MP game - "Pantheons" Started

Lex · #1 August 14th, 2004, 02:51 PM

k, two teams then!

in order to speed up the process (if it wasn't moving fast enough already) I'd suggest having a third-party select random races for each player. Then if players don't like the race they've been randomly assigned, they can trade with their teammates. This will get the ball rolling for game hosting and start the converstations between team members reguarding playstyles and experience.

I'm all for creating "themed" teams, but we might be here till next week figuring out, post by post, what races to pick that complement our team (especially since we probably aren't experts with all the races). I personally am looking forward to playing a new race. My only request is that we decide the races soon, and then give a day to research/experiment first before uploading a pretender (so our choices are smart ones).

Pickles · #2 August 14th, 2004, 03:24 PM

Quote:

k, two teams then!

in order to speed up the process (if it wasn't moving fast enough already) I'd suggest having a third-party select random races for each player. Then if players don't like the race they've been randomly assigned, they can trade with their teammates. This will get the ball rolling for game hosting and start the converstations between team members reguarding playstyles and experience.

I'm all for creating "themed" teams, but we might be here till next week figuring out, post by post, what races to pick that complement our team (especially since we probably aren't experts with all the races). I personally am looking forward to playing a new race. My only request is that we decide the races soon, and then give a day to research/experiment first before uploading a pretender (so our choices are smart ones).

Yeah 2 teams for the reasons the Panther noted.

Random allocation to player was not an option - random allocation to teams looks favourite on current voting followed by intra team haggling.

I am just not in that much of a hurry to start to need to rush things. I will give it until about 12.00 GMT tomorrow to allow those people who posted in the middle of my night a chance to comment then we can probably set the thing up. Still seem pretty precipitous to me & there is still no rush to start until everyone is happy with their nation & pretender.

Pickles

Pickles · #3 August 14th, 2004, 03:31 PM

Indeps Nations Graphs

Pickles 7 R Y
Aku 3 C -
Boron 7 C Y
Panther 3 R Y
Tauren 3 R -
????

Agrajag 7 R Y
Alexti 7 R Y
Cheezeninja3 R -
Yvelina
Lex 3 R -
Tuidjy?

Nations c= choose R = random
Here is how I believe everyone thinks - means has not expressed an opinion but has posted.
Until the others reply we cannot be sure but it looks like Random nations & graphs with indeps still to be decided. I give em 15 more hours or so.
(note I have come off the fence)

Pickles

alexti · #4 August 14th, 2004, 04:01 PM

I prefer 2 sets of nations to be defined by a neutral party.Then each team distributing the nations between its players as it sees fit. Graphs are ok, considering that with only 2 teams they won't cause any usual problems. Not sure if indy strength will make much difference, though I probably prefer 6 or 7.

#5 August 14th, 2004, 09:18 PM

This game books pretty cool, but I think I'm in one too many, already (esp.as large alliances generate a lot of work)

One comment; you might want to think about the balance effect of UlM. It could easily turn into a magic item factory fed by all the gems five allies can send it. Protected by its allies, and allowed to concentrate on alchemy and forging exclusively Ulm could become very gross, and massively boost the side that gets it. I don't think any of tho other races would synergise with alliance play in quite the same way.

Mark

Pickles · #6 August 14th, 2004, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Mark the Merciful said:
This game books pretty cool, but I think I'm in one too many, already (esp.as large alliances generate a lot of work)

One comment; you might want to think about the balance effect of UlM. It could easily turn into a magic item factory fed by all the gems five allies can send it. Protected by its allies, and allowed to concentrate on alchemy and forging exclusively Ulm could become very gross, and massively boost the side that gets it. I don't think any of tho other races would synergise with alliance play in quite the same way.

Mark

OK there is now a gap in the lineup. I suggest we wait for Yvelina to see if the mysterious tuidjy is in. If not we go 5v5, if he (or she) is then we need one more.

Ulm crossed my mind too. Not just forging - which could be pretty gross though I dont see forge of the ancients staying up long but the Great Alchemist. Ulm could turn an allied Abysias fire gems into 155 gold per turn - or 80 more than Abysia can alone etc.

I had thought of this as an opportunity but it may be too
strong.

We could ban the Alchemist, ban default Ulm, ban both or live with it.

I would be inclined ban the alchemist as that is a problem from turn 1 (well 2) & so most problematic or both (plus I want to try the other themes!)

Anyone else have any ideas?

Pickles

The Panther · #7 August 14th, 2004, 10:14 PM

As for the Ulm thing with forging, I am currently playing base Ulm in one of my MP games. Because base Ulm gets exactly ZERO random schools of magic on the master smith (the ONLY mage it can recruit), then it still has very limited selections of things to build, no matter how many gems it gets. The forge benefit for Ulm is not all that great because you can only forge the same things over and over. No luck pendant even!

Of course, forge of the ancients changes this radically and would therefore be top priority for the enemies to dispel. I could see a team putting over 100 earth gems into that global enchantment and hoping it Lasts for a couple of turns to do mass forging. Still, that is a very high cost for sure and late game only. The other team, which put those gems into powerful golems instead of this enchantment just might have crushed you by then.

Also a rainbow alchemist that never left home would definitely be advantage to Ulm, but it is easy to simply disallow.

And if the team wants to pour mass gems into empowering the Ulm master smith, well then it will take a long time for the forge benefit to break even, especially for only the level 1 skill artifacts. A viable long term strategy, but it will take a while to reap the benefit.

Also, don't forget that ANY earth magic mage from ANY race can build the forge bonus tools, like dwarven hammers, and distribute them to teammates. This actually reduces one major Ulm advantage, the one that it can make a bunch of those things quicker than any other race can. For the team with no Ulm can just pool earth gems into the proper nation and build a bunch of them. You don't have to wait to pile up the gems, only wait for the Construction research. Don't forget that Ulm is a VERY slow researching race because of the high gold cost per base research level (just 5) on its only mage, the master smith. I believe that Ulm is the slowest researching race of them all, everything else being equal.

The Panther · #8 August 14th, 2004, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Lex said:
My only request is that we decide the races soon, and then give a day to research/experiment first before uploading a pretender (so our choices are smart ones).

I could not agree more with this comment, as I for sure will take a race I have yet to play on MP no matter what method we use to decide races.