MP: Yang: Newbie game EA CoD defaults - Running

[licker]

Originally Posted by qio

You have an actual point you are trying to make?

Changing the settings affects the game. If it didn't, there wouldn't be any settings.

If you do not care what the settings are, you could be mute on the issue. If you are in favor of some modifications, you could justify the reason for making those; or simply just say what your preference would be. I see neither.

I can give you random advice that has no relevance to the issue. You should eat a lot of fiber. This is pretty much on par with your statement above.

My my...

A tad touchy about this?

My advice is crystal clear. This game is about more than just determining what you are good with, or what your favorite strategy is. If the game is to be played with certain settings, then you should be able to adapt to those settings.

Others have said they feel more sites makes it more fun. You have said more sites disadvantages your strategy.

I wonder which is more likely to be chosen based solely on the above?

Though it should be noted, that your strategy is only disadvantaged in a relative sense, and perhaps not at all, as you seem to think that a rainbow pretender will find 'fewer' sites than the level 0 sites you appear to feel disadvantaged by, or the 'extra' sites a nation lacking diversity will miss.

Of course the above presupposes that more gems is always an advantage. Though I'm not sure who is going to disagree with that.

I'm not sure how you gathered from my post that I was neutral on this issue anyway, but no matter, until the host asks for some kind of tally I don't see that it will matter much.

[Juffos]

I would like to join as Yomi.

[pyg]

Ok, the game is full (sorry analytic_kernel). What nobody picked Ulm? I'll take Fomoria.

It seems like everyone is down with all game settings and mods except Magic Sites - 55. Currently we have Trumanator, Redeyes, and statttis for it -vs- qio and myself against. Majority rules (not consensus), so speak up if you care.

I'll give a bit more time for people to weigh in and then start the game on LlamaServer probably around 2400 GMT.

[Tolkien]

EA Ulm isn't as fun or as good as MA or LA Ulm, in my opinion.

Plus I wanted to try out Helheim.

As for the magic sites: either way is fine for me.

[pyg]

Technical difficulties, please stand by.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/50/13...118171.jpg?v=0

[qio]

Originally Posted by licker

My my...

A tad touchy about this?

Your talking more garbage.

Originally Posted by licker

My advice is crystal clear. This game is about more than just determining what you are good with, or what your favorite strategy is. If the game is to be played with certain settings, then you should be able to adapt to those settings.

Go back to school. That's my advice. You did not ask for it. I did not ask for yours. Understand? It is irrelevant to the issue at hand. The issue is "should we increase the frequency for magic sites".

Originally Posted by licker

Others have said they feel more sites makes it more fun. You have said more sites disadvantages your strategy.

Yes. If it comes down to a majority decision, I have pointed out why increasing magic site frequency is a bad thing. Some will agree with me, some will not. A few like you will probably not understand.

I want to make this VERY clear, as your reading ability is clearly compromised. I have NOT SAID that this DISADVANTAGES my strategy. Please quote exactly where you think I say this. Why are you assuming I am playing a certain strategy? I am pointing out that by making modification X, you are directly harming certain builds. I am playing Vanheim. Increased magic site frequency is advantageous for me.

Originally Posted by licker

Though it should be noted, that your strategy is only disadvantaged in a relative sense, and perhaps not at all, as you seem to think that a rainbow pretender will find 'fewer' sites than the level 0 sites you appear to feel disadvantaged by, or the 'extra' sites a nation lacking diversity will miss.

You also clearly misunderstand what I said. A rainbow pretender will NOT find LESS sites. However, ANY player that takes over provinces has a HIGHER chance of finding lvl0 sites. This is VERY advantageous for nation/pretender builds that have poor site search capabilities (for example Vanheim - my nation).

Originally Posted by licker

I'm not sure how you gathered from my post that I was neutral on this issue anyway, but no matter, until the host asks for some kind of tally I don't see that it will matter much.

I don't know why I made that assumption. Maybe, because you DID not say you were in FAVOR or AGAINST having the magic site frequency increased - you know, the ISSUE. I am against this, you got that much.

[licker]

Originally Posted by pyg

Ok, the game is full (sorry analytic_kernel). What nobody picked Ulm? I'll take Fomoria.

It seems like everyone is down with all game settings and mods except Magic Sites - 55. Currently we have Trumanator, Redeyes, and statttis for it -vs- qio and myself against. Majority rules (not consensus), so speak up if you care.

I'll give a bit more time for people to weigh in and then start the game on LlamaServer probably around 2400 GMT.

So we are using cbm 1.41 complete correct? This is important for creating a 'legal' pretender.

[pyg]

qio, I think you are stepping a little over the line. It's just a game. I see a lot of miscommunication going on here and I don't think this is going anywhere positive. Let's all just chill.

[pyg]

Originally Posted by licker

So we are using cbm 1.41 complete correct? This is important for creating a 'legal' pretender.

Yes. No one objected and several posts were positive.

[Juffos]

qio, that counts as flaming.