30% Iron Civer Tournament

[Rommel2D]

This is the Organizational thread for the Iron Civer PBEM Tournament. Early discussion on the format can be found in the March Madness! thread.

Yomigaeru Aiyan Shivilan
Yo-mi-guy-ru-eye-yon-shiv-u-ya!

Confirmed Entrants
smellymummy
Conqueror
Aqualung71
Moonbars
Andydog
ricketyclik
Flandrien
Soltz
Paddy the Scot
alexman
Masuro
MickeyJ
McMeadows
sabrewolf
Trip
Bongo
jshelr

Replacement Pool
MFCamillus (D)
Beta (D)
playshogi (D)
Krill (B or C)
conmcb25(D)
Arnelos (D)
snoopy369 (D)


The Tournament is nearing completion. The final will soon be underway and a new tournament will follow. Stay tuned for further updates...

The main thing to keep in mind: This is a long term proposal. Everybody should be available on a daily basis for at least the next year with only limited periods of expected absence.

The games have begun and are scheduled thusly:
Players in Purple text have been purple carded for delinquent play! "*" Designates a yellow card.

Game A
ricketyclik %eliminated%
Paddy the Scot %eliminated%
Aqualung71 Victor
Masuro %eliminated%

Game B
McMeadows %eliminated%
jshelr %eliminated%
Flandrien %eliminated%
Bongo Victor

Game C
Andydog
Mickeyj %eliminated%
Moonbars
sabrewolf %eliminated%

Game D
alexman Victor
smellymummy %eliminated%
Soltz (richthur) %eliminated%
Trip %eliminated%

Standby Game AA
MFCamillus %eliminated%
conmcb25
Arnelos
Snoopy369


Wrabbit Wrangler:
Rommel2D (jwala at fastmail dot fm)

Groupings have been made geographic in hope of promoting 'quick play' periods where mutiple turns may be played in one day. I've done my best to arrange an east to west flow modified by the schedule information I've been given...

[Rommel2D]

Finalized rules (seventh draft):

1) 16 players, two rounds, all four player games
2) Tiny pangea with 70% water, random civs (first round only)
3) Players in final round choose tribes in order of first round completion
4) Players organized by geography for fast play (modified by individual schedule variations)
5) Turn order in east-west progression with exceptions only for players who give specific availability variances
6) Games started by referee, first turn skipped
7) Each player has the option, once per game, to call for a restart before the completion of their first turn
8) Replacements are allowed while game is still BC
9) Replacements will eventually be assigned according to speed and/or number of victories in ICR games, but until the first replacement round reaches completion, they will be chosen as best meets the situation
10) 24 hour 'play clock', actively enforced
11) All players expected to make simple 'sent' post in tracking thread each turn, preferably listing year played, except when technical problems interfere.
12) All turns to be played with version 1.22 until it is superceded by another stable upgrade which all players agree to adopt
13) There is to be no...
rule 13.


To clarify the issue of rules and exploits/ettiquette:
Everything listed under Tournament Rules is here to keep the whole tournament together and running smoothly. These will receive active attention from the moderator.

Everything in the Etiquette and Exploit List is there for the convenience of the players. It is meant to be a starting point for them to refer to when deciding on 'house rules' for each game, and these items are not being actively enforced by a moderator. However, if a dispute arises that is not settled by the individuals in the game, the moderator's resolution will be based on the list and agreements stated in the game's tracking thread.

[Rommel2D]

[ Recently revised content in orange text ]


Regular and bold words give the basic exploit information and rules to prevent them. Red, underlined words are the specific exploits covered. Royalblue, italicized words are etiquette points mostly, meant to add to the game if agreed to, but not necessary to avoid the most damaging exploits.



Preamble
It is understood that everyone participating is doing so to enhance their enjoyment of the game and share this enjoyment with others. These rules are not designed to prohibit someone who does not play with the spirit of sportsmanship from gaining undue advantage, only the vigilance of the community can hope to accomplish this. The aim of these rules are to present a common ground from which a fair challnge is presented to all, subject to the intended random elements of the game.

Reloading
Reloading of the turn in an effort to gain better RNG results or reposition units according to newly aquired information is the most heinous abuse of the PBEM system. However, reloading a turn to correct manual errors is Ok, as long as no unexplored or fog-of-war tiles are revealed and no combat has taken place. Any instance of reloading should be reported in the tracker thread.


