|
Post by charliebrownparker on Dec 2, 2005 18:15:21 GMT -5
Not sure if this had been mentioned, but one thing I'd like to see next time (I won't hold my breath for this time ) would be some events that have the 'no razing' option selected, for two city elim games. Meaning to take a player out you have to make sure you do it right, or if you want to keep a city you better take it to hold it. IMO this offers more strategic depth than the standard razing approach. In any case, it would be nice for variety. Something between the standard settings and the ironman non-elim slugfest. Crucial question Onan What about City razing option? We have trained on 2 city elim events (espacially on Renaissance start) and it seems to be very hard to keep a captured city when no city razing option is on. Could you please inform us about that? Many thanks.
|
|
|
Post by sparta on Dec 2, 2005 19:44:04 GMT -5
The Illuminati will emerge from the shadows.Our roster is forthcoming. LOL.
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Dec 3, 2005 0:34:19 GMT -5
Not sure if this had been mentioned, but one thing I'd like to see next time (I won't hold my breath for this time ) would be some events that have the 'no razing' option selected, for two city elim games. Meaning to take a player out you have to make sure you do it right, or if you want to keep a city you better take it to hold it. IMO this offers more strategic depth than the standard razing approach. In any case, it would be nice for variety. Something between the standard settings and the ironman non-elim slugfest. Crucial question Onan What about City razing option? We have trained on 2 city elim events (espacially on Renaissance start) and it seems to be very hard to keep a captured city when no city razing option is on. Could you please inform us about that? Many thanks. It very much depends on what you bring to take the city, and what your teammates are doing. Proper teamwork on an assault would make "Take and Hold" a much more strategic game than "Assassination/Elimination."
|
|
|
Post by drspike on Dec 3, 2005 9:13:48 GMT -5
I am (I think) not playing in this CCC so what I say is just as an unbiased observer.
I cannot believe that some players experienced enough to know better are arguing against using a duel map for..........a duel.
Sure, if you start very close duels maps are not that good. Sure if one player has resources much closer then duel maps are not that good. So, let's play duels on huge maps as a solution right?
Wrong!
The game has settings you can change to make a duel map perfect 95% of the time at least. Just play mirror reflection and you wont reach your opponent that soon and you both have the same reources and possibilities.
The game has little enough interaction as it is without trying to take even more out by playing needlessly large maps.
|
|
|
Post by sparta on Dec 3, 2005 11:33:18 GMT -5
I think that in general most people don't like starting relatively close to each other so they have to engage in that sucky early warfare where it can either go completely your way or completely not your way.
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Dec 3, 2005 13:53:24 GMT -5
I am (I think) not playing in this CCC so what I say is just as an unbiased observer. I cannot believe that some players experienced enough to know better are arguing against using a duel map for..........a duel. Sure, if you start very close duels maps are not that good. Sure if one player has resources much closer then duel maps are not that good. So, let's play duels on huge maps as a solution right? Wrong! The game has settings you can change to make a duel map perfect 95% of the time at least. Just play mirror reflection and you wont reach your opponent that soon and you both have the same reources and possibilities. The game has little enough interaction as it is without trying to take even more out by playing needlessly large maps. The problem is that duel map was added late, and the ideal 1v1 settings are NOT available for a few maps. 1v1s, IMO, should be played on... Duel-Inland Sea, Wheel, Ring, Hub, Archipelago, Custom Continents Tiny - Lakes, Pangea, Team Battlegrounds, Highlands, Great Plains If you play any of that second group on Duel, you run into the possibility of an impact-distance start, where the first border expansion tells you where the other player is. In those situations, what you see has nothing to do with skill. It has to do with which player sent their first unit in the right direction into the darkness, which player had the hut with the promotions nearby, which player picked the aggressive civ and bumped into two animals for the shock promotion, etc. These are not contests of skill - they are simply contests of RNG. Duel on the first set of maps is excellent - the second, simply a trial of luck. There is no setting anynwhere on that second set of maps which says "Keep us from starting 5 tiles apart." One reason that settlers have two movement in CIV is to encourage players to move their settler a bit if they want to do so at the start of the game - but on certain maps with the duel setting, it is very possible that you could move within IMMEDIATE culture impact of each other. Then it becomes "whose warrior started in which direction in relation to the other settler." No duel-map setting can fix that.
|
|
|
Post by claudelu on Dec 3, 2005 15:45:19 GMT -5
so then play 1v1 on a wheel map? Wheel is fun make it 3 plots wide, so holding chokepoints is hard.
