Cut More Crap - Pitboss

[Darkness]

Originally Posted by Plattfuss

Can we have a vote on the 3 options? It looks like most people just want to go on. A vote could help to clear things up and end the discussion.

Is a vote really needed? If you wanted a completely balanced game you should've had Barbu make a balanced mirror map... This one is moderately balanced, which seems a big improvement over the Rule-the-World games (in terms of balance, I mean). There some players only had space for 4 cities (on a huge map), like Beam and myself. And look how that turned out in RTW2 (well, for me anyway... )...

[Wosret]

Thats easy to solve.

The ones who have surplus resources shall share them, with me of course, receiving back only my indiference, under the penalty of death, humilhation, decaptation, and other "tions"...

The other resourcers I let you to fight for, while i watch, sitting in my emperial golden throne.
:P

[Stapel]

Originally Posted by Plattfuss

Can we have a vote on the 3 options? It looks like most people just want to go on. A vote could help to clear things up and end the discussion.

We will simply continue, I guess.

[Beam]

Originally Posted by Stapel

We will simply continue, I guess.

I'm with stupid.

Btw Stapel let's celebrate your 3000th post on CDZ! Though your avatar has gone down the drain.

[Plattfuss]

Originally Posted by Stapel

We will simply continue, I guess.

ok, finally a challenge

[Azza]

Originally Posted by Stapel

We will simply continue, I guess.

I don't see any reasonable alternatives to just continuing on with the game.

[Indiansmoke]

I think this map is about as close as you can get to a relativelly balanced map without it being mirror or equal map.

Of course if Bardu had given at least one good luxury to the 2 people that have no luxuries things would be even better.

Industrial resources are less important as by that stage you should be in a position to go to war and take over the land you need....however I must say that the idea of turning all connecting land between players to desert is a bit weird (since if the land was not desert you could expand towards opponent and take the luxuries by force...now that is very difficult due to long desert strips).

[socralynnek]

Well in the end, I can only give a reasonable guess after the game is done...

I have no luxuries (believe me or not...), but I hope that maybe the rest of my land is better than the average. Then it is ok.

I mean, we don't need a perfectly balanced map. We don't have pefectly balanced Civs either. I guess, the map is probably balanced enough to give each player a reasonable chance to win.

[Plattfuss]

Originally Posted by socralynnek

... I guess, the map is probably balanced enough to give each player a reasonable chance to win.

I doubt this since Barbu himself said the game is not balanced and thus proposed to exclude lux trading. Who would know better than he?

[Robi D]

Originally Posted by Plattfuss

I doubt this since Barbu himself said the game is not balanced and thus proposed to exclude lux trading. Who would know better than he?

There is a difference between reasonable and exact. Personally i'm happy with a no lux trade rule, it doesn't affect me. If we allow lux trading then i wont be that bothered either.

It's only 4 players that have that lux advantage. On the other hand those 4 players might find themeselves with bigger targets on their backs since lux stavered players surrounding them would see an oppertunity to get some luxs off them, I'd view that as a disadvantage.