Definitions
'game turn'= sequence begun when first player in order starts turn and ended when last player clicks 'save & exit'

'production phase'= part of the individual's turn immediately after loading, lasting until player is free to select and move units. In the "it's not a bug, it's a feature" department, any time the map is blacked out, it is still the production phase. :-)

'Trade' = applies to tradeable resources only

1 Intertribal cooperation

1-1 Players shall not conspire to use irregularities of the game engine's turn sequence to gain extra use from units or resources. They shall not declare frivilous wars. Deals shall not be canceled on the same game turn as they are made unless due to a legitimate war. Resources intentionally removed from a trade network cannot be reconnected to that network on the same game turn. Players shall not make deals that include money they will not pay for.

1-1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers
1-1.2 Sharing a Luxury or Strategic resource
1-1.3 Generating Leaders and Golden Ages by sacrificing cheap units
1-1.4 Declaring war for happiness
1-1.5 Inflation bug
2-0.2 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war


1-2 Players shall not exchange in-game information until they are represented on each other's foreign advisor's screen. They shall not exchange graphic map information before both have knowledge of Navigation.
a) In diplomacy without an embassy between the Tribes, a player may only offer technology already known by their Tribe. They may not offer or ask for unknown techs.
b) Players shall not coordinate military action unless an alliance is formally declared in the foreign advisor's screen.
c) Players shall not make reference to specific distances or directions until both have knowledge of Map Making.
d) Players shall not make Mutual Protection Pacts or Trade Embargoes unless they are declared in the foreign advisor's screen.

1-2.1 Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation.


2. Intertribal conflicts

2-1 Players shall not rename units or cities to disguise the content of unit stacks or diplomatic offers.


2-2 Cities may be offered diplomatically only as part of a peace treaty.

2-2.1 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities


3. The individual turn

3-1 Players may only use drop-down menus to make changes during the 'production phase'. They should not zoom to cities or advisor screens from the pop-up boxes.

3-1.1 Using F1 to change production during the 'production phase'
3-1.2 Using city screen's arrow keys to change production during the 'production phase'


3-2 Last player in turn sequence shall not use the GoTo command's double movement to gain strategic advantage over an opponent.

3-2.1 Using GoTo to get extra movement


4. Options

4-1 Naval chains are allowed unless players agree otherwise in advance.

4-1.1 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

4-2 There are 4 basic levels of combat reporting;

Level 0> Absent
No reporting whatsoever, unless the attacker feels like gloating.

Level 1> Passive
(The default level to be used unless there is a consensus to use one of the other levels.)
A summary of combat results is required to be sent to the defender if, and only if, they make a relevant inquiry soon afterward.
['soon' should allow for a few turns to realize a unit is missing, but could only be one turn cycle for simplicity if the attacker insists.]

Level 2> Active
A player making any attack must indicate to the defender that it has taken place and provide a brief summary of units involved, along with damage taken.

Level 2.5>
Same as level 2, except any unit moving into and out of another player's fog of war on the same turn must be reported.

Level 3> Intensive
A player making any attack must indicate to the defender that it has taken palce and provide a detailed account of each unit's location and resulting damage status.

Level 3.5>
Same as level 3, except any unit moving into and out of another player's fog of war on the same turn must be reported.

All information need only pass between the affected parties. Post it in the turn thread only if you wish to broadcast results to the world (or are too lazy to make a seperate email )

[Rommel2D]

...From first to last
The peak is never passed
Something always fires the light
That gets in your eyes
One moment's high
And the glory rolls on by
Like a streak of lightening
That flashes and fades
In the summer sky...



Progress Report, as of July 18, 12 weeks into it:

Coliseum A was at 310BC.
Scores at 750BC:
314 Paddy the Scot
219 ricketyclik
169 Aqualung
161 Masuro

Coliseum B was at 1725BC.

Coliseum C was at 70BC.
Scores at 750BC:
235 Moonbars
176 Andydog
160 Mickeyj
159 Sabrewolf [since eliminated]

Coliseum D was at 670BC.
Scores at 750BC:
254 alexman
247 smellymummy
162 Soltz
Trip [eliminated]

[Soltz]

Sorry, between the Easter weekend and a business trip last week, I didn't get around to checking my PM's.

Password sent.

[Rommel2D]

MFCamillus and McMeadows requested the last spot, but Soltz responded within 24 hours of their PMs, so I'm going with him.

All passwords received, thank you.

Tracking threads will be made up and games launched later in the week. I'm particularly busy with RL on Mondays and Tuesdays.

[Beta]

Um - interested.

[Krill]

I can be a replacement for GMT games.

[Paddy]

so when do we start

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

I could still use passwords from the following (in order to save me the trouble of making up rude embarrassing ones for them myself ;-) :
MickeyJ
LzPrst

Something like 'ReadYourPMs' and 'SendPMInTime' would be good passwords for them, dont you think

[Rommel2D]

Haven't sent PMs yet- they still have a few days as I don't plan to launch the games until the end of the week. It would be nice if they read this thread though, since it has been so graciously topped.

