The aim of this thread is to gather people for a specific kind of multiplayer game. It will be especially suitable for slow players.
Recently I have tried one MP game and the game speed was quite high for me - I got confused easily, I wasn't able to control every detail of the game as I do in singleplayer. Then I joined one 7-player PBEM and it is quite slow... For me a disavantage of a standard PBEM game is that time periods of my concentration on the game are too short. I get deeply in the game...and it finishes for the present day.
So ... my thinking is heading towards something between MP and standard PBEM:
Standard PBEM vs. PBEM in sessions
I can imagine 2 ways of playing PBEM:
A) Slow PBEM
A player finishes a turn and goes away. He doesn't know when his opponent will play and so he supposes he won't be able to continue for at least several hours (or days). This is how standard PBEMs are played.
B) PBEM in sessions
Players agree on a playing time. They can do something else on the computer, but they have enough time for a PBEM in the meantime. This way 5, 10, 20... turns may be managed in one session (it may last 1, 3, 10... hours). (This is a way of playing that is similar to MP: Both players must agree on time of sessions. Game is slower than an MP game, but on the other hand there is no time pressure and players needn't focus on Civ2 only. They can do other things concurrently.)
So I would like introduce a new term...
Fast PBEM duel
In "Fast PBEM" players combine both Slow PBEM and PBEM in sessions. Sessions are preferable, but the game can continue also by Slow way when there is lack of time. Also some players may not be able to play in sessions. A duel is desirable since PBEM is slower with more players.
I don't want to force them at any cost but... I prefer them. I mean both standard (vanilla) Civ2 or empire-building scenarios and mods.
Now let us get deeper:
Exigency of clear rules
Most standard PBEM games are played without clear rules, but then some players start to reload battle outcomes (this is not a joke!) and the others wonder about that. Therefore I believe in PBEM there must be a clear boundary between allowed operations and disallowed ones.
I have heard tales about people cheating in PBEMs, but I don't think this should be a problem. I suppose everybody plays the game because of thrill from anticipation, sense of responsibility for one's own decisions and all those similar entertaining things. People that would cheatwould lose all that fun. If someone wants to win by any way or without having to think, then he can start SP, go to cheat menu, and reach the Alpha Centauri in 3900BC. That is much easier than to bother with sending many e-mails.
Although most PBEMs are played in the .net (multiplayer/internet) mode, I suggest the .hot (multiplayer/hotseat) mode. The main reason is that a .hot savefile is opened much faster than a .net one (opening a .net game involves going through many windows).
A partially accelerated start is possible - for example 2 Settlers, two warriors and 100 gold to start.
Several starting positions
A possible modification:
My idea is that each civ should get two or three starting positions (settler + warrior or something similar) on distant map positions. Then empires will be fragmented and the game will be more interesting.
(A note: For example, with two positions I consider this placement of starting positions
less interesting than this:
(because in the second example both civs will have to fight for the central area))