Who wants...

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Randolph
I don't think that the religious trait directly reduces WW, it:
1) Reduces the cost of religious structures by 50% (temples, cathedrals)
2) Makes your anarchy phase only 1 turn.

Good point about the hoplite triggering a too-early GA, that would certainly be a down side.

Of course it doesn't relieve WW, but it means that if the govt crashes, its one turn to communism or republic. not 6-7 turns of wasted production.

I can see this as a "dirty" trick, can't you? refusing to grant peace in a stalemate in order to cause 6 turns of anarchy? religous civ would protect against that.

[alva]

being non-religious can be a problem in MP, you can loose a war without any serious battles being fought. In SP , who cares, but aginst other intelligent (, yeah right), this can be a problem.

The hoplite could very well be the best unit in MP IMO. No ones gonna even think about attacking you. (except for the reason mentioned, but, they will realise however, it will probably cost them very dearly. So who will catch the bullet? So other players can profite from it??



Not building it to soon, is a way to avoid an early GA , beelining for replublic is an alternative one (IMO any GA, once you get republic is a good one (not allways perfect, mind you) , provided you don't suffer any/too much WW.

Personnally, my last game was with Babs (sc+rel)(bowman2.2.1), and I must say, I was/am very pleased with them.
Cheap buildings overall (paradoxial: I think this is the best combo for a warmonger (less time needed to build, more time to make units)

Maybe divide a couple off major tasks. Let's improvise
They will wanne best mates for a long time( better trade deals?)

[alva]

I can see this as a "dirty" trick, can't you? refusing to grant peace in a stalemate in order to cause 6 turns of anarchy? religous civ would protect against that.

yes and no, once fighting stops, WW goes down again (slowly, but it will)

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by alva848


yes and no, once fighting stops, WW goes down again (slowly, but it will)

Yes, but why stop till our enemy is in ruins, people overturning cars and setting banks on fire. Nuclear meltdowns


WW does go down, but since its so dependent on the other civs and their war policies, I would be afraid of what could happen.
6 consecutive turns of anarchy would stall our war.

granted, I'm probably over analysing this, probablywon't be much of a factor, but I just wanted the discussion out on the table, as it were.

[alva]

absoluteley right

I was taking in terms, when used against us



btw: any updates when these forums will be private?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by alva848
absoluteley right

I was taking in terms, when used against us



btw: any updates when these forums will be private?

point

hopefully soon

[FrustratedPoet]

Room for one more?

[alva]

great

I was thinking about pm' you

[FrustratedPoet]

It'd be odd to play on the same team in a DG, but against each other in a PBEM. Cool, though.

Yes, I will study you closely in a DG until I can predict your every move!
It's all part of my cunning plan.

[Harovan]

You're welcome FP. This team is getting very good.

[FrustratedPoet]

Although if I'm joining then the talent of the team will be dragged down.

But, yeah, we're gonna kick ass!

[asleepathewheel]

Welcome to the team

[Tassadar500]

Can I join?

[notyoueither]

I think so. Room for one more before 10.

Then... do we want a limit?

[Meshelic]

I still say Carthage is a great choice, regardless of what type of map. Their Numidian unit 2/3/1 is a good early defense unit that will keep our lands safe from encroaching enemies. But notyoueither you seem to be pretty dedicated to the Romans, eh? If you guys don't really want Carthage then no big deal, I've just been rooting for them since this all started....

Between 10 and 12 would be good I think as far as a limit goes. 11 would be good, as it being an odd number that could help with majority/minority votes on elections or agendas in the future....

Speaking of which, we have to create a constitution don't we..?