November 27th, 2009, 07:36 PM

I'd like to go with EA Sauromatae

Kref · #19 November 28th, 2009, 10:54 AM

"So for example if there are 12 people, and someone captures 3 capitols, and three other players in possession of their capitols conceed in favor of the same player, game is over, the player has one."

For example, now I'm loosing in tarrax, but I have 2 capitols in my posession. Also, I have a friendly relations with a nation wich possess nothing but a capital, and doesn't have any signifficant chances. But with such rool, if I would be a bit lucky than I would be very close to victory. I do not agree that 6 or even lesser loosers should decide the fate of the world. Change rool so that the victor should directly (without any favors) control 10 or 9 capitols, or sign me out.

chrispedersen · #20 November 28th, 2009, 03:20 PM

Hey Kref,.. I'm willing to discuss changing it.

In Balance2, we had 5 or 6 players remaining - everyone wished to concede, yet we play on because one player wished to.
People would probably say he was right at this point = ).
I don't mind; but I do want victory conditions clearly enumerated, and a way to avoid this kind of situation.

I think the good player pledge really removes what you said - losers throwing the game for no reason - have you taken a look at it?