C3cdg1?

[snoopy369]

I'm wondering if there is any interest in starting a C3CDG. Now that PTWDG1 is wrapping up (well, it's down to 3 major nations anyway), and several (many in fact) of us "newer" players (in the last year) haven't had the chance to be in on the beginning of a DG, I want to gauge the interest of the group in a new DG based on the form of PTWDG1 (and 2, assuming they're similar).

I think we don't want it to take too long though, particularly with Civ4 starting in the not-too-distant future, so I recommend the following:

6 civs (not 8)
Small map
Pangea 60% water
AP ON (remember we need to finish this reasonably quickly!) (edit: this is not definite!)
STRICT 24 hour turn limit (unless something big is happening) enforced by a game master/mistress (someone with not enough time to play but who can hit "spacebar" when needed)

*No Agricultural Civs (Not my idea but i'm sure it's going to be the general consensus)
*Fast start?? (3 settlers/workers; 6 settlers/3 workers; etc.)

# Teams with 1 main player, which can rotate as desired
# Limited diplomacy, as described below
# Battle Reports, similar to PTWDG1 Reports of the Lego/GoW/GS war, for all killed units

Diplomacy:
% No OOG contact until IG contact
% No Map Sharing until Map Making (or discussion of specific directions, ie distances AND compass direction, one or the other is ok w/o mapmaking)
% No OOG military coordination unless IG alliance
% No OOG resource trading embargo unless IG alliance or tech embargo (when available) (Trading embargo OK with Embassy)
% No OOG discussion of specific units, undiscovered techs, or other civs w/o Embassy

What do you think? Is there interest in this sort of thing? Are the rules acceptable (I tried to just lay out standard rules of PBEMs, not Iron Civ or anything too strict)?

I'd like to see at least 24 people interested if we're going to have 6 teams - if less are interested we can have a smaller game and either increase water or decrease map size. This would (probably) be the LAST DG of C3! Get in now!

(For those of you in PTWDG1, this should be a great chance to continue playing - odds are this will get interesting right about when PTWDG1 is essentially over... and for those of you who are already out of PTWDG1 or essentially out - even better!)

Teams can be formed in this thread OR outside and declared in the thread. I announce the formation of Team 1, which will get a name when it gets players. If we have interest, I'll PM Markos to get us a forum all to ourselves

edit: Teams::

"Can Play" is in 3 groups: Evening GMT, Night GMT (evening EST), Morning GMT (evening Oz time). IE if we had a turn order of Evening -> Night -> Morning we theoretically get 1 turn/day, or fewer days at least... If i have ?? by your team please state a playing time you all can make, as well as if I made a mistake in guessing your play time!

• Team Euphorica(China?): (Can play evening/late evening GMT)
• snoopy369 (GMT-6)
• McMeadows (GMT+1)
• Andydog (GMT or so)
• Platypus Rex (GMT-8)
• Wittlich (GMT-8)
• Rhothaerill (GMT -8)

• Bloody Oath Horde (Mongols): (Can play evening GMT)
• Paddy the Scot (GMT+11)
• Chrisius Maximus (GMT)
• Ljube (GMT+1)
• Iron Jackson (GMT+1)
• Bongo (GMT+1)
• Rcoutme (GMT)
• Earthworm (GMT -8)

• Team Babylon: (Babylon) (Three) (Can play night GMT)
• Beta (GMT-5)
• Gamecube (GMT -6)
• joncnunn (GMT -6)
• skrobism (GMT -6)
• BFM (GMT+1)
• Micha

• Team Conquest: (Egypt) (Four) (Can play ??)
• Conqueror (GMT+2)
• jshelr (GMT-5)
• Krill (GMT)
• ormuzd (GMT+2)

• Desolation Row: (Persia) (Five) (Can play morning GMT)
• Aqualung (GMT+8)
• Sabrewolf (GMT+1)
• Solomwi (GMT)
• Trip (GMT -7)
• Masuro (GMT+9)

• The Lost Boys (Carthage) (Six)
• 1889 (GMT -7)
• ZargonX (GMT -5)
• LordNuclear ( GMT -8)
• OctavianX (GMT -6)
• Jonny (GMT -6)

• Unclassified:
• GrandpaTroll (GMT-5)
• GF (GMT-6)
• Nimitz (GMT-6)

• Organizers:
• UnOrthOdOx (GMT-7)
• OPD (GMT)
• MWIA (GMT+12)
• Dominae (GMT -5)

Totals as of 1/31/05: 36 Players, 4 GMs (WOOOT!!)

Right now the play order would be (starting with my team):

Team Snoopy (late evening GMT)
Team Banana (night GMT)
Team Beta (night GMT)
Team Lung (morning GMT)
Blood Oath Horde (evening GMT)
Team Conquest (eve/late eve GMT)

[jshelr]

Why not

[ChrisiusMaximus]

I would be interested, thanks for the email.

Reserve a team slot for me and probably Paddy too

[UnOrthOdOx]

I will not be joining any team that intends to win in a demo game ever again.

HOWEVER...

If you wish to allow the creation of a MERCENARY or a PIRATE team, I am all for it, and could assist in the startup of said team.

Mercenary team remains strictly neutral to all teams. No alliances, no grudges, nothing.

Mercenary team will not declare war for own gain. Only to complete a contract. (ie, no self military expansion.) A PIRATE team, however, could attack for own gain as well.