[alexman]

The replacement pool has enough players to form a new group. Some of them are frequent and reliable PBEM players.

Would it be any fun to form a new group, and have five players in the final?

[Rommel2D]

The experimental Quatrain Tournament Engine (TM) is scheduled to have its prototype assembled early Saturday GMT. Unfortunately, the engineering team will be sleeping one off for the next few days, and are unavailable to make modifications.

I'd really like to keep the tournament structure as simple and uniform as possible for this one, and focus on what happens within that structure. Like I've said elsewhere, I hope someone else takes the initiative to run another tournament and experiment with different set-ups like that. (We can sort of compare this to the first Tournament to see how well the five-player final works.)

[jshelr]

Originally posted by alexman
The replacement pool has enough players to form a new group. Some of them are frequent and reliable PBEM players.

Would it be any fun to form a new group, and have five players in the final?

I'm sure we would have loved to see that happen Alexman!

[richthur]

All sounds great guys! I'v never tried the PBEM, done alot of CivII Gold MP. THIS seems the way to go for a REAL long term player.
Bummer to hear of all the cheats that are possible, but that's true in ANY human competition. Some a__holes have to push his/their ego ahead of everyone else's fairness & fun. But "luck" has a way of balancing them out. As long as, as U have so well done, THE rules are known to all.

As for this touney... i'm a single, self-employed, work from home, keep-strange-hours-anyway, kinda guy. So, having been in long term MP's with players all around the world, i CAN & WILL stick with it... even if i'm getting whooped (as i would no doubt in this crowd). It'd be a great learning experince for moi'. I AM a fast learner.

But if U need another altern or, as has been just suggested, another grouping is formed... count me available & interested.

As a PBEM newbie, any one know where i can get into a / some games? Any takers here? Or "mentors".

---------------------------------------
An Aside: where / how do U get your personal "icon" & flags created/added?

[Beta]

Originally posted by alexman
The replacement pool has enough players to form a new group. Some of them are frequent and reliable PBEM players.

Would it be any fun to form a new group, and have five players in the final?

[Beta]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

1-3 Players shall not exchange in-game information until they are represented on each other's diplomacy screen.
a)They shall not make cooperative research, development, or combat plans until an embassy is established between them and an alliance formally declared.
b)They shall not make Mutual Protection Pacts or Trade Embargoes unless an embassy is in place and they have knowledge of Nationalism.

Is this exclusion based on contact, or the building of an embassy. In many games, research and military co-operation has occured after teams have met, but before embassies have been built. That being said, I think I agree with your proposal (ie you have to build the embassy to engage in such negotiations.)

3-1 Players shall dismiss all pop-ups at the beginning of their turn until the production phase is complete.

3-1.1 Hitting F1 to change production
3-1.2 Using city screen's arrow keys to change production

These I was not aware of. Can you explain, please?

And thanks Rommel - I may grab these for use in the topped info thread. I presume that is OK by you.

[richthur]

Beta; I can shed some light in the way of explaination. U can do this/these in any game.
When the game engine gets around to updating your civ, U simply hit `F1' at the first chance. That, as U know, gets into your civ's overall city mgt display.
From there, U clik on a city's name & it takes U to that city's individual mgt window. Make your changes to that city's orders. THEN, instead of closing the city's window, use the arrows at the top of that screen to scroll to any other of your cities' & change things before releasing control back to the game engine to update these remaining cities. Cities which NOW may have altered instructions based on the changes JUST done... instead of what U ordered LAST move before sending off file.

That help?

[McMeadows]

Originally posted by Beta


Is this exclusion based on contact, or the building of an embassy. In many games, research and military co-operation has occured after teams have met, but before embassies have been built. That being said, I think I agree with your proposal (ie you have to build the embassy to engage in such negotiations.)

I enjoy to conduct a certain code of honour in games, but I think we should not make it too difficult and just go with what the game has to offer at some points. As soon contact is established I would say it is ok to negotiate for "tech trade pacts" or "mutual protection pacts". Allready in ancient times pacts were made, and only later people thought of building embassies in one anothers country. It's PBEM, with all human players, equal chances for anyone, less chance for "cheating" if it isn't cheating and, isn't it the juice in the PBEM game to negotiate with real people?

McM

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Beta
Is this exclusion based on contact, or the building of an embassy. In many games, research and military co-operation has occured after teams have met, but before embassies have been built. That being said, I think I agree with your proposal (ie you have to build the embassy to engage in such negotiations.)

