|
Post by SirPartyMan on Nov 12, 2006 13:54:22 GMT -5
In CIV3, traditionally we made people wait until 3000bc to plant in OCC - this gave time for all players to find and reach optimal city placement location.
Some have suggested this would be a good rule for CIV4 also.
Please state your opinion and vote.
This poll will be open for 72 hours and then the result of the poll will become the official rule for CCC40.
Best, SPM
|
|
Juni
Worker
Posts: 137
|
Post by Juni on Nov 12, 2006 15:15:40 GMT -5
This rule is great on regular maps, in wich you are not sure to get a good land. And with a bad land in OCC? you have just no chance to win.
But with Eiffel's map, founding where your settler appear is the best thing to do in most cases. So waiting turn 4 just make us loose 3 turns IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Gogf on Nov 12, 2006 16:26:36 GMT -5
I agree with Juni. Eiffel's map is generally very good at giving equal starts. It's pointless for everyone to hit enter four times while their settler just sits in place.
Another concern that MMV raised was that the game would be very difficult for players who begin with scouts, because an enemy warrior might warrior at their capital before it is possible for them to build their own.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Nov 12, 2006 17:50:14 GMT -5
The OCC semi-cton is being played in Classical so there will be no Warrior vs. Scout starts to worry about.
I brought this up in the other thread but I guess I'll mention it here so it's in the proper place --
I don't mind a couple turn delay at the start of the game. With an Archer, Worker, Scout, and Settler at the start you should be able to survey your land in 2 turns max and make a well informed decision about where you want to plant your capital. With the timer on Blazing it can be a little tricky to figure this all out on the first turn anyways.
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Nov 12, 2006 18:02:30 GMT -5
This 4 turn rule IMO is gay why? besides if the map is balanced as it should be for a OCC whats the need im sure this 4 turn settle rule will screw up the Games but when it happens please remember we told you so
|
|
|
Post by swissy on Nov 12, 2006 18:23:24 GMT -5
The OCCModMap is unfair. The reason it is unfair is the equity of startegic resources and the inequity of the food resources. Unless you see exactly where your food resources are at you cannot intelligently plant your city. Some players will be blessed by the map generator with a view of their entire start area once they move their initial units. Other will still have holes caused my hills and forests. Not all food resources are equal. In a classical start, grass/jungle/banana will eventually be 5 food, while a grass/corn will be 5 food within a few turns. There is no way to balance the map for food other than setting a level of available food bonuses to a certain level, the map generator parcels them out randomly. So a few turns to get see where your food is not out of order. Not every player is blessed with seeing all their food in the first turn, those who are have a great advantage as they already know they will have horses/metal within two expansions, and while its nice to be able to work horse/metal, it is not necessary to get the main benefit of unit creation. The main benefit of food bonus resources is the extra food to grow your city faster. Without improved workable food bonuses you are bound to fall behind in OCC. OCC is all about food, since all have the strategic resources available, the only real variable is what food you have and how to best maximaize your city size by getting as much workable food as possible on your plant.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Nov 12, 2006 18:43:35 GMT -5
other resources such as sugar, wine, etc make GREAT food tiles until you can use work them as plantations with the calendar tech.
I play a LOT of OCC's and have always had at least TWO food tiles at start (one animal, one rice/corn/etc) and even more later in the game after more border expansion.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Nov 12, 2006 18:46:45 GMT -5
and on another note, this poll is for removing the RULE of turn delays before planting, you could still most CERTAINLY delay settler plant if anyone wished to
it gives you the OPTION of both, while removing the requirement for the other.
|
|
|
Post by alice on Nov 12, 2006 22:57:53 GMT -5
if not 5 then 3 or at the absolute least 2 turn i have been screwed by this map pleanty, such as on a coast ect..
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Nov 12, 2006 23:40:21 GMT -5
This 4 turn rule IMO is gay why? besides if the map is balanced as it should be for a OCC whats the need im sure this 4 turn settle rule will screw up the Games but when it happens please remember we told you so I really don't see how a turn-plant rule can ruin the game at worst it delays the start by a couple turns. But that may give some players the best start they can get, how can that be a bad thing for the cost of a few turns? There's really no con to a turn delay in a Classical start 0CC IMHO. CS
|
|
|
Post by mansurji on Nov 13, 2006 0:19:36 GMT -5
I agree with CS, it's harmless and can lead the game to be more even, it sounds like a good improvement to do
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Nov 13, 2006 0:37:41 GMT -5
wOwzaaaa!
17 people interested in this new CCC event
maybe we should have more than one game, eh?
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Nov 13, 2006 1:45:19 GMT -5
wOwzaaaa! 17 people interested in this new CCC event maybe we should have more than one game, eh? 17 votes to affect a CCC event setting doesn't necessarily equate interest in the event . And there is an OCC 2v2 on Sunday as well (which is quite fun to play in I might add!).
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Nov 13, 2006 1:58:52 GMT -5
With the timer on Blazing it can be a little tricky to figure this all out on the first turn anyways. Blazing is EVIL.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Nov 13, 2006 10:19:11 GMT -5
wOwzaaaa! 17 people interested in this new CCC event maybe we should have more than one game, eh? 17 votes to affect a CCC event setting doesn't necessarily equate interest in the event . And there is an OCC 2v2 on Sunday as well (which is quite fun to play in I might add!). Sorry, lol - I know it's sometimes tough to "read here" but I was being sarcastic with a hint of "wondering" if all those who are voting will have a specific interest in this specific match
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Nov 13, 2006 10:30:35 GMT -5
17 votes to affect a CCC event setting doesn't necessarily equate interest in the event . And there is an OCC 2v2 on Sunday as well (which is quite fun to play in I might add!). Sorry, lol - I know it's sometimes tough to "read here" but I was being sarcastic with a hint of "wondering" if all those who are voting will have a specific interest in this specific match Maybe some votes in the way ask by their mates
|
|
|
Post by Lestat on Nov 13, 2006 10:37:54 GMT -5
I voted no and blazzing is bad. Fast is ok for OCC.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Nov 13, 2006 12:32:01 GMT -5
Well I would strongly suggest that we atleast try this rule once before we condem it to hades, we could reduce it to 3 turns, but removing it before trying it would be a mistake IMHO.
CS
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Nov 13, 2006 15:29:54 GMT -5
I think it's a good idea to, as CS said, at least give this rule a try. And if anyone is concerned about losing turns in the game, increase the game by the number of turns that settling is delayed to balance it out.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Nov 13, 2006 17:20:31 GMT -5
nope, my only concern is the one that the first player to get hit with it will SCREAM about -
warrior/settler blind moving closer to him and his "scout/no warrior" civ get's knocked out at turn 6
it's going to happen, there WILL be a tournament "scream"
(and it will probably be from someone who WANTED the 3 turn settler plant delay, lol)
But, per SPM's usual pattern, he'll probably go with the vote unless it's EXTREMELY close
|
|