Ideas

[Fleme]

I suppose it's really hard to add a lot of novelty value since things are bound to repeat themselves and that is not necessarily a bad thing. For me all the games have been a welcome change of pace from my usual settings and it has been both strange and refreshing to play on Normal Speed when I usually play Marathon. It's also nice to see different map types but I swear if the map type is Shuffle, I'm not playing it. Seems that the rotation you have going is good and there's some catch to every map, be it scarcity of certain strategic resources, incredibly hostile surroundings or a start position that forces you to either be hostile or expand aggressively.

"Forcing" players to run a specialist economy was a nice touch, too.

To put it short I do appreciate the variety you've put into these games and I personally wouldn't mind if the games repeat themselves at some point because you can always make players go at them with different leaders, game speeds, surroundings or other game settings.

This whole League is a really good thing, for both learning more about the game and passing time.

[JungleIII]

You could just make a standard game map, and save it as a 'public map' (a scenario), and let US chose who we want to be... from the premade list of choices.

Might be interesting way to see what 'preferences' players take on as their choice in leaders...

It would probably be best as a small map with only 3 or 4 civilization choices to play from. Not that this would be the 'normal' style of Tournament game, but a once in the while game...

[RobWorham]

............

[Nugog]

Originally posted by RobWorham
............

[Chuckman]

I still like the idea of a love fest.

[JungleIII]

Good Game Elements
1. Consistent skill level in game (can be achieved by harder or easier maps, conditions, etc, leader selection)
2. Variety
3. Trying new things to encourage diversification of players skills
4. Use of more maps representing earth type environments, be it arbitrary as in “big and small” or actual Europe or other maps…

Bad Game Elements
1. “goofy maps” – unrealistic settings (Boreal was "O.K." - disliked but not too unrealistic)
2. Always war - probably not always peace (unless at fast speed) - both can get tiresome and maybe better ways to achieve goal...
3. Limiting ways of winning to ONLY a narrow range of choices or one choice (fine to narrow somewhat on occasion)
4. Marathon is tough to finish for some, unless very small map or advanced start


Couldn’t we try starting a game once in a while that stays in era longer? I.e. starting in something like Medieval Age with extra units/settlers and on Marathon Speed. Maybe everyone is in Europe... or... or...

Just a few more thoughts…

[RobWorham]

[Fleme]

I personally play Marathon exclusively so the Epic speed was a nice change from the usual normal - although I wouldn't consider the optimal choice for a maptype like Boreal. Anyways, I hope to see Epic again.

[Nugog]

Originally posted by Fleme
I personally play Marathon exclusively

Ditto

I find Epic a bit too fast - and Normal is almost unplayable to me. I have never tried Quick.

[draethor]

Yeah I also hope to see epic again.

I think marathon can be too drawn out at times, epic to me seems like the perfect balance.

[playshogi]

I like the series so far, but if you want some suggestions....

1) map size - standard is good, with the occasionally large and small map. Small map could be reserved for use around holidays.

2) It might be intriguing to somehow hide the map type and number of civs in the game. I prefer random starts & random AI opponents rather than designed scenarios. Aggressive AI is hard enough without piling on the backstabbing AI.

3) map selection - I personally prefer earth-like cylindrical maps that are around 60-70% water. So, I enjoy archipelago, big & small, continents, fractal, global highlands, hemispheres, ice age, medium & small, pangea, and terra. Flat map types have either too much land or are too predictable in format or both.

4) aggressive AI - So far, always checked and I'm fine with that because the game is easier otherwise.

5) barbs - I like playing with barbs on but maybe 5 games raging barbs so far is too much. I'd reduce this to maybe 2 in 10.

6) no tech brokering - I'd never choose this, as it makes the game easier.

7) perm. alliances - no opinion. Players who win with a perm. alliance should rank lower than those who win without it.

8) speed - tailor to map size:
small - quick,
standard - normal, epic,
large - epic, marathon,
huge- marathon.

I'd like to see mostly epic speed games. So far we've had 9 normal and 1 epic. Marathon takes too long to play.

9) victory & scoring - Rather than request specific victory types or the generic 'any', I'd like you to always rank all victory types in order of preference. Since games seem to be ranked according to score it seems only fair to announce beforehand which victory types are to be preferred. That way, you avoid problems with trying to decide if a cultural 1850 win should outrank a 1900 space win that scores more points, since you've ranked victory types in advance. You should then decide if you always want fastest finish to outrank games that finish later, but score higher, within the same victory type. Time victory is always last in preference since these games are milking contests that some folks detest.

10) Random events - I voted for them, and now wish to say that I don't like them. So far, since that vote, every game has had them on. You had the right idea in the beginning: random events are bad for comparative play.

[JungleIII]

Random events are great! Sorry Playshogi...

They add a little spice, and their effect is so small - no more than a tribal village in most instances and often less. I'm sure you've noticed, they are tailored to events in the game and quests are usually something to just prod you to try something you might not have thought of... I've tried and failed in some, and completed others and found the outcome brought my interest to bear on completing something (like stables) I never built before, but now find usefull at times.
Anyway, they are interesting... keep them in please. :desire:

[Chuckman]

Some loose theme ideas:

A game where all the nations unique units are mounted units. The player would be Stalin!

A Viking raiding theme.

A couple of old world/ new world thoughts:

Player starts on new world among Native Americans, Aztecs, Mayan, Incan. Do you play friendly with your neighbors or take them all over before the Eurpoenas show up?

Player starts in new world by themselves. Can your unmolested expansion in the new world stand up to the arrival of the Europeans who have been trading technologies for milennium?

A fight among European nations on a "Europe" map.

A One City Challenge.

All female leaders.

[playshogi]

[SIZE=1]

All female leaders.

That was Game 10.

[Chuckman]

Originally posted by playshogi


That was Game 10.

I guess you can tell I didn't start that one yet.