Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Master builder poll

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Thanks for the encouragement!

    In the meantime, let me try to serve some more food for thought, this time about plans related to our capital...

    There are 5 tiles within reach of our capital that can be improved at a reasonable cost: 1 plain vanilla grassland, 2 grasslands next to river, 1 bonus grassland, and one grassland with cattle. The only other type of tile we can use in the foreseeable future is the hills (probably only one of them) next to the river. As a side note: next time we should put the city on that hill to the North East -- it's still next to the river, it would give an extra grassland to work on (the one currently under our capital), and it gives extra deffensive value -- but let's not ponder about the past, let's look at the future, shall we!?

    In terms of tile improvement, we have only one fundamental choice to make: shall we irrigate or mine the cattle?

    Let's investigate this question with our medium-long term strategy in mind: expanding Legoland. The basic assumption here is that in the capital we want to build settlers and some escort for them until we are close to satisfied with the shape of our Homeland. We will, of course, build a few warriors for basic protection and scouting at the beginning -- the focus of this investigation is what should happen afterwards. We will also most certainly need more workers -- those will be produced by other cities, not the capital.

    So let's cut to the catt^H^H^H^H, khm, cheese: if we irrigate the cattle tile, we can easily have a city that produces 4 extra food and 5 shields with 3 population. I would certainly advise us to take this path if we could build spearman. In that case, we could have a city producing a 1 spearman/1 settler combo every 10 turns while growing up from pop 3 to pop 5 and then consuming 2 pop for the settler -- very convenient and very effective.

    But, alas, we can't build spearmen, we can only build a Num.Merch. for 30 shields or 2 warriors for 20 shields total. At this point, it becomes clear that further decision making requires input from other Ministers, specifically the Military Architect and perhaps The Enlightened. The three Ministers should decide what is the more favorable solution: having 2 warriors or 1 Num.Merch. as an escort for every outgoing settler. The following analysis is to help to make an informed decision in this regard.

    Should the High Council find that the 2-warrior version is favorable, we proceed as outlined above: irrigate the cattle, mine the bonus grassland and one of the other grasslands next to the river. And of course we build a road on all the tiles.

    The advantages of this solution are that:

    - it doesn't waste any shields nor food
    - it is easy to maintain -- once set up, will work without intervention
    - doesn't require any extra science or city improvement and can be made available in as little as 12 turns

    Should the High Council find that the 1-Num.Merch. version is favorable, we have quite a challenge in front of us in terms of city planning. The ideal setup for producing 1 settler/1 num.merch. combos in this early age is a city that produces 6 shields, grows every 5 turns, and can maintain these qualities across a range of 2 sizes (e.g from size 3 to size 5).

    One simple (although not cheap) solution to the above problem is this:

    - mine the cattle and the bonus grassland
    - build a granary
    - maintain a minimum population of 3 in the capital and assign these people to the above mentioned two improved tiles and (surprise!) to one of the (unimproved) hills

    This way the city produces 2 extra food and 6 shields -- with a granary, we can pump out a settler/num.merch. combo every 10 turns till the end of times. The extra population that grows into the capitol while the num.merch is built will be assigned to one of the grasslands next to the river. The advantages of this solution are that

    - it doesn't waste any shields nor food
    - it is easy to maintain -- once set up, will work without intervention
    - it requires minimal tile improvement: mining the cattle and the bonus grassland (plus of course the roads, which are implied in any solution anyway)
    - we make use of one of the hills (generally not easy to do this early)

    Also note that the arrival of the new Num.Merch. cleverly coincides with the population growth from 3 to 4, thus unhappiness is automatically taken care of by means of military policing.

    The disadvantage is that we will need a granary, and consequently Pottery, thus it will take at least 20-25 turns to finilize this setup (largely depending on how fast our Science Department can deliver Pottery -- maybe next time we should start with Pottery instead of Bronze Working? ).

    I suspect that every other, significantly different, ie. "mine the cattle but don't build granary" type of solution would result in wasted shields and/or food, and it most certainly would result in unnecessary micro-management as the build and growth cycle of the capital wouldn't be synchronized and would be difficult to predict. We will leave it as an exercise to the reader to (dis)prove this...

