March Madness!

[Flandrien]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
Iron Jackson (the defacto Iron Civer ;-)

NOT !

Iron Briek (Briek Schotte) was a most famous Flandrien

[Conqueror]

I'm in, ofcourse.

I'll turn the notification on again

[Aqualung71]

Ok, now we're all confirmed, I've got a bunch of stupid questions since I've never tried PBEM before. Or is there a thread someone can point me to that explains how this whole thing works?

Thanks

[smellymummy]

it's really simple, you get an e-mail that has the save game attached. you play that game, save your turn at the end, then email the next player with the save attached

otherwise the game is about the same...

[Aqualung71]

Thanks smellymummy, that's kinda what I thought. But....

1. How does the computer know who's turn it is when I receive the save file?

2. There's no AI in the game? Not worth throwing in 1 or 2 AI's for the hell of it?

3. What happens if somebody plays 2 turns in a row (apart from being abused and ejected)? I guess this is physically possible, right?

4. How do the locked alliances work, and how do we determined who is with whom?

5. Which "exploits" are allowable and which are banned, as per the lists already posted on this thread?

6. How do you conduct diplomacy? Do you just call up another player during your turn, offer something and hope he accepts? Wouldn't the negotiation go on for a few turns? Or is this where you can discuss things outside the game, assuming you are both online at the same time or some such thing?

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
btw, concerning the rules... i wouldn't mind having a bit more space than 4civs on tiny, especially as many strategy geniuses are playing ... except if 40% water really works, then it's different

70% ocean on a tiny pangea is working pretty well in the first tournament. We're a few techs away from the middle ages, some borders are tightening up, but there's still alot of space to expand. I think this amount of land makes for the right pace of play for a civ game. You can't hide from the other players forever.

I've scratched the MPTournament.biq idea- 40% is way to much land for 4 civs, and some of the other modifications, like early map trading, are only meant for online MP. I agree with alexman that we should go with stock rules, the only question being over disabling SGLs or not. Should we take out a wildly random element and reduce the power of scientific tribes? (BTW- I will enable y-wrapping to give seafaring civs extra mobility as slight compensation for being on a pangea.)

The rules in the second post of this thread should be up to date. The single restart option will be the standard. If individual groups agree to 'stick with the draw' in advance, style points will be awarded. ;-)

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
no communication until contact, no alliances until an embassy is established, no screen shots (or precise verbal descriptions of the map) unitil map trading.

Did we agree on these rules, BtW ?
Trip's list sounds very good and i vote for that and agree 100 % on that list, but i think it did not cover these points.

I'd vote yes atleast on the "no comm. until contact" and "no map info sharing until you have the tech" (Navigation in C3C IIRC)

[smellymummy]

1. i think the players turn is encoded into the save file. when you're done with a turn, the game informs you to save it and send it to (civ name)

and then...

3. the game exits to the main menu once you're done with your turn.

4. locked alliances only work in scenarios (like those in conquests). this tournament won't have any AFAIK

6. you send what you have for sale to a player, and wait for their reply with how much they will give back. theres two little buttons that say 'accept' and 'do not accept'. a deal could easily take 3 turns to complete, so discussing about it in email might be faster

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
1. How does the computer know who's turn it is when I receive the save file?

2. There's no AI in the game? Not worth throwing in 1 or 2 AI's for the hell of it?

3. What happens if somebody plays 2 turns in a row (apart from being abused and ejected)? I guess this is physically possible, right?

4. How do the locked alliances work, and how do we determined who is with whom?

5. Which "exploits" are allowable and which are banned, as per the lists already posted on this thread?

6. How do you conduct diplomacy? Do you just call up another player during your turn, offer something and hope he accepts? Wouldn't the negotiation go on for a few turns? Or is this where you can discuss things outside the game, assuming you are both online at the same time or some such thing?

For #s 1 and 3, each players turn is password protected (you enter yours in on your first turn), and the game mechanisms prevent errors.

#2- AIs muck things up- they belong on the exploit list

#4- No locked alliances without AIs

#6- Diplomacy is similar to SP, except you can't choose from what your opponent has to offer- you only see what the other player is actively offering and either accept, reject, or add something of your own to the deal. You can discuss diplomacy via email depending on if you have contact and to the extent that research coordination is allowed.

#5-Tricky. Since we actually have 5 players yet to confirm they want to play at all, having everyone come to a consensus on what they accept as an exploit is just not likely to happen. I say each individual group should refer to an exploit list (they seem to be springing up all over like May flowers) before starting to make sure everyone is generally aware of them. Work out an arrangement all four are content with.

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Thanks smellymummy, that's kinda what I thought. But....

smelly there answered some of your questions already, but if you have never played PBEM before, i'd suggest a quick practise game with someone.

