Would you prefer hm or no hm for the nr 20 tournament?

Yes to half map
22
63%
No to half map
5
14%
Yes to half map for military but not for gathering
8
23%
 
Total votes: 35

No Flag [TLDT]Amsterda
Musketeer
Posts: 67
ESO: Amsterda

11 Sep 2019, 10:39

Heard some mixed opinions about this so thought I'd make a poll about it.
No Flag harcha
Crossbow
Posts: 40

11 Sep 2019, 12:47

If your civ has more vils early on, then I'd imagine it wouldn't be hard to send them to eat out opponents mines before they have the chance to do so tehmselves. This would cripple the opponent more than yourself. Then the game would turn into a race of who can gather all the coin first, similar situation as racing to fill the whales with fishing boats in NR40... Imo kinda lame so I wouldn't want the vils to travel over hm.
No Flag [TLDT]Amsterda
Musketeer
Posts: 67
ESO: Amsterda

11 Sep 2019, 13:05

harcha wrote:If your civ has more vils early on, then I'd imagine it wouldn't be hard to send them to eat out opponents mines before they have the chance to do so tehmselves. This would cripple the opponent more than yourself. Then the game would turn into a race of who can gather all the coin first, similar situation as racing to fill the whales with fishing boats in NR40... Imo kinda lame so I wouldn't want the vils to travel over hm.

Yeah, would say it's far from being as extreme as the whale example you gave but would definitely make the warchiefs civs more viable.
User avatar
Canada Mitoe
ESOC Media Team
EWTNWC LAN Top 8
Posts: 4103
ESO: Mitoe
GameRanger ID: 346407

11 Sep 2019, 18:47

Half map is both stupid and necessary at the same time.
Germany supernapoleon
Lancer
Posts: 610
ESO: Supernapoleon
Location: Munich

11 Sep 2019, 21:43

Mitoe wrote:Half map is both stupid and necessary at the same time.

Why stupid?
"I'M SOOOOOO GOOD AT THE GAME"
Hazza wrote: "I mad u win cos u get carried all game and have to lame every game"
User avatar
Canada Mitoe
ESOC Media Team
EWTNWC LAN Top 8
Posts: 4103
ESO: Mitoe
GameRanger ID: 346407

12 Sep 2019, 02:14

Because it’s kinda boring, and it feels so contrived. At least there might be some strategy before the treaty ended if half map rule didn’t exist.

Instead half map just sets it up so both players just ram units into each other for 5 minutes after the treaty ends, without too much thought going into real strategy. I know I’m oversimplifying that a bit, but still.


Even so, I can see how stupid it would be if someone just snuck like 30 petards into their opponent’s base before it was walled up and just sat 2-3 on top of all of their buildings and then killed them instantly, etc etc.

Also certain civs with more vills would benefit a lot more than others from being able to use more natural resources.

I get all of that, and while I think that it’s stupid that we have to rely on a gentleman’s agreement for this sort of thing, I also understand that the treaty community is too small and mostly too casual—on top of little opportunities for treaty-specific balance changes, especially for different time rules—for it to realistically make sense to have no rules.
User avatar
Kiribati SirCallen
Gendarme
Posts: 7911
ESO: KTRAlN
Location: Midwest best west

12 Sep 2019, 02:33

NR40* is just an endless game of rock, paper, scissors!

*I know thread is about NR20
and the giving famishes the craving
sweet thames, run softly, til I end my song

The shepherd's staff's tantalus around my neck

let the water
touch the tongue
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
ESOC Media Team
Posts: 3680
ESO: DJ_Cometk
Location: California

12 Sep 2019, 02:45

@Mitoe can 100% assure you that a lack of half map rule would not make Treaty any more strategically interesting, rather it would make it cheesy to the point of unplayability.

and it should be the opposite of contrived, seeing as historically at the end of treaties there was precedence for meeting in an agreed upon place for battle. Métis had a nice post on it from the way back, but I’ll be damned if I could find it
sebnan12 wrote:whenever i see a picture of siege elephants i question why they do 40~ dmg when they hit u. that phat cannons probably loading coconuts
User avatar
Great Britain Riotcoke
ESOC Media Team
Posts: 1621
ESO: Riotcoke
Location: Best County in the UK

12 Sep 2019, 03:01

How would you enforce it?
You have the charisma of a damp rag, and the appearance of a low-grade bank clerk. And the question that I want to ask, that we're all going to ask, is "Who are you?"
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
ESOC Media Team
Posts: 3680
ESO: DJ_Cometk
Location: California

12 Sep 2019, 03:17

sebnan12 wrote:whenever i see a picture of siege elephants i question why they do 40~ dmg when they hit u. that phat cannons probably loading coconuts
User avatar
Canada Mitoe
ESOC Media Team
EWTNWC LAN Top 8
Posts: 4103
ESO: Mitoe
GameRanger ID: 346407

12 Sep 2019, 07:20

Cometk wrote:@Mitoe can 100% assure you that a lack of half map rule would not make Treaty any more strategically interesting, rather it would make it cheesy to the point of unplayability.

and it should be the opposite of contrived, seeing as historically at the end of treaties there was precedence for meeting in an agreed upon place for battle. Métis had a nice post on it from the way back, but I’ll be damned if I could find it

No I understand that, I just think it's a shame that that's the case.

Forum Info

Return to “Treaty Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest