HOTW7 Set up thread

[Robert]

That's 2 hour of Prussia and 1 of someone subbing.
If we go back to 2 hours the game won't be finished before civV has been released.

[Toni]

[Frank Johnson]

Guys I think alot of the problems with the terra map could be fixed by selecting Tropical for weather on startup, and choosing balanced resources.

In this setup, even the southern most player's 2nd city could access some land outside of the tundra. Jungle overall is easier to manage and much more useful terrain than tundra in the long run, particularly since you can usually build around it until you get iron working. Anyway I thought I'd make the suggestion.

[Robert]

Ballanced resources is a must anyway.
I like the idea of tropical weather!

[LzPrst]

Balanced resources!? Are we men or are we wimps? HOTW5 did not have balanced resources and we managed fine. The real world doesnt have balanced resources and our history has been so interesting because of it that games have been made about it...

Also, I am not favorable to tropical either, we want some variation dont we? I am a big fan of normal normal normal standard everything. It's a game, let there be some randomness and difficulties to overcome. please?

[Robert]

I'm not really sure if playing from 01:00 am till 04:00 am for 20 weeks while having a full time job, a new baby and while studying parttime can still be concidered to be a game

[Frank Johnson]

Lz, "Variation" isn't worth much if it means 2-4 civilizations are stunted because of a tundra start and tundra frontier. It promotes ladder style gambits, not diplo style interation. I got a tundra start once. Then someone bottled me in a founded a holy city. Then I warrior rushed it. I fixed my problem, but ruined another player's game in 2000bc. All that does is sow the seeds for whiners and leavers later. I value everyone having a base to build on over variation.

[Toni]

Looking at those normal sea level maps, I still believe that each one of us can fit 4-5 cities the most. Hmm a bit worried about that, isn’t that just too little guys?

What map sets did u had in HOTW5?

[Robert]

I agree with Frank. A good game is a game that at least starts ballanced. Our gameplay and diplo skills should determine who's up in the ranking and who's down. Of course, gamefun doesn't always depend ones position on the ranking, though I think that there's no one who hopes to be backwards during the entire game, for sure not because of the odds and not because of the skills. And I agree, we shouldn't regenerate maps untill everybody is satisfied, perhaps such a thing should only happen if someone really really has the worst start ever, but if we can keep the odds as low as possible then we should do that.

Regarding the 4-5 cities, remember that:
1. you can create overlapping cities, the civ4 cities don't grow as large as civ3/civ2 cities
2. in civ4 the number of cities doesn't matter! Small civs can still win
3. There's another continent across the sea.

I agree that 4-5 cities per civ isn't much, it's not a disaster either (though I prefer a little more room as well) (I'm in fact still curious for the reasons the 'normal sealevel' guys have. It's not as if everyone then suddenly has lots of room.)

[LzPrst]

hmmm. but I want tundra. I'm playing the vikings! you cant have vikings in tropical regions. its bad for their temper

you guys definitively have a point, but looking at that map I hardly saw any desert or tundra. and though I agree that having crappy land sucks, there should be some of that terrain type. we want a certain scarceness in order to promote competition and I feel, variation of terrain, just to promote different playstyles.

as for the game you are referring to frank... I dont think it was that hopeless and it would have made for an amazing storyline about the savage warrior/glorious cultural empire of the frozen northlands (all depending on how you wanted to run your civ) and could have made very interesting diploing, not despite having crappy land, but because of it. that's the joy of diplogaming, mechanics isnt everything. your crappy start could have been overcome by diploing. your solution to the problem was a warrior rush, ask rasputin what he would have done, I am sure the answer would be a different one. it's all about mindset.

England got a pretty crappy deal in HOTW5 (not too dissimilar from the one you referred too I believe), but they still managed to become among the top civs, becoming the colonizers of the new world. it's not about wanting a rough deal for some, I am risking that as much as anyone else. it is about flexibility. if you have lots of tundra, settle lands further away. it will be a slight economic obstacle early on, but great for RP'ing. Imagine something like "The Vast Frozen Lands of the City State Federation of the Greek Trading Empire"... With good diplo your poor conditions can be balanced out, and in time, most civs will be able to change their situation by many different means. acquiring new land by discovery, conquest or even buying it if the conditions are favorable. the possibilities are endless, we just need to be willing to think outside the box.

Once again, I want variation. If we have 14 players with the same start, almost equal amounts of land, evenly distributed resources, what is the challenge, where is the fun? Then it boils down to mostly game mechanics. I want room for oddities and unorthodoxy. some civs will inevitably be more peripheral than others for many reasons, but that doesnt mean that will be true for the full duration of the game. A marathon game is long and has room for so many twists and turns, ingame and diplomatically.

finally I would like to add. if it is the consensus of everyone to go for tropical, though I am firmly against, I would have to say that I absolutely abhorr the idea of a balanced start. it is totally against what I consider the spirit of diplogaming. Capo has said it again and again, diplogames are not about equality and balance. I agree that it is a disadvantage to not have access to certain resources, but for goodness sake!! that's why you have to wheel and deal!

once again I am strongly in favor of having only the Standard settings. Huge. Terra. Standard. Normal. Average.

if not, shouldnt we discuss if we want raging barbarians or no barbarians? how about having no goody huts, cause it's unfair towards those who dont start with scouts?

my point is merely, let the dice fall and then play, dont try to adjust the table in order to get the desired results. with flexibility in playing and diploing nothing is impossible. remember with the points distribution system the victory conditions are more than just game mechanics. diplomacy amounts to a lot of score.

[LzPrst]

as for balanced... here's a quote from Krill answering rah

It's not like every resource is available with 5 squares of were you start.

Actually that is exactly what it does IIRC. It was a request that every map have the option to have balanced resources (I think they just lifted the code form the balanced map script and dumped it in every other map script at first) so some people didn't get constantly screwed over by having no copper or iron within 10 tiles. It got removed from TBG because on team games, which it is meant for, the 5 tile radii overlap between team members, so some people got no copper or horses, adn some people had 2 or 3 of each. I even got lucky and had resources (ones you can always see+copper/iron/horse) on 15 of the starting 21 tiles when I played a game on TBG with balanced resources. So it got removed as unbalanced on TBG.

[Prussia]

I'm just saying that I cannot guarantee a full 3 hours every time, but I will do my best, and will probably clock in 3 hours most sessions.

[Toni]

Thats the spirit Prussia

[Rasputin]

ok ok, if we need someone to get the bad start and not grumble give it to me. i play same game no matter where i start. if someone builds a HOLY CITY (whatever tht is) and blocks me i promise i wont warrior rush it (cause i dont know how to rush and have never found a warrior capable of killing anytihng other than an ocassional ANIMAL.

So tha tis solved too.

[Colonel_Treize]

I like Balanced resources in competitve games, and if this was a Ladder game I would recommend Balanced, but LzPrst's arguments in favor of letting the chips fall where they may in a diplogame are sound, IMHO.

Moreover, I'm confused with all this discussion of the specific land mass in the map with the associated pictures. I mean, they had to create a custom map in the ISDG that was agreed upon by all teams because a lot of pride goes into winning a game like that. But in a diplogame where winning isn't supposed to be the main focus...? Any Terra is a good map. Doesn't everyone want to be surprised by what they find through exploration? Isn't that why you guys aren't using an Earth map?

I can't install AIM for some technical reason, but my Yahoo and MSN IDs are visible.