What is your definition of balance, if not your second sentence?
Balance = You can win both sides. In most of those civs I dont see that, e.g would be almost impossible to win with spain/china/byz vs teut/brit/turk. So game ends at 1-1 with both sides being turk/brit winning then its decided by 3rd game which is same covs.
Balance = You can win both sides. In most of those civs I dont see that, e.g would be almost impossible to win with spain/china/byz vs teut/brit/turk. So game ends at 1-1 with both sides being turk/brit winning then its decided by 3rd game which is same covs.
I think most civs are fine, they cant be perfect anyway. If you can think of better combinations please suggest them
Great work cec ! Everything is fine for me , you can not make perfect 3v3 combos . And in past we already had alot of 3v3 mirror/same civ tourneys . So i hope this will be fun both for specs and players .
e.g would be almost impossible to win with spain/china/byz vs teut/brit/turk
you are wrong, just imagine as p1 biz p3 spa p5 china vs p2 teut p4 brit p6 turk, biz+spa can spawn fast teut and get razing+bloodlines so far while p4/p6 kill only a few runners from biz this without p5.. yet :/ & the game turns into a bbt fest like the ordinary random civs
What is your definition of balance, if not your second sentence?
Balance = You can win both sides. In most of those civs I dont see that, e.g would be almost impossible to win with spain/china/byz vs teut/brit/turk. So game ends at 1-1 with both sides being turk/brit winning then its decided by 3rd game which is same covs.
I think most civs are fine, they cant be perfect anyway. If you can think of better combinations please suggest them