|
|
|
Post by yilar on Dec 3, 2005 15:48:19 GMT -5
The problem is that duel map was added late, and the ideal 1v1 settings are NOT available for a few maps. 1v1s, IMO, should be played on... Duel-Inland Sea, Wheel, Ring, Hub, Archipelago, Custom Continents Tiny - Lakes, Pangea, Team Battlegrounds, Highlands, Great Plains If you play any of that second group on Duel, you run into the possibility of an impact-distance start, where the first border expansion tells you where the other player is. In those situations, what you see has nothing to do with skill. It has to do with which player sent their first unit in the right direction into the darkness, which player had the hut with the promotions nearby, which player picked the aggressive civ and bumped into two animals for the shock promotion, etc. These are not contests of skill - they are simply contests of RNG. Duel on the first set of maps is excellent - the second, simply a trial of luck. There is no setting anynwhere on that second set of maps which says "Keep us from starting 5 tiles apart." One reason that settlers have two movement in CIV is to encourage players to move their settler a bit if they want to do so at the start of the game - but on certain maps with the duel setting, it is very possible that you could move within IMMEDIATE culture impact of each other. Then it becomes "whose warrior started in which direction in relation to the other settler." No duel-map setting can fix that. I suggest you actually play a "duel mirror lakes" before you start commenting, oboviously you've never played this format.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Dec 3, 2005 17:46:49 GMT -5
on mirror map starts are in 90% on map ends- what means that there are more then about 15 tiles in between - think quite same is on battlefield
wheel, hub and ring are totally static what means its dumbass to play em imo
I agree to Frie that his 2nd set of map is very bad as its totaly luck based and starts are just too random
|
|
|
Post by drspike on Dec 3, 2005 18:54:12 GMT -5
Yeah, but for some reason, the undeniably fairest map and the only one that suffers from none of the problems mentioned here doesn't feature on his list.
|
|
reptile
Worker
in desperate need of a new avatar
Posts: 106
|
Post by reptile on Dec 3, 2005 19:34:19 GMT -5
I believe that the 100 turns for the future event are too much. 80-90 would be good. But then, most games will be decided by kills anyway because of the 2 city elim. However, a 100 turn future game to the end will last about 4-5 hours. (A GC test game took 2 hours for the first 50 turns)
The tiny map for 1vs1 is good imo. You dont necessarily start at the opposite sides of the map - and you can cross the edges of the map anyway. But the 100 turns here are much too few I believe.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrownparker on Dec 3, 2005 20:41:47 GMT -5
One simple suggestion linked to Reptile post:
Could we try to reduce 3vs3 futur start event lenght? 100 turns is too long. We have tested it on 3 training games. Average game time : 4 hour and a half which is too long for CCC.
As all civs start with a "complete" city you can directly build armies. 75 turns seems to be enough to manage opponents elimination or spaceship victory.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Dec 4, 2005 12:17:32 GMT -5
damn the frenchies made 3 training games over 4,5 hours- looks like winner is determind allready.
|
|
|
Post by yilar on Dec 4, 2005 13:17:11 GMT -5
damn the frenchies made 3 training games over 4,5 hours- looks like winner is determind allready. And in the end it all comes down to who has the most danes in their roster ;D
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Dec 4, 2005 13:20:58 GMT -5
damn the frenchies made 3 training games over 4,5 hours- looks like winner is determind allready. Well, if that comes to be they deserve it. They are a dedicated bunch, and real gentlemen too.
|
|
|
Post by Onan on Dec 4, 2005 15:02:19 GMT -5
Just wanted to reiterate: I think all the events for this CCC are elim with razing (the default elim setting).
In future CCCs I'd like to see some events where the "no razing option" is selected.
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Dec 4, 2005 19:40:05 GMT -5
damn the frenchies made 3 training games over 4,5 hours- looks like winner is determind allready. And in the end it all comes down to who has the most danes in their roster ;D Do you mean Great Danes? yeah those are big dogs
|
|
|
Post by venceslas on Dec 5, 2005 4:17:55 GMT -5
Your answer is always "popup say who is the true winnner" for this CCC? You seems have changed your mind in another topic. Sorry to be a little insistent about that, but with a clear rule no contestation is possible(and for now it's a little confusing). I think if you add a point, you may save time for TD chris.
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Dec 5, 2005 8:43:11 GMT -5
Look at the dates on the two posts.
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Dec 5, 2005 10:00:35 GMT -5
Maybe just delete or edit the obsolete one.
|
|