Rule 1-3 is based on contact only. No communication until contact is pretty standard in games I've seen, so it is the main rule.

1-3 a) and b) are not usually observed. They add some depth to the game since there is little use for embassies otherwise. However, these (along with the other lettered clauses) can be dropped from a game without introducing unbalancing exploits like the other rules are meant to cover.

More important than what rules to play by is that eveyone play by the same rules. I'm suggesting all players in each game explicitly decide whether to use the lettered clauses (in blue text) before starting. I think we need to make everyone more aware of them, since they have been rarely used before.

These I was not aware of. Can you explain, please?

And thanks Rommel - I may grab these for use in the topped info thread. I presume that is OK by you.

The detailed discussion on these exploits is over in the March Madness! thread. Basically, anything at the beginning of the turn that gives you a pop-up (new tech, production, rioting) allows you to either zoom to the city screen and use the arrows, or hit F1 and use the advisor screen to go directly to any city. You can then allocate entertainers to stop rioting before it happens, or reallocate workers to gain extra commerce.

Clicking on the default ok for each pop-up eliminates the chance of the player using this exploit while thinking they are doing legitimate city maintainence. Like the pre-1.20 load bug, this is something newer players will occasionally stumble onto without even realizing it is happening. I speak from personal experience here.

Grab away!

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by McMeadows
As soon contact is established I would say it is ok to negotiate for "tech trade pacts" or "mutual protection pacts". Allready in ancient times pacts were made, and only later people thought of building embassies in one anothers country. It's PBEM, with all human players, equal chances for anyone, less chance for "cheating" if it isn't cheating and, isn't it the juice in the PBEM game to negotiate with real people?

I don't think embassies have to be seen solely as buildings with permanent staff. In the ancient era, it could represent a single important emissary who makes occasional visits to another chief and stays in their guest room. It simply represents a slight investment to facilitate higher-level communications between tribes. IMO, Following the spirit of Civ's tech development with diplomacy would keep human interaction a bit more interesting and respectable than the realityTV-style alliances that seem to develop...

I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing with "tech trade pacts", but the 1-3 a) clause is meant to prevent the "I'll research this tech tree branch, you take that one" sort of deals, not simple trading of technologies already discovered. These deals [edit: coordination of research] would be fine with an embassy, however.

[Conqueror]

3-1.1 Hitting F1 to change production
3-1.2 Using city screen's arrow keys to change production

You could add 'during production phase' in the end of these sentences to clarify them.

(I admit, i used these myself not so many months ago, before i saw the MZO rules and realized these were counted as exploit in general. Havent done that since. But never intended knowingly cheat by using these, mostly changed prebuilds to something that new tech allowed, as i was used to do in GotM.)

[Conqueror]

Rule 1-3 is based on contact only. No communication until contact is pretty standard in games I've seen, so it is the main rule.

This is important rule.

Example : I played a 4 player game in 'other' forum about year ago, and the game was pretty much over for me and 'mr. c', when it started, because 'mr. a' and 'mr. b' had agreed all research paths / development / military cooperation even before the 1st turn.
This pretty much ruined the game, and me & 'mr. c' were not that happy about it.

[Arnelos]

Well, shoot, I missed this. Put me down as a replacement if anyone drops (please PM me! I may or may not be paying very close attention to this thread if I'm not actually IN the tournament ).

[Beta]

Arnelos - I know - I missed it as well until recently. Hopefully another game or two will start up for us extras.

To all above, especially richtur. Thanks! I understand it now. Never knew about that possibility, but as I have always clicked the OK button, I guess I never stumbled across it.

As to contact and embassies. I have always been pretty adamant about the no communication before contact rule. It only makes sense. Conqueror gives an example of the main reason for this. It is the embassy rule that is new to me, and I agree with Rommel, it would be good to find some reason to make them useful in MP.

Thanks aagain - and I will check March Madness. btw - it is now April.

(and they start with 64 teams )

[jshelr]

Replacement Players:

If you email me your addresses I'll start up a game or two to bring everybody into play.

[Rommel2D]

If anyone has special last minute considerations (customized names, titles, etc.), now's the time to speak up. Unless I hear otherwise, I'll use your 'poly nicknames as your leader's.

[Rommel2D]

Replacement players,

I'm sorry everybody couldn't get directly into the tournament. I started the discussion thread over a month ago (hence the 'March' in the title ) and advertised it in this forum and in my .sig. The 4 -> 4 framework was planned for months before that, as part of the original idea for this tournament.

Alexman made another suggestion that I would like to work into the tournament. Instead of rule 9) Replacements for final game will be highest scoring runner-up from first game to finish in first round, how about if the late arrivals played games to determine the primary replacement? They would be with similar rules, except play clock enforcement by me would be passive rather than active, as I'm not sure if I'll have enough time to keep up with more than four games...

