I know this is silly, but... (PBEM request)

self biased · September 30, 2003, 11:01

anyone up for one of a short PBEM? possibly regicide? i know conquests is out next month, so perhaps just a quick and dirty game?

self biased · October 1, 2003, 13:43

mmm no takers, eh?

self biased · October 5, 2003, 12:16

'ello?

notyoueither · October 5, 2003, 15:36

I'd do that. It would be better to get more than 2 players though. Maybe 4 players on Tiny.

Harovan · October 5, 2003, 16:49

If it's 4 on tiny, I'm game.

self biased · October 7, 2003, 11:51

okay... we've got three...

OPD · October 7, 2003, 12:41

:cough: accelprod :cough:

self biased · October 7, 2003, 14:16

i think that might be arranged...

notyoueither · October 7, 2003, 21:07

I'm not sure if SR would do AccelProd. What do you say, good Sir?

Harovan · October 8, 2003, 01:15

I don't like it. In this game it may make sense, though. But still...

notyoueither · October 8, 2003, 02:22

I could do with or without. I prefer without. It is great for on line simult, but not so good for classic turn based.

OPD · October 8, 2003, 05:59

Nevermind then, I understand how AP can significantly detract from the game.

I think I'll wait till conquests.

Tarquinius · October 8, 2003, 06:21

I'd like to join a quick game on tiny.
Maybe we need someone to set up the game?

self biased · October 8, 2003, 11:24

let's see... we have:

notyoueither
OPD
Tarquinius
Sir Ralph
and myself.

weeell... this would make 5 on tiny... wouldn't that be a little cramped?

OPD · October 8, 2003, 12:55

Yeah cramped, just the 4 of you would be better,

like I said, I think I'll wait untill C3C before starting another pbem.

Harovan · October 8, 2003, 12:55

As far as I understand, that was a "no" from OPD, or did I get that wrong?

conmcb25 · October 8, 2003, 14:02

looks like by the time you guys get this going Conquests will be out

If you need a fourth, Ill do it. (Right now looks like you have four)

I would play in the evening usa time.

Good lUck

Harovan · October 8, 2003, 14:22

So the optimal play order would be

self biased
notyoueither
Sir Ralph
Tarquinius

The latter 2 could be changed, as they appear to be in the same time zone. Who will set up the game? Should we have 3-4 starts and vote for one? Or should we have somebody looking if nobody is stuck at an island?

Tarquinius · October 8, 2003, 15:40

Better to turn around the order:

Tarquinius
Sir Ralph
Self Biased
Notyoueither

As they are behind on us, they will be able to get within a reasonable time period. If you put it other way round, you could just be sleeping when you get it from the other side of the world.

It would be best to find someone to set it up, as that would guarantee (almost) equal positions.
Any volunteers?

If there aren't any we could try three starts and pick one without any horrible starts (no shielded grassland for example, or no 2-food tile)

Harovan · October 8, 2003, 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Tarquinius
Better to turn around the order:

Tarquinius
Sir Ralph
Self Biased
Notyoueither

As they are behind on us, they will be able to get within a reasonable time period. If you put it other way round, you could just be sleeping when you get it from the other side of the world.

It would be best to find someone to set it up, as that would guarantee (almost) equal positions.
Any volunteers?

If there aren't any we could try three starts and pick one without any horrible starts (no shielded grassland for example, or no 2-food tile)

That is different how?

(except that you and me have changed position, which I said is possible)

self biased · October 8, 2003, 21:42

my location is USA eastern timezone... if that helps...

Harovan · October 9, 2003, 02:43

I thought so, considering your Apolyton time setting. So who will set this game up? self biased, as initiator? Should we have 3-4 different starts and vote? Should we choose our civs or have everything random? What do you guys think?

Tarquinius · October 9, 2003, 04:25

I'd like to choose my civ, and a pangea map. Rest can be set to random (including Barbarians) Diffciculty level doesn't matter much to me, is Monarch okay?

I think picking one start from 3/4 starts is best. No perfect starts are required, just no terrible ones.

Harovan · October 9, 2003, 05:02

In a game without AI difficulty matters only for happiness, barbarian strength and corruption.

- Chieftain gives 4 citizens born content, Warlord 3, Regent and Monarch 2, Emperor and Deity 1.
- Barbarians get the stronger the higher the difficulty is
- Corruption gets higher with increased difficulty, because the OCN gets lower.

Monarch would be fine with me, although happiness-wise it's just the same as Regent.

I think there should be four starts generated, which will be evaluated by each player. Everyone has 10 points to share, but may not give more than 5 to a particular game. So if you have 2 good starts and 2 horrible, just give the good ones 5 points and the horrible ones 0. Or if you have 4 different ones, give them 4, 3, 2 and 1 point. The save with the highest score sum will be the one played. You get the message.

Settings should be pangea, normal, temperate, 4 billion years.

Tarquinius · October 9, 2003, 11:51

Agreed Sir Ralph
I can make 4 games if it is okay with the others. Just say which civ you want to play and how your civ and ruler name and noun etc. is. One thing though, someone should be able to veto a save, if it really is not playable. Otherwise, if it is just a bad or mediocre start you will just have to live with it.

Are the following settings okay with everyone?
Monarch
Tiny
Pangea
4 Billion years
Temperate
Normal climate
Restless Barbarians

self biased · October 9, 2003, 12:35

sounds good to me

Tarquinius · October 10, 2003, 05:45

Do you guys want to choose your civs or random? Actually in this case it would be funny to have random civs, as you can take this into account when awarding points for the starts.
So I am for random civs. Please state your opinion fast, so we can get this on the road.

Harovan · October 10, 2003, 08:00

If all chose random, I'm all for it too. But that might be unjust, because some civs have late UUs (Germany, USA) and I have yet to see a PBEM that gets far into the industral age on any map, let alone on a tiny pangea.

If civs will be chosen, I'll take Persia. Never had Persia in a PBEM yet.

self biased · October 10, 2003, 12:17

sounds interesting... i'm only just starting to go for random civs in my regular games... let's go for it.

notyoueither · October 10, 2003, 17:29

I will go with the flow. Random civs. The other settings mentioned by Tarquinius are fine.

Can we clarify that a player may veto a start if it is truely horrible? Should we say that a screen must be posted and the other 3 can override if unanimous? I think we are all reasonable people. If someone showed be a screen with 3 tundra and 2 mountains in the initial area, I would agree to go again.

One other thing, if random civs do we want culturally linked off?