|
Post by lporiginalg on Mar 15, 2006 16:26:36 GMT -5
I had the chance to play in the ironman event this past CCC, I had a good time but here are a few suggestions that I think would make for better games in the future:
1. People should be allowed to choose the same civ, this should be an event of let the best man win, not the best man with the biggest advantage...I had 4th pick this ccc (which is pretty good out of 12) my first three picks were the first three to go and I ended up getting 4th place with two of the people above me having chosen first...hmmmm....
2. Timer should be blazing.
I think those two changes would make for a better event.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Mar 16, 2006 6:14:38 GMT -5
This has been discussed before and I agree, giving an already advantaged team, the ability to gain greater advantage is not in the spirit of the game IMO. Untill the issue with certain civs is resolved winning the Ironman is more about what clan you belong to and less about individual skill. It's still there but it's diluted by the choice of civ rule, that's an antiquated overspill from C3c. People seem to have a hard time letting go of them though for some reason. Also in practice giving people a choice of any civ seems to work better too for game balance and enjoyment purposes, but nm.
Just say no more than 3 Indian civs or chinese civs per game and let everyone chose what they want, way better IMO.
|
|
|
Post by rupman on Jul 26, 2006 21:27:36 GMT -5
So what's the point of being at the top if you don't get any advantages. At the last CCC there were many players that were in the top-10 that didn't play in the ironman and most teams only have 2 or 3 players playing in the event. How is it tommy's fault that he is the best active player on ladder and is consistently in the top-10. As much as I think it provides him and other top players with an advantage already. I could have easily started the ironman at the time for my clan. Picked india since I was like #4 at the time, was ahead of Tommy who was the highest ranked player in the game and picked india. I'd rather it be the way it is than having some sort of parody system. The atmospere that may create seems far worse to me than letting the highest ranked players getting the better civs. Also having 3 Indias or China's or whatever in a game seems lame to me. If you're a good player you utilize the traits you have and should be able to compete with anyone. Maybe you should get yourself in the top 20 before the CCC and from there try to make it to the top 10. If you're a good player making the top 20 shouldn't be hard. Making the top 10 can be a bit of a challenge, but if you're around there you should be getting a top pick anyways. Besides in the last CCC Notagoodname got second for ..A.. with Catherine. I wouldn't have picked her in the top 4 but never the less he did and played well. Hell I once got second in a cton with Mao and on the other side of the coin lost an anc 1v1 when I was inca and the other guy was catherine. If you're truely a good player stop whining about civs and just kick some ass. The outcome of the game depends on more than just civ choice.
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Jul 27, 2006 0:41:02 GMT -5
Rupman, ironman civs are selected on clan ranking from earlier matches not individual ladder ranking.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jul 27, 2006 3:33:33 GMT -5
timer was blazing and mali 2nd best civ imo was picked last - peter the 3rd best civ wasnt picked at all
and agree on traits not that importnat - stone/marble close > indu trait long river > fin trait few woods > fast worker no horse > cossacs
so u see 1 single tile can be more important as whole traits or uus
|
|
|
Post by rupman on Jul 27, 2006 11:27:39 GMT -5
^^ I really? I did not know that. So we get 2nd pick next time and we had 3rd this past time?
^ -Um few woods sucks, I like to have an intermediate amount of woods so I can chop but not enough so that I feel I have to chop all the time to avoid an early choke. -How is no horse better than cossacks? -I agree with the other 2 assements Tommy. Hell I think fin without a river sucks. If I can't get that extra gold right of the bat from a cottage I'm kind of dissapointed. Rivers are da bomb. Hell with a river it can save you time by not having to build as many roads early, so workers can spend more time chopping and improving tiles. Of course I road damn near everything anyways.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jul 27, 2006 13:03:17 GMT -5
no horse > cossacs as u got no cossak without horse
|
|