    After all these details, allow me to make a few general observations about our starting position:

    - There are two promising directions to explore for sites of our next cities: to the West along the river, and to the East in the direction of that bonus grassland that is so unfortunately outside of the reach of our capitol. We should request our Military Architect to send troops into these directions.

    - We have lots of jungle. Fortunately we are industrious people, therefore it is only half the pain it could be. Nonetheless we better get used to clearing the jungle as part of our regular activities. While assigning workers to this unpleasant activity, we should pay attention to assign at least 2, but possibly 3 or 4 workers to the same tile so that we can enjoy the fruits of our work early. Assigning 5 workers would be a waste of their effort (base cost of jungle cleaning being 12), and assign 6 or more would be probably an overkill. And, we have to make sure, of course, that cities are placed on a jungle tile whenever possible, for automatic clearing.

    - There seems to be a river starting at the foot of the mountain with the gold in it. We should request our Military Architect to investigate that area as well, it might be a suitable place for a city.

    - Care must be taken while moving units and especially our first worker around the capital. We should try not to lose any moving points by unnecessarily crossing the river.

    Well, this is what I would do if I was the Master Build... now, how about you, guys?

    Delmar!
    Last edited by delmar; December 7, 2002, 13:33.
    Care for some gopher?

    Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

    Comment


    • #17
      delmar, are you sure you are not cracker's D/L?

      j/k, forget it

      Fine points, I will sure respond in more detail later on.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by vondrack
        delmar, are you sure you are not cracker's D/L?
        Don't know anyone with the name of Cracker, sir!

        Fine points, I will sure respond in more detail later on.
        I will be honored and as you seem to be playing the game I will be very happy if you read my post about the capitol before making your next move. However, what I would really like is to get a sign from our MB candidates that at least they read what I put together here. I don't expect anyone to sign up to my strategies 100%, but I would surely expect a Master Build to have some kind of strategy, outlined to at least the details I mentioned above.
        Care for some gopher?

        Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by delmar
          I will be honored and as you seem to be playing the game I will be very happy if you read my post about the capitol before making your next move.
          The worker started mining the cattle tile (as agreed upon by general consensus some time ago - see a poll some time ago). The production is now what we need most - sending warriors all over, exploring etc.

          Expanding the empire while stretching the defenses too thin would be an invitation for warmongering teams to rush us. Keep in mind we are NOT facing AI that will leave you in peace for cheap. The other teams will not demand just some gold or cheap tech to leave us be if we are weak. They will extort us for our right hand and leg, if they feel they have an edge. Thus, our most imminent goal is to get to Bronze Working, cranking out some Mercs (thus: road first, then mine). That should be enough to make others think twice before harassing us.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by vondrack
            Expanding the empire while stretching the defenses too thin would be an invitation for warmongering teams to rush us. Keep in mind we are NOT facing AI that will leave you in peace for cheap. The other teams will not demand just some gold or cheap tech to leave us be if we are weak. They will extort us for our right hand and leg, if they feel they have an edge. Thus, our most imminent goal is to get to Bronze Working, cranking out some Mercs (thus: road first, then mine). That should be enough to make others think twice before harassing us.
            I don't recall saying anything about stretching the defense. Chances are we won't even meet anyone for another 1000 years and it will be yet another 2000 before they can attack us. On this scale, having Bronze Working 10 turns earlier or later is probably insignificant. Note that I am not saying it was a bad idea to research Bronze Working first, it is just not that obvious as "they are humans so they will attack so we need defense so we need Merc. so we must research Bronze Working ASAP". I hope that my small analyzis above induced at least a shed of doubt whether researching Bronze Working first will indeed result in more Mercs in the long run.

            As a side note, I think it is also important to realize that a team of humans is not a super-intelligent AI running on deity. They are now also fighting to crank out their first units, they are swearing because they are next to jungle/mountains/tundra, they are also afraid that someone will run over them. And once they start to feel strong, and start looking for enemies, do you seriously think that a civ with a 2/3/1 unit will be their first choice? I doubt it. They don't even know how many Mercs we have. They are scared to lose the game early. These are the things (can you say psychology?) to think about when we play against humans, not how damn intelligent they are or how well they were playing single player.

            Maybe if we are alone with the GoW team on a small island, maybe then I would be worried.