[Rommel2D]

The turn tracking threads are out there, the first turns will follow within 24 hours...

[jshelr]

I will have the first replacement game going this morning, btw. (I hope this is regarded as helping rather than interfering.) It looks to me like this group of players might be the nucleus for a decent club!

[Krill]

How big are the replacement games, jshelr? and how many?

[jshelr]

4 people. At least two.

[alexman]

I have a question about 1-3a:

Originally posted by Rommel2D
a)They shall not make cooperative research, development, or combat plans until an embassy is established between them and an alliance formally declared.

Does this mean that two players need to be at war with a third player (alliance) in order to cooperate in research, or is just an embassy enough?

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by alexman
I have a question about 1-3a:
[...]
Does this mean that two players need to be at war with a third player (alliance) in order to cooperate in research, or is just an embassy enough?

Good catch. I hadn't thought it through to the point of realizing alliances are only made to declare war on an enemy. I edited it so that cooperative research and development are possible with only an embassy. Unless anyone thinks they should require a MPP?

Moonbars also pointed out the vagueness of 1-2 and 1-2a. These have been clarified, as has 1-3b.

[Rommel2D]

If any of the tracker threads have all players posting in agreement, I'll send out the first turn as soon as I notice. Otherwise, they will go out in about six hours or so...

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by jshelr
I will have the first replacement game going this morning, btw. (I hope this is regarded as helping rather than interfering.) It looks to me like this group of players might be the nucleus for a decent club!

Just curious what you have in mind. I'd like to cooperate on this, but you haven't indicated how you would like to tie this in to the Tournament. What would be helpful would be to have some way to determine who would go into a game if we need a sub. For the first round, I meant to take the first person who posted from the same time region. For the championship, I thought the first winner of your games would be the alternate. I was going to suggest playing the games in elimination mode to get quick results, maybe even quick enough to determine a first-round alternate. Are these games to be self-moderated?

Whatever, I'm glad to see there are so many people interested in participating...

[Arnelos]

Just my little opinion in here, but the prohibition against tech planning before embassies seems excessively restrictive, not to mention exceedingly difficult to enforce. There would seem to be a TON of grey between "negotiating current techs" and "planning on future techs"... I'm not convinced that drawing a fine line between these is even all that feasible.

Then again, I'm only a replacement player who may not even end up in the tourny, so I guess as long as the people playing are fine with it (at least until it becomes a problem... which I suspect that it will), then whatever.

[Rommel2D]

Without an embassy you can only discuss the techs you are able to place on the diplomacy table- ie the ones already discovered. This would be consistant with the intentions of the in-game diplomacy model, I'd say. I haven't played with a rule like this yet, so I'm not sure if this is grayer in practice than it seems now.

Once again, not having thought it out thoroughly until now, I have to admit I just violated this in a game last week. It wasn't stated as a rule, but I like to play in this spirit regardless.

[Rommel2D]

For anyone needing email address info- Apolyton is back up!

[alexman]

Here is another exploit that belongs in the list, under 1-1, I think.

[jshelr]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

Just curious what you have in mind. I'd like to cooperate on this, but you haven't indicated how you would like to tie this in to the Tournament. What would be helpful would be to have some way to determine who would go into a game if we need a sub. For the first round, I meant to take the first person who posted from the same time region. For the championship, I thought the first winner of your games would be the alternate. I was going to suggest playing the games in elimination mode to get quick results, maybe even quick enough to determine a first-round alternate. Are these games to be self-moderated?

Whatever, I'm glad to see there are so many people interested in participating...

Not to worry if I was not clear. The replacement players list was fertile ground for finding people who wanted to play in a game. So, we just started games from that list. Use us as you will for the tourney. (With the length of time these games take, some of us will more likely be dead than available at the end of round one anyway )

The other remark is that we have a large group of names that is willing to play by a set of rules. I've run into rampant willingness to do anything that can be done in other games. So, the attitudes here are a relief and that's why I suggested that this group might form a club for originating games that are fair and fun to play.
Russ

[sabrewolf]

so, in the fastest played thread the 2 best qualify for the next round, right?

the other guys in the ColiseumC-thread have done a great job and we got 8 turns in under 3 hours. didn't know PBEM could be THAT much fun

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
the other guys in the ColiseumC-thread have done a great job and we got 8 turns in under 3 hours. didn't know PBEM could be THAT much fun

I want to coliseum C too, any of you want to retire ?

we in Coliseum B havent had even the first turn played yet ! Players are AWOL, mail addresses are missing...

