Tweet
As there was a long discussion about this without a consistent result, I guess a poll won't hurt. Perhaps it will clear things up a bit. The original discussion is here.
-
29A PBEM tournament, 4 players, fast turns, DARs.13.79%4A PBEM tournament with diplogame rules.6.90%2A game where it is forbidden for the player to build wonders.3.45%1A game with a limit to the number of structures you can build in cities.3.45%1One of the Conquests.10.34%3A game started by a veteran player at Deity level and continued by a newbie after a strong start has been set.0.00%0A game with very wide city spacing as a requirement.3.45%1A game in which players are required to try out the idea of camps (temporary cities).0.00%0A replay of one of the old AU courses (with a changed map).20.69%6A succesion game training.3.45%1A game to try and maximize the number of wonders built (great start, Emperor level).10.34%3A game where critical resources are difficult to reach.17.24%5A mix of some of the the above (please specify).0.00%0:ana:, or promote Theseus to Almost-God status, just short of Nathan..6.90%2Seriously. Kung freaking fu. -
Thanks Modo
*"Winning is still the goal, and we cannot win if we lose (gawd, that was brilliant - you can quote me on that if you want. And con - I don't want to see that in your sig."- Beta -
REPLAY!!! REPLAY!!! REPLAY!!!
Come on, Total, Eternal, Forever War has got to be fun!! Or May be a Psycotic Wonder building course.You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.Comment
-
I vote for one of the Conquests.And her eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming...Comment
-
4 player PBEM!"I used to be a Scotialist, and spent a brief period as a Royalist, but now I'm PC"
-me, discussing my banking history.Comment
-
4-player PBEM, with 4 AI, balanced by someone who will not be playing. It's the next step from the 1 vs 1 with 6 AI we had in AU 601.
One of the Conquests for SP would be interesting if they weren't so unbalanced in terms of game play. On the other hand, perhaps such a course could lead to some AU-mod-style modifications for future use of that conquest, thereby benefitting the community.Comment
-
And it'll take forever to finish.Originally posted by alexman
4-player PBEM, with 4 AI, balanced by someone who will not be playing. It's the next step from the 1 vs 1 with 6 AI we had in AU 601.
Seriously. Kung freaking fu.Comment
-
I have a preliminary question: If we do decide to play a 4 player PBEM (with additions Alex suggests), would it be acceptable to use AU 601 as a ranking? Since it is a PBEM, there is not really any point in pretending it won't be competitive. (Of course, it would be possible to set up both an SP course and a PBEM mini-tourney, and have them run in parallel)
Edit: In reply to modo: No, if they average 1 turn a day, which is quite easy, then they don't take that long. We could have it done by Easter If we use a rapid fire session at the start, then we could have it done by Christmas.
You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.Comment
-
I believe that. What concerns me is, what year it will be.Originally posted by Krill
We could have it done by Easter If we use a rapid fire session at the start, then we could have it done by Christmas.
Seriously. Kung freaking fu.Comment
-
I have question then: How long do you expect your current PBEMs to last? Does it matter so long as it's fun, and you constantly get to play your turns? What will you do if you get bored while playing those games?
Or are you not going to play?You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.Comment
-
Believe me, I understand the fun aspect, even if I only just started joining PBEMs. And I will join, should a PBEM be the next AU course - just for the fun of it.
But I honestly wouldn't know what there is to learn. Or do you really think a player barely beating Regent can take on a Deity-level player and have real chances of winning, just because it's a PBEM? Somehow, I doubt that.
I guess such a course could show that a PBEM is deadly for anyone unaware of the human psychology, but isn't that a tad too obvious to teach here? Spend half a year writing DARs for people, just so they know what vicious creatures humans can be? C'm on. Oh yeah, it's great fun because of the unpredictable human nature. But that's no hot news either, is it?Seriously. Kung freaking fu.Comment
-
Or do you really think a player barely beating Regent can take on a Deity-level player and have real chances of winning, just because it's a PBEM? Somehow, I doubt that.
using those exact skill levels, not really, but if they understand the basics then they can use the PBEMs as practice. Thats what I did
And about writing DARs, That is not the entire reason to write them, or people would never bother to have written them in the first place
They write them for the comparison of strategy and tactics in game, for their (the players) learning. If other people learn, then thatis just a bonus
Last edited by Krill; November 5, 2004, 19:16.You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.Comment
-
Yeah, but SP games don't take half a year all that often. You can learn the basics in PBEM, but you can learn them much faster and with more direct help in SP games. Adding the PBEM thing to it does nothing but slow down the process.
Sorry, but I'd rather have the no wonder game and an AU course repeated than play a single PBEM. Especially if some of the best players just won't play another PBEM.Seriously. Kung freaking fu.Comment
-
That is why I suggested running the MP and SP courses in parallel
You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.Comment
-
Yeah, but with a long playing time and some important contributors missing from the PBEMs, the learning value of those is suddenly down in the cellar, big time. What stays is the fun part, so Sir Ralph would be pleased. Unfortunately, it doesn't help much when you're trying to improve your skills.Seriously. Kung freaking fu.Comment
Comment