            And maybe I should bring up a small example here. I am playing an MP game with notyoueither (leader of Gathering Storm and apparently a renowned Civ player), another guy, and (originally) 4 AIs. notyoueither is playing the Vikings, I am playing the Russians. I am pretty sure that at the time notyoueither got the Berserks, he could have whiped me out or at least crippled me badly. He didn't dare to attack (of course I am not sure why, so I am not saying he was dumb, mark you), consequently I am in lead now and they will be hard pressed to prevent me from winning even if the two humans team up on me. Of course, "past performance is not guarantee for future results", as our brokers always remind us so kindly, so take this just as an interesting piece of history, if you will.

            Thanks for listening!

            Delmar
            Last edited by delmar; December 7, 2002, 21:22.
            Care for some gopher?

            Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by delmar
              I don't recall saying anything about stretching the defense.
              Adopting the strategy of producing Merc+Settler combos (you proposed earlier) in order to grab as much land as possible indirectly implies stretching our defenses thin. Having our cities defended with just one, pretty costly unit does not seem as a very safe strategy to me.

              Chances are we won't even meet anyone for another 1000 years and it will be yet another 2000 before they can attack us. On this scale, having Bronze Working 10 turns earlier or later is probably insignificant.
              Chances are... we decided to play it safe (which is perhaps exactly what others intend). Once we have BW and Mercs, we shall be safe and free to choose what to do next. What if we assumed we would not meet anyone for 1200 years and we would not be attacked for 3200 years and - dammit - it happened? We might lose the game even before actually getting to play it.

              Note that I am not saying it was a bad idea to research Bronze Working first, it is just not that obvious as "they are humans so they will attack so we need defense so we need Merc. so we must research Bronze Working ASAP". I hope that my small analyzis above induced at least a shed of doubt whether researching Bronze Working first will indeed result in more Mercs in the long run.
              :shrug: The BW first strategy was adopted by an overwhelming majority of the team. The reasoning was not what you mention, but "Once we have Mercs, we will be safe. Let's be safe ASAP." BW will not result in more Mercs. BW will get us Mercs earlier, which is both good for defense and to prevent wasting shields.

              As a side note, I think it is also important to realize that a team of humans is not a super-intelligent AI running on deity. They are now also fighting to crank out their first units, they are swearing because they are next to jungle/mountains/tundra, they are also afraid that someone will run over them. And once they start to feel strong, and start looking for enemies, do you seriously think that a civ with a 2/3/1 unit will be their first choice? I doubt it. They don't even know how many Mercs we have. They are scared to lose the game early. These are the things (can you say psychology?) to think about when we play against humans, not how damn intelligent they are or how well they were playing single player.
              I don't recall saying anything about considering other teams superintelligent AI running on deity. You may even find a post of mine somewhere else on this forum, expressly stating we shall not fear other teams, despite the renowned names, since what they can think up, we also can. OTOH, other teams include players that are well known for their aggressive strategy. They have repeatedly expressed their belief that agressiveness, especially early in the game, can significantly hinder opponents' ability to catch up. It is true that they are likely to be more careful facing humans, but we better not reckon on that.

              And maybe I should bring up a small example here. I am playing an MP game with notyoueither (leader of Gathering Storm and apparently a renowned Civ player), another guy, and (originally) 4 AIs.
              Interesting info. But as you said, we can hardly judge based on a single example.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by vondrack
                Adopting the strategy of producing Merc+Settler combos (you proposed earlier) in order to grab as much land as possible indirectly implies stretching our defenses thin.
                Only if you assume that the cities produced this way will sit there and produce Wealth or something similarly intelligent. The second city we produce (already defended by the Merc) can start producing barracks to crank out veteran Mercs (or whatever you like) to defend other cities. Just an idea.

                The BW first strategy was adopted by an overwhelming majority of the team.
                I hope the overwhelming majority of the team also plays as Carthage and on this very same map all the times. Usually I am researching BW first as well. In fact in all the 4 MP games I am involved now, I researched BW first. But that is a different civ/map. And I think we shouldn't take anything for granted because it's always been like that or because everybody is doing it. Maybe the thing that 99% of the people wouldn't even dream about is the key to our victory.