You guys will have to wait for us a looong time after you finish the game, thats my prediction.

[sabrewolf]

i thought there's a 24hour response tolerance, then general rommel and the league of replacement players take over!?!

don't forget that our turns were only the first fast ones. you controlling only about 1-3units and 1-2 cities. maybe your group consists of some rushers who'll finish the game before you get to the next era

[McMeadows]

after 72 hours IronJackson was replaced by me. It took 10 hours for me to get home and play. An internet hiccup caused more delay as my mail to Conqueror failed to reach him. A retry the next morning was succesfull. Now we're waiting for LzPrst (last message on Apolyton: 26-04-2004 21:23:04) to play his turn, or maybe even for Flandrien to send it to him.

I'm just as eager as you Conqueror, I hope it's just a bit of bad luck and some unfortunate start-up troubles.

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
i thought there's a 24hour response tolerance, then general rommel and the league of replacement players take over!?!

Yeah, one player got replaced already

Originally posted by sabrewolf
don't forget that our turns were only the first fast ones. you controlling only about 1-3units and 1-2 cities. maybe your group consists of some rushers who'll finish the game before you get to the next era

mmm.. 2 cities... i will have them in - six months or so

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by McMeadows I'm just as eager as you Conqueror, I hope it's just a bit of bad luck and some unfortunate start-up troubles.

True, true. I'm just spamming here cause its my day off and i dont have anything special to do

[McMeadows]

I'm waiting for my next sequence of samples to be taken in 10 minutes. Tomorrow is a national holiday in the Netherlands. Then I'll be available... Have a good one today, and maybe even an extra turn for the both of us..

[sabrewolf]

for those who aren't happy with the speed of their tournament game and would be interested in another PBEM (frequently available european latenighters and others who can play between approx. 19:00-24:00 UK-time), check this out: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...48#post2930948
please only if you fit the profile in the first post of the thread ( http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...43#post2873643 )

maybe i'll get banned for misusing this thread for advertising something else , so please reply in the other thread...

[Rommel2D]

I haven't brought up planned absences since the beginning of the March Madness! thread and no one had any comments then. I just posted this in the game D thread:

...the plan is to allow everyone [up to] two weeks worth of time to 'freeze' the game if they know they are going to be gone. Beyond these two weeks, either you have to find yourself a temporary sub (who will become inelligable to replace anyone else later in the game) or I will play the turns, following any instructions you leave me.

Does anyone see any potential problems with this?

[Rommel2D]

I've tried to make the exploit/etiquette list clearer with a rewrite. I've also included the newly discovered money bug alexman brought to my attention. Since the games are already started (well, three of them anyway)-: , I'll give everyone a chance to object to any additions/changes/omissions before posting the new version at the top;

Revised content in orange text

1 Intertribal cooperation

1-1 Players shall not conspire to use irregularities of the game engine's turn sequence to gain extra use from units or resources. They shall not declare frivilous wars. Deals shall not be canceled on the same game turn as they are made unless due to a legitimate war. Resources intentionally removed from a trade network cannot be reconnected to that network on the same game turn. Players shall not make deals that include money they will not pay for.

1-1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers
1-1.2 Sharing a Luxury or Strategic resource
1-1.3 Generating Leaders and Golden Ages by sacrificing cheap units
1-1.4 Declaring war for happiness
1-1.5 Inflation bug
2-0.2 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war


1-2 Players shall not exchange in-game information until they are represented on each other's foreign advisor's screen. They shall not exchange graphic map information before both have knowledge of Navigation.
a) In diplomacy without an embassy between the Tribes, a player may only offer technology already known by their Tribe. They may not offer or ask for unknown techs.
b) Players shall not coordinate military action unless an alliance is formally declared in the foreign advisor's screen.
c) Players shall not refer to specific distances or directions before both have knowledge of Map Making.
d) Players shall not make Mutual Protection Pacts or Trade Embargoes unless they are declared in the foreign advisor's screen.

1-2.1 Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation.


2. Intertribal conflicts

2-1 Players shall not rename units or cities to disguise the content of unit stacks or diplomatic offers.


2-2 Cities may be offered diplomatically only as part of a peace treaty.

2-2.1 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities


3. The individual turn

3-1 Players may only use drop-down menus to make changes during the 'production phase'. They should not zoom to cities or advisor screens from the pop-up boxes.

3-1.1 Using F1 to change production during the 'production phase'
3-1.2 Using city screen's arrow keys to change production during the 'production phase'


3-2 Last player in turn sequence shall not use the GoTo command's double movement to gain strategic advantage over an opponent.

3-2.1 Using GoTo to get extra movement


4. Options

4-1 Naval chains are allowed unless players agree otherwise in advance.