Easiest way to found out the answers

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
#2- AIs muck things up- they belon on the exploit list

Well said
Somehow this comment made me laugh like hell even its true

Fun at civ forums

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

70% ocean on a tiny pangea is working pretty well in the first tournament. We're a few techs away from the middle ages, some borders are tightening up, but there's still alot of space to expand. I think this amount of land makes for the right pace of play for a civ game. You can't hide from the other players forever.

ok, you're right... i'm dead meat anyway, no matter if they have to walk 5 tiles or 10 tiles

I've scratched the MPTournament.biq idea- 40% is way to much land for 4 civs, and some of the other modifications, like early map trading, are only meant for online MP. I agree with alexman that we should go with stock rules, the only question being over disabling SGLs or not. Should we take out a wildly random element and reduce the power of scientific tribes? (BTW- I will enable y-wrapping to give seafaring civs extra mobility as slight compensation for being on a pangea.)

it is a very random thing, but so are goody huts (getting settlers/settlements vs. disturbing 4 fierce warriors).
i've just noticed a problem with SGLs in a PBEM game (started with patch 1.15): some people can't believe me that i got one. i must say, the odds were very small (non-scientific), but i nonetheless got it.

disabling SGLs would mean crippling scientific civs even more and making another trait "sub-optimal" for PBEMs (besides exp, com). imho, leave them in. but either vote here for general tournament rules or have the players vote in each game...

The rules in the second post of this thread should be up to date. The single restart option will be the standard. If individual groups agree to 'stick with the draw' in advance, style points will be awarded. ;-)

i can see myself starting with 4 cattle and 2 wheat and someone else wanting a restart

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Conqueror
Did we agree on these rules, BtW ?
Trip's list sounds very good and i vote for that and agree 100 % on that list, but i think it did not cover these points.

I'm just aiming to compile a list of such rule options for reference. It will be much easier to have the 4 players in each game decide which rules to go with. In the first tournament, it seems that many of the players have no clue what was discussed and agreed to in the original thead.

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Tease me all you want

Who's teasing whom?

, but even if I wished, I could not participate. For reasons I don't want to mention, my ability to play contiguously or even to post on Apolyton is at least in the next time seriously in question.

Boss or wife? :-)

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
disabling SGLs would mean crippling scientific civs even more and making another trait "sub-optimal" for PBEMs (besides exp, com).

Don't be too quick to write off commercial tribes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but corruption and research rates are proportional to the map size. High rates of corruption and low research demands on a tiny map can make a few saved beakers very valuable (not to mention even one or two extra goody huts for expansionist).

[sabrewolf]

com was my favorite trait in SP before conquests - mainly because of alphabet-start. now it's less powerful because seafaring get the same advantage bonus plus the additional faster ships.

exp on tiny can be good with a lot of luck, but advantages are limited to the very early game.

but i'll stop now as i don't want to go offtopic here...

rommel, who will be setting up the games? one group for the other or is there a neutral (not playing) person who'll do it or is it up to the RMG?

[LzPrst]

I' m in. sorry for delay. had to visit my parents for easter

[Aqualung71]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
disabling SGLs would mean crippling scientific civs even more and making another trait "sub-optimal" for PBEMs (besides exp, com).

Why do you see exp and com as sub-optimal for PBEM?

EDIT: Oops, sorry....I guess I should have read all the posts before asking that question

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Conqueror
Well said
Somehow this comment made me laugh like hell even its true

Fun at civ forums

A certain PBEM comes to mind, where somebody grew awfully big by eating 2 AIs, while his counterpart was surrounded only by human players.

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
A certain PBEM comes to mind, where somebody grew awfully big by eating 2 AIs, while his counterpart was surrounded only by human players.

But the counterpart had to build much more military to beat up the humans, which was a good thing for him in the long run.

(Oh no those Sipahi are coming... again... ... -wakes up- Thank God, it was only a dream... )

[Jon Shafer]

I think we need to have standardized rules for all the games. It's not fair if one group is playing according to one set of rules with another group playing according to another. Certain exploits can make the game easier, so certain players advancing with this help when it should not normally have been available is unfair to those in the other games.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Trip
I think we need to have standardized rules for all the games. It's not fair if one group is playing according to one set of rules with another group playing according to another. Certain exploits can make the game easier, so certain players advancing with this help when it should not normally have been available is unfair to those in the other games.

Since your competition in each game plays by the same rules you do, no one gets an unfair advantage.

Of course, if you all play different rules at the beginning, it's going to be hell trying to get everyone to agree in subsequent rounds.


Dominae

[Jon Shafer]

My problem is that the criteria for advancement are different from game-to-game, and I believe that things should be more standardized.

[Dominae]

Last man (or woman) standing proceeds to the next round. That's pretty standard.

[alva]

A certain PBEM comes to mind, where somebody grew awfully big by eating 2 AIs, while his counterpart was surrounded only by human players

But the counterpart had to build much more military to beat up the humans, which was a good thing for him in the long run.

(Oh no those Sipahi are coming... again... ... -wakes up- Thank God, it was only a dream... )

Hmm, it's not always an advantage not to have any neighbours.

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Dominae
Last man (or woman) standing proceeds to the next round. That's pretty standard.

works for me

[Aqualung71]

Anyone interesting in a quick practice game so this newbie can work out what this is all about?

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
Anyone interesting in a quick practice game so this newbie can work out what this is all about?

I'll be glad to help out, provided the game moves fast.

Yes, yes, I like fast games. So sue me. It takes 5 minutes to play and send a turn, I see no reason why it should take more than a day or two for each turn.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Dominae
Last man (or woman) standing proceeds to the next round. That's pretty standard.

If I advance to the next round, I want to play against opponents who has earned their spots by being good Civ players, not because they and a friend triggered their GAs on each other at an opportune moment to take out a 3rd player, or because someone knew how to chain ships together to land an invasion force 30 tiles from where he should have been able to.

Is that too much to ask?

[Aqualung71]

Ok, when do you want to start?

Now?