                I don't recall saying anything about considering other teams superintelligent AI running on deity. You may even find a post of mine somewhere else on this forum, expressly stating we shall not fear other teams, despite the renowned names, since what they can think up, we also can.
                Happy to hear that. I just realized that you are also the head of our Foreign Affairs, so on a personal note: maybe you should go out and play on human weakness. Maybe you could publish a newsletter that reports how many and well placed Mercs we have all over the map (slightly exegarating numbers and strategic value, of course ). That might be worth more than 3 Merc/city.

                OTOH, other teams include players that are well known for their aggressive strategy. They have repeatedly expressed their belief that agressiveness, especially early in the game, can significantly hinder opponents' ability to catch up. It is true that they are likely to be more careful facing humans, but we better not reckon on that.
                Good. I am happy to see that someone is taking care of this aspect of the game.
                Care for some gopher?

                Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by delmar
                  Only if you assume that the cities produced this way will sit there and produce Wealth or something similarly intelligent. The second city we produce (already defended by the Merc) can start producing barracks to crank out veteran Mercs (or whatever you like) to defend other cities. Just an idea.
                  Was this necessary...?

                  Anyway, this discussion is just very academic now, as we have almost no knowledge of our surroundings & neighbours. Let's wait till we learn more. Then we talk about general strategies.

                  Originally posted by delmar
                  I hope the overwhelming majority of the team also plays as Carthage and on this very same map all the times. Usually I am researching BW first as well. In fact in all the 4 MP games I am involved now, I researched BW first. But that is a different civ/map. And I think we shouldn't take anything for granted because it's always been like that or because everybody is doing it. Maybe the thing that 99% of the people wouldn't even dream about is the key to our victory.
                  And your point is? I said that most people in the team voted for researching BW first. In this game, with this civ, on this map. Thus we went for BW. If the majority of the team wanted to disband our capital, we would disband our capital. It's that simple. This is a team effort and the majority rules. Prior to making a decision, let there be a discussion. Once the team makes the decision, it's over (speaking specifically of the research now). Switching research would kill us. Discussing whether going for BW was fine or not is useless now.

                  Originally posted by delmar
                  Happy to hear that. I just realized that you are also the head of our Foreign Affairs, so on a personal note: maybe you should go out and play on human weakness. Maybe you could publish a newsletter that reports how many and well placed Mercs we have all over the map (slightly exegarating numbers and strategic value, of course ). That might be worth more than 3 Merc/city.
                  Like GoW did? Other teams would consider the info just as irrelevant as I consider GoW's fake pic. But if you feel like working on propaganda, feel free to do so. I just don't have time to.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by vondrack

                    Was this necessary...?
                    I guess the real question is: was it offensive to you? If so, I apologize. I thought we were discussing strategy, so I just wanted to point out that nothing I said so far implies that we won't have good defense.

                    Anyway, this discussion is just very academic now, as we have almost no knowledge of our surroundings & neighbours. Let's wait till we learn more. Then we talk about general strategies.
                    I don't fully agree but I can see your point, and I appreciate that you read through all my rather long posts so far. So just one last comment:

                    And your point is? I said that most people in the team voted for researching BW first.
                    You said the "overwhelming majority of the team adopted this strategy" and I interpreted this as "most people in our team usually do this so we did, too". Even though you didn't mean this, I would argue that this is the case and in fact this is the reason why the vote came in as it did. Whether it is a good decision or not, is an independent question. See also the poll where it was decided 9 to 1 that we should mine the cattle first and then we didn't mine it first because the simulation showed that it doesn't make sense. As a side note, I couldn't find the thread where the research decision was made so if you could send me a pointer, I would appreciate it.

                    And my point is: if we are playing based on instinct, even if it is the collective instinct of 18 people, instead of careful evaluation of facts, then we are missing out on one of the huge advantages of playing as a team.
                    Care for some gopher?

                    Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by delmar
                      You said the "overwhelming majority of the team adopted this strategy" and I interpreted this as "most people in our team usually do this so we did, too". Even though you didn't mean this, I would argue that this is the case and in fact this is the reason why the vote came in as it did. Whether it is a good decision or not, is an independent question. See also the poll where it was decided 9 to 1 that we should mine the cattle first and then we didn't mine it first because the simulation showed that it doesn't make sense. As a side note, I couldn't find the thread where the research decision was made so if you could send me a pointer, I would appreciate it.
                      The poll is here. Perhaps I expressed myself incorrectly... what I wanted to say was that overwhelming majority (everybody, to be exact) voted for BW. Sorry if it was bad English (even though I don't think so), I am not a native speaker.