4-1.1 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

4-2 If players agree to it in advance, the offensive player in a battle must send a combat report listing the resulting details to the defender.

[sabrewolf]

btw: http://apolyton.net/civ3/ should get updated (newest message: "FINAL STAGES OF `IRON CIVER` PLANNING")

[Rommel2D]

Just waiting until I take care of one last thing for the tournament. I'd like to see if we can set up games for the replacement players that will produce results faster than the main games. Rather than using the first come-first served selection process, I think it would be better to choose someone as a replacement because they were the first to win a qualifier game.

I'm thinking of using the same setup as the main games except for two things:
*Accelerated Production
*Elimination Mode

Elimination mode is an MP setting where a Civ that loses any of its cities is eliminated completely. I'm not entirely sure if it works with PBEM, a little experimentation is in order...

It may not be "real" Civ, but the point here is less about finding those with the best playing ability (that's what the main games are for) and more about seeing who understands the rules and can play consistently.

So, are any of the replacement players interested in this? The ICR games will also be considered, but since they are with the same settings as the main games, it seems possible, if not likely, they won't finish before the main games are done.

[snoopy369]

lol

I'd definitely be interested. Elimination mode kind of scares me, but is doable. I'd say Accel Prod., Pangea, tiny map would do it (or small map for 5+ players) nicely.

I'll even start it up (unless Rommel you would like to) ...

[sabrewolf]

Elimination once got me killed after 20 turns. i was expansionist, popped a village 2 tiles away from the enemy capital... no time for rush-building defense units

i don't know if i tried abandoning the city, but i know i was dead 2 turns later

[Rommel2D]

I would do these just like the other games (4 players per game, I'll take passwords and enter them for the first turn), except I won't track down delinquent players until someone else in the game sends me a message about it.

If we get four responses, I'll set the first one up. MFCamillus has already said he'll play.

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
Elimination once got me killed after 20 turns. i was expansionist, popped a village 2 tiles away from the enemy capital... no time for rush-building defense units

i don't know if i tried abandoning the city, but i know i was dead 2 turns later

20 turns! That would give us some win/loss percentages to go by pretty quickly. ;-)

There's a few ways to handle this (apart from MPTournament.biq, which eliminates city-popping in elimination):
* play on demi-god or higher, so that all goody huts have barbarians
* set barbarians to whatever level eliminates goody huts
* do nothing about it- no one says you have to pop the huts near enemy units.

[snoopy369]

I just don't pop the huts until I have enough def units to survive

edit: realize this sounds like I didn't understand -- I mean I don't pop huts with only one def unit if I am anywhere near enemy territory.

I like elimination. I think we could have quite an interesting game with it.

One caveat: I think it would be at least a little more competitive if we played on islands - perhaps a small island map 4billion years old. That would allow at least a tiny bit of time to build a halfway decent civ (until mapmaking) and elim the "zergling rush" style of play that I could see making it a lousy game. We'd still be done by Cavalry (by that point offense has a big advantage, 6 to 8 versus 4, so there's no way we survive beyond that without losing ONE city imho unless you're REALLY good on defense). I'd play Monarch level and go with option 3 (don't pop goody huts unless you don't care about consequences )...

Perhaps also require either random civilizations or prevent certain civs (i'd nominate Mayans, Ottomans, and maybe one or two of the seafarers, maybe norse or english) just because that might be too much of an advantage. I suppose you could argue for any given civ, but especially if we don't play island I think certain of those would have too big an advantage with their UU...

-Joe

[snoopy369]

and I'd hope they disallowed abandoning cities, or we forbid it, in elimination. Otherwise it's not elimination, just normal civ -- you just abandon any given city if you're going to lose it. Of course that would take a while with a larger city, but it's not infeasable as a strategy.

[BigFurryMonster]

Why is this tournament called "30% Iron Civer" ?

[Rommel2D]

It's a "literary" reference. Pop-culture, but pretty obscure...

[sabrewolf]

have you found any 'volunteers' for the "acc.prod-elim-tiny-pbem" yet?

if you can wait until this weekend, i could help out... my preferable playing times are approx. 18:00-24:00 UK-time

[Rommel2D]

The 'volunteers' I'm looking for are for a trial AP-Elimination game I'll play in myself. The ones I'd like to start here would be 'official' tournament qualifiers for reserve players who wish to earn priority consideration for replacement situations and have some fun in the process...

[snoopy369]

Well, either way I'm glad to participate.

