EPT[Civ 4] Game 4 - Team A - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Biochemist
United States1008 Posts
| ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On July 14 2010 05:41 Biochemist wrote: What do you mean by multiplayer mode? Like two separate succession games that started from the same game but with different civs or will both teams be competing against each other in the same game? We cant get both teams to actually compete, because that would require turn for turn play, which would take forever. However if we start both teams off on the same game, but controlling different civs, I think it will be interesting to see how it turns out. So two seperate succession games started from the same game, but with different civs. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On July 14 2010 05:00 Lexpar wrote: I've only play 4 or 5 full games of civ 4 in my life, but I'd definitely want to play with you guys. Just for clarification, do you play with the beyond the sword and warlords expansions? Yes | ||
|
Lunaticman
Sweden1097 Posts
If we somehow could fix that I would love it if that happend. Otherwise I am fine with both alternatives. | ||
|
Biochemist
United States1008 Posts
On July 14 2010 06:02 Lunaticman wrote: Wouldn't there be a problem with ghosting? If we somehow could fix that I would love it if that happend. Otherwise I am fine with both alternatives. I don't see what difference it would make... the games will diverge pretty quickly due to the RNG and such. | ||
|
Sethronu
United Kingdom450 Posts
On July 14 2010 04:53 Fen wrote: Ok  Ive got 14 people who will play if its a split game. Which is good numbers of people. However I've got a poll up there which says that no-one actually wants a split game and is happy with a game with lots of people playing. Just so everyone knows what I want to happen if there is a split game. Basically, I will start the game on multiplayer mode instead, All the rules will be based on the polls on the first page. Then the roster will be split into two teams and each team will assume the role of different civs in the game. Therefore we can see what would happen if players played from different perspectives in the game. Does everyone hate this idea? Because I'm a little confused that people would complain about a large roster last game, but be completely fine with it this time around. (I will get this started as soon as I can, but I want to make sure we get everything right beforehand) That sounds like a great idea to me at least! | ||
|
Keilah
731 Posts
At some point, we should play a standard multiplayer game, simultaneous turns, blazing speed, etc etc. Takes about 3 hours to play to the point where everyone knows who's gonna win, and that's GG! (It would take aaaaaaages to actually make it to victory, civ4 is badly designed that way IMO. The start/mid is so good but the end just drags things out.) | ||
|
Biochemist
United States1008 Posts
On July 14 2010 10:17 Keilah wrote: woah, splitting into two separate civs in one game is not going to work. But having two teams each attempt the same game with the same start, but making different choices throughout, would be very interesting. At some point, we should play a standard multiplayer game, simultaneous turns, blazing speed, etc etc. Takes about 3 hours to play to the point where everyone knows who's gonna win, and that's GG! (It would take aaaaaaages to actually make it to victory, civ4 is badly designed that way IMO. The start/mid is so good but the end just drags things out.) Why not? I thought it sounded fun. | ||
|
Teejing
Germany1360 Posts
| ||
|
ShloobeR
Korea (South)3836 Posts
On July 14 2010 10:17 Keilah wrote: woah, splitting into two separate civs in one game is not going to work. But having two teams each attempt the same game with the same start, but making different choices throughout, would be very interesting. At some point, we should play a standard multiplayer game, simultaneous turns, blazing speed, etc etc. Takes about 3 hours to play to the point where everyone knows who's gonna win, and that's GG! (It would take aaaaaaages to actually make it to victory, civ4 is badly designed that way IMO. The start/mid is so good but the end just drags things out.) Unless you mean ghosting then I dont understand why it wouldnt work. He is suggesting that we play two totally seperate games, on the SAME map with different civs... not competing against each other. | ||
|
Lexpar
1813 Posts
| ||
|
Nokarot
United States1410 Posts
Also, I'm all for tropical fractal etc etc, but have you guys ever tried Fantasy realm? I don't know if its a mod me and my friends played with or if its built in to the game, but its pretty funny sometimes when you come across a flood-plains/hill on a river with an oasis and pigs on it. It is absurd a lot of the time, when you settle cities near godlike tiles, but fun nonetheless. I imagine it could make for entertaining written reports, too, if people decided to play along with it. | ||
|
Lunaticman
Sweden1097 Posts
| ||
|
Nokarot
United States1410 Posts
On July 15 2010 01:54 Lunaticman wrote: Nokarot, I would be willing to try it sounds awsome! Found it, I guess it is a mod. http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/reference/map_scripts_guide.php#fantasyrealm Perhaps something to consider for the next succession game that pops up, but not this one. | ||
|
Zyphen[p]
United States91 Posts
It is pretty absurd though. Random Tundra tiles with Corn and whatnot. | ||
|
savz
8 Posts
A game of 14 will be trouble. It will be very very very slow and players might lose intrest during the game. Another thing that I don't fancy is that map size. Huge is so... heavy. It forces a long no-war early game because the distances. The only decision to be made before rifling is the city positioning. Anyway, good luck with the game, should be a fun one no matter what! | ||
|
Nokarot
United States1410 Posts
I'm indifferent in truth, though. I'd play either and have equal fun in either. The idea of two identical games/maps being controlled by two different teams to see which gets further with the same map and starting location is intriguing, though. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
Ill put this poll up one more time, and whatever the result is, I'll start the game with that. Poll: Split game? Yes, Split game (12) No Split (5) 17 total votes Your vote: Split game? | ||
|
prOxi.Beater
Denmark626 Posts
| ||
|
catabowl
United States815 Posts
| ||
| ||