                      Originally posted by delmar
                      And my point is: if we are playing based on instinct, even if it is the collective instinct of 18 people, instead of careful evaluation of facts, then we are missing out on one of the huge advantages of playing as a team.
                      Instinct or careful evaluation, it does not matter. If the team votes for something, we are going to do that. If you consider something others propose (say, based on their instinct) wrong, submit a counter-proposal then (say, based on your careful evaluation). If it is backed up by solid arguments, members may change their mind and adopt your solution (which is exactly what happened with the cattle tile issue - the second vote overrid the first one). If they don't, we will play according to their instinct. That's the principle. You can't have the game played to your liking, unless you gain the majority support for your ideas.
                      Last edited by vondrack; December 7, 2002, 17:37.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by vondrack
                        Perhaps I expressed myself incorrectly... what I wanted to say was that overwhelming majority (everybody, to be exact) voted for BW. Sorry if it was bad English (even though I don't think so),
                        Not at all, I think it was simple prejudice on my side.

                        I am not a native speaker.
                        Me neither.

                        Instinct or careful evaluation, it does not matter. If the team votes for something, we are going to do that.
                        I am afraid my whole point is getting missed here. I am not arguing for ignoring what the majority wants (and expresses in form of voting), even less for changing things that have been decided already and, for example, changing the research direction after investing several turns into Bronze Working. I am not even necessarily proposing a strategy here.

                        What I am trying to get through is that there is a way to think ahead and see the consequences of our decisions, and it is possible to define our building strategy in more detail than "we will expand and will place cities 2 tiles away from each other" (sorry dear candidates, no offense meant ). I hope that I gave some ideas above as to how to do this "in theory", but if it is not good enough then I will attach a scenario here which can be used to model our situation.

                        Edit: it seems I can't attach anything here. I do have a scenario nonetheless, so if anyone has any idea how to share it then let me know.

                        Yes, I did question some early decisions, but not from the point of "why did we do this after most people voted for it" rather "did people have enough information to vote for one or the other".

                        If you consider something others propose (say, based on their instinct) wrong, submit a counter-proposal then (say, based on your careful evaluation).
                        I would hope that this is going to be done by the Ministers (that is, describing different scenarios, with their cost, risks, pros and cons, and let the citizens choose), and I also believe that I gave an example here. The starting point of this whole discussion is the simple fact that I wanted to choose a Master Builder and I found that I can give more details about a possible strategy (not the strategy that we must implement otherwise Delmar will cry and go home! ) in 30 minutes than any of the canidates did for days, even though I personally don't want to be a minister at all. And this while we are already actually playing the game! (Don't worry, I don't take it as seriously as it sounds. )

                        Now to put some more fuel on that fire, let me point out that the voting about the research direction was finished before the game actually started (last post dated at 30-11-2002 22:29 -- this is why I didn't find it...). While you can dispute the importance of seeing the map before making such a decision, I will find it difficult to accept that you couldn't have made an at least as good decision after seeing the map. Note that I am not saying that it was a mistake to choose BW as target, only that this decision could have been prepared better.

                        And again, I mention these things not because I want to show you how much better my strategy would have been (I am not sure at all if it would have been better), rather to help us improve our decision making process.

                        Thanks,

                        Delmar
                        Last edited by delmar; December 7, 2002, 20:37.
                        Care for some gopher?

                        Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by delmar
                          Now to put some more fuel on that fire, let me point out that the voting about the research direction was finished before the game actually started (last post dated at 30-11-2002 22:29 -- this is why I didn't find it...). While you can dispute the importance of seeing the map before making such a decision, I will find it difficult to accept that you couldn't have made an at least as good decision after seeing the map. Note that I am not saying that it was a mistake to choose BW as target, only that this decision could have been prepared better.
                          I'm glad you want to improve the decision making process. We are only beginning the game, so we sure lack experience and good organization. However, there is a problem which caps our decision making process : many decisions must be taken in a hurry. The whole PtW DG agreed teams should have the save 24 hours max. That's why we cannot have too much clutter (like a mutual veto power for example), and that's why we must meet some decisions too early, rather than too late.
                          In the very case of the discovery of BW, I'm the culprit, being the one who posted the poll. But hadn't we decided before the game started, we could have wasted 1st turn because of our indecision.
                          I prefer having relatively bad decisions rather than no decisions at all.
                          "I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
                          "I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
                          "I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- Dis

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Spiffor
                            However, there is a problem which caps our decision making process : many decisions must be taken in a hurry. The whole PtW DG agreed teams should have the save 24 hours max.
                            This is indeed an important factor and I was wondering when we start to blame things on this, khm, must admit that this makes things a bit more difficult.