[ricketyclik]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
I haven't brought up planned absences since the beginning of the March Madness! thread and no one had any comments then. I just posted this in the game D thread:

...the plan is to allow everyone [up to] two weeks worth of time to 'freeze' the game if they know they are going to be gone. Beyond these two weeks, either you have to find yourself a temporary sub (who will become inelligable to replace anyone else later in the game) or I will play the turns, following any instructions you leave me.

Does anyone see any potential problems with this?

Good system

Do we arrange this with our fellow players?

[Rommel2D]

Just post your advance notice in the tracking thread as soon as you know about the absence, and how you would like it handled. If you're freezing the game clock, list a start/stop time and date in GMT. If you'd like me to play your turns, also email me any instructions/strategy you have in mind.

[snoopy369]

Rommell, any news on the elim/accel production game?

[Rommel2D]

Snoopy, you and MFCamillus have been the only ones to express definite interest so far. There should be a new Apolyton news item on the tournament soon announcing the prizes being awarded to the eventual champions, so I'm guessing more people will be checking in here soon. I'll also PM everyone else already in the replacement pool about this sometime tomorrow...

[richthur]

Just letting folks know i'm still available & can FINALLY report & add my 2 cents worth again.
Yes, i'd interested also.

Tho i would throw out; that a balance between the 2 would be to have TWO city Elim. 1 city/instant death = SO unreal. There's never been a war in history that doesn't have opportunity to counterattack + has anyone ever heard of a nation that vanished instantly because ONE of it's cities was over run??

PBEM is SUCH a better system than the 2 hours shootouts... as long as the dropout / slow cycle doesn't get out of hand. Life's a tradeoff, ain't it.

[snoopy369]

Eh, one city is the same as two city elim to me, maybe not quite the same strat but either way a strat game. Not realistic, of course. After all, how much of Civ really is realistic? But it's fun. Not sure elim with 2 cities is possible (without asking you to retire once you lose 2 cities anyways, which is too complicated and hard to enforce without lots of discussion or asking rommel to pay very close attention), since it's just a check box i think in the victory conditions box ...

[Rommel2D]

The fourth post in this thread has been updated with information on the games:

After two weeks of civing, all games are keeping ahead of the turn per day pace. The ratios:

Coliseum A is at 2670BC (sorry ricketyclik, I'm not buying your 1275 line...), averaging 1.86 turns per day. Can they break the 2.0 barrier and hold it?

Coliseum B is at 3000BC despite restarting with a new player and losing track of the save over the last couple days. With only 12 days since the restart, they are averaging 1.58 turns per day.

Coliseum C is at 2950BC and trying real hard to get a scedule together, but apparently spending too much time at the pub. They still have 1.43 turns per day on the record.

Coliseum D is only at 3250BC. Probably due to some confusion with richthur subing for Soltz and not having Apolyton access for awhile, the are just ahead of the TPD barrier at 1.14.

If anyone has stats or screenshots from the F8 or F11 screens they want to email me, I'll see what I can do about editing them in there.

[Rommel2D]

I didn't get a chance to send out PMs about the Elimination games- will do so after some sleep...

[alexman]

After two weeks of civing, all games are keeping ahead of the turn per day pace.

When the time limit for each player is 24 hours, the games can get in a turn every 4 days and still be within the limit.

IMO our game (D) will not average much more than 1 turn per day for that reason. We are content waiting 12-24 hours to play our turn after receiving it, and that doesn't have much to do with richthur subbing for Soltz.

[richthur]

Thank U, Alexman. The sub was NOT any source of slow down, beyond the fact that valid, usable emails were not provided me BEFORE receiving the 1st turn. We had several multiple turn days = fun & fast.

As for posting, that very avoidable (read, FIX or don't bother, Apoyton) situation has obviously been corrected.

IMO, posting after EVERY turn seems a rather time & forum wasting activity. If the game is moving along smoothly, why bother filling this space & EVERYONE's emails with doz's of notices? Why not manage by exception, rather than by the lowest common denominator. Work this like a business, rather than like some mindless, trust-no-one-to-do-their-job, government operation. Point of fact; did the game suffer at all due to my not being able to post? The forums were correctly used to address the exception; that the sub wasn't given valid emails, & got it corrected. Why fill them with what is expected / normal / routine ? Keep them clear for IMPORTANT stuff.

Think about it gents. If these things last as long as U hope / plan, there will be MEGABITS of totally meaningless & useless posts. Page after page of trying to find the IMPORTANT & fun stuff.

[snoopy369]

eh, but posting tells the next person that you've sent them the save -- the random 5% of the time that any of us screw up and send to the wrong person or think we've sent and didn't, it will let them know that something went wrong. More than one of my games has been delayed by *not* posting after a send that didn't actually get sent ... and these posts don't exactly take up much room on the server ...