I'd take the Peacekeepers in a second game. xxxkylebenanderson@hotmail.comxxx
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
New SMAC PBEM with 4 players Classic Game :)
Collapse
X
-
Back to the first game for a sec
I was hoping in the rules we could haver CO-victory off OR have a rule that no two human players can win together ( you could team with an AI)-- I just find it ruins the game for two strong players to team up to the end . . .You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Flubber
Back to the first game for a sec
I was hoping in the rules we could haver CO-victory off OR have a rule that no two human players can win together ( you could team with an AI)-- I just find it ruins the game for two strong players to team up to the end . . .
Comment
-
Originally posted by Minute Mirage
I haven't played any PBEMs to that point, but that does seem plausible. As far as rules are concerned, I'd also prefer that random events were turned off.
I assume random events WILL be off-- As for CO-OP, I know that tournament rules allow as many as TWO human controlled factions to share the victory
I just find it more interesting diplomatically if everyone knows they are ultimately alone. Some of the more boring games were ones where two (of perhaps 3 evenly matched players) team up to the bitter end . . . .You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Comment
-
OK, so in game 1, it's teaming with the AI but not a human, and random events off. Sounds good so far. I'm ready to start.
Net WarriorLast edited by Net Warrior; October 20, 2003, 18:09.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Net Warrior
OK, so in game 1, it's teaming with the AI but not a human, and random events off. Sounds good so far. I'm ready to start.
Net WarriorYou don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Comment
Comment