                            Now, if we think that this is a problem (and I do think), then maybe we should do something about it. For example, I would like to point out that most decisions can be made based on the previous save, in fact a large number of decisions can be made 5-10 turns ahead, especially in this early phase. So maybe we shouldn't be in such a hurry to send forth the save even if we think we don't have anything to do in this turn, rather wait until our 24 hours are over -- thus saving some time for the decisions for the upcoming turn(s) to be made. This way we could have plenty of time to build a base strategy (that could be followed if everything goes as planned) and we would have close to 48 hours plus whatever the other teams take to think to react to most emergencies or unforeseen events. Just an idea.

                            In the very case of the discovery of BW, I'm the culprit, being the one who posted the poll. But hadn't we decided before the game started, we could have wasted 1st turn because of our indecision.
                            I prefer having relatively bad decisions rather than no decisions at all.
                            No question there. And I wouldn't even have disagreed, had I been a citizen at that time, to start such a discussion (maybe not necessarily a poll) that early. What I am trying to point out here is the general principle that we need to use as much information when making decisions as possible. To apply this principle to the case of research direction, I would have waited with the final decision until after the map is revealed. Now before someone replies back and proves me that it wouldn't have mattered: that is not the point here.
                            Last edited by delmar; December 7, 2002, 22:51.
                            Care for some gopher?

                            Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by delmar

                              This is indeed an important factor and I was wondering when we start to blame things on this, khm, must admit that this makes things a bit more difficult.

                              Now, if we think that this is a problem (and I do think), then maybe we should do something about it. For example, I would like to point out that most decisions can be made based on the previous save, in fact a large number of decisions can be made 5-10 turns ahead, especially in this early phase. So maybe we shouldn't be in such a hurry to send forth the save even if we think we don't have anything to do in this turn, rather wait until our 24 hours are over -- thus saving some time for the decisions for the upcoming turn(s) to be made. This way we could have plenty of time to build a base strategy (that could be followed if everything goes as planned) and we would have close to 48 hours plus whatever the other teams take to think to react to most emergencies or unforeseen events. Just an idea.


                              THe problem is that right now other teams want the saved played and sent on asap. THey dont want to wait a whole day just to tell worker to build a road, or skip turn, allthough when we get futher in the game, the time we will have to make dessicions will be longer because turns will take longer to play. SO i would not worry about this, because like i said we will get more time as the game goes futher, not less.
                              Donate to the American Red Cross.
                              Computer Science or Engineering Student? Compete in the Microsoft Imagine Cup today!.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Jack_www
                                THe problem is that right now other teams want the saved played and sent on asap.
                                Do we have a rule that allows us to hold the save for 24 hours or not? As the other teams are not citizens of Legoland, I assume they are not looking for our best interest and therefore I consider it irrelevant if they want something that was not enacted as a rule.

                                In fact it might be considered psychological warfare (if not outright unfair) to push other teams into hurried decisions (I mention this for future reference, dear Department of Foreign Affairs ).

                                THey dont want to wait a whole day just to tell worker to build a road, or skip turn
                                The issue at hand seems to be that we don't have enough time to make decisions, see Spiffor's earlier post in this thread. If we don't have this problem (frankly, I am too new here to decide this) and we indeed just need to press "ENTER or SPACEBAR for next turn" then obviously we shouldn't hold up the game.

                                allthough when we get futher in the game, the time we will have to make dessicions will be longer because turns will take longer to play. SO i would not worry about this, because like i said we will get more time as the game goes futher, not less.
                                Paradoxically, I would argue that individual decisions made later in the game tend to be less critical (even thought there might be more of them).
                                Care for some gopher?

                                Did you know that in GalCiv, the AI makes you think you are playing against humans? Stop laughing, they mean it!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X