Mercenary team will create a standard pricing format for all contracts to be taken against other nations. I have an example I could easily dig up.

All dealings are kept PUBLIC after contact with all civs unless PAID EXTRA to keep a team's identity secret. Every tech trade, every contract to kill x units or take y city.

Contracts will have clearly defined targets. No 'join us against Z team for the duration of war'. They will be take and hold A city, or raze B city, or something of that sort.

By informing all on creation of the game, it gives all parties a chance to know what's going on, and adds a dynamic to the game that there is a team that can and WILL be bought IN GAME.

Questions and concerns will be addressed when I get back to this thread.


Mercenary team in MZO demogame (playing as Vikings):

Contract thread mostly blank awaiting all contacts atm: http://forums.mzocentral.net/index.php?showtopic=3204
STANDARD pricing thread (this needs some adjusting more than likely) http://forums.mzocentral.net/index.php?showtopic=3577

[snoopy369]

lol UO ... I'm all for that, if others are interested, but only if pretty much everyone is ok with it.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Yes, that's the thing. People need to be ok with the idea first.

I know there are a few who are adamantly opposed to the very thought of it.

Another idea is the Feudal team.

Essentially a small team who each control a group of cities, perhaps even down to a number of units within their civ. This could go very well with the Mercenary team, contracting with individuals and THEIR resources, not the team as a whole.

For those who remember, think the $minigame on steroids.

[McMeadows]

I'd like to join. I'd like to see the accelerated production disabled. Eventhough it slows down the game. I'm much more in favour of extending the starting resources to get a quick start.

[Paddy]

Originally posted by ChrisiusMaximus
I would be interested, thanks for the email.

Reserve a team slot for me and probably Paddy too

Blood Oath

[snoopy369]

UO, i'm only interested in starting a simple DG based on the concepts in PTWDG1 and 2.

McM, I'd like to see AP on. For a DG, it means more units, more action, and a faster start... we just don't have the time for a full nonAP game - even with the quick start (i'd also like to see). More action means more involvement... you'd never have had the sort of action we had more than once it PTWDG1 without AP.

Of course if the consensus is no AP, then so be it, it's a DG after all But I strongly suggest it.

[Paddy]

Ap for a faster game indeed

[Addled Platypus]

call me slow, I never heard of this - -

"but who can hit "spacebar" when needed)"

I say less than 24 people to make roll along fast like you want

count me in
Merc team if its a go,
if not unassigned

[snoopy369]

24 people = 6 teams of 4

Unassigned just means we don't have any other organized teams yet ... Paddy and Chrisius i'm guessing will be the nucleus of Team Two, but who knows ...

[Paddy]

indeed we will be

I believe that we will have our other two join us in the coming days

so please keep those spots clear at this time

we will be in touch

[McMeadows]

I'll swallow the AC and am available to whichever team..

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Im not sure I like the idea of a mercenary team, to me it seems pointless and wonder how it would work.

I cant speak for Paddy but I know I would see the mercenary teams existence as a threat and would endeavour to totally destroy it to be rid of that threat.

Why would I want to pay some one else to attack a team when its more fun to do my own dirty work ???

Just my opinion Im happy to follow the herds consensus.

[UnOrthOdOx]

^^^Thats the challenge of being ON the mercenary team.

By being for hire, you are friend to none and enemy to all. As I said during team formation in the MZO demogame, an island would be the ideal start location for the team just to allow it to survive everyone early. Pangea would likely mean near instant death.

However, anyone can see the value in paying someone to attack...as a distraction, to slow your opponent, as a prelude to your own attack.

[McMeadows]

Is the team's role not to evolve during the game? Either team may decide which role it wants to play and announce its intentions to the known world. However, any "role-playing" beforehand is not that much appreciated by me. Nor are unbalanced starting locations.

[UnOrthOdOx]

I wasn't suggesting being given a specific starting position, just saying that you look at things a bit different when you are not allowed to attack your neighbor to expand your border, and know most teams don't like your very presence from the beginning, which is something I've never understood, we'ld only be a threat if you are NOT hiring us...

I don't know what you mean by 'roleplaying'. I'm explaining the concept. If the other teams are not interested in having a team with a goal that is NOT to win the game, but to rather act as mercenaries for the other teams, never break a contract, and generally have fun while adding a new dimension to the same boring, predictable gameplay that even human opponents present, that is fine. Civ Players seem genuinely frightened of a team they cannot predict. I'm used to getting the idea shot down. (ACDG folks on the other hand are so caught up in playing roles I can't even grasp what the hell is going on. )

I ask to act as an overseer to the game then. I'll generate a random map, make sure it's not too unbalanced, and generally keep eye on things like Trip in PTWDGI or Panzer in PTWDGII

edit: Here's some roleplay, The Merc Team Slogan: "Victory is reserved for those who are willing to pay it's price."--Sun Tzu

[snoopy369]

UO if you skip the ... propoganda ... from your last post you're pretty much right. Poly players, as a group not as individuals, are probably less interested in unpredictable features, rather in having a game that is consistent and predictable.

Roleplaying is what you'd be doing, though, by my definition: not playing the game 'straight up', but taking on a role that's not part of the traditional game and sticking to it.

Anywho I appreciate the offer to head up the game! Hang out and we'll see how many teams we get etc... i definitely like the idea of a previewed random map. We can give you passwords for each team and you can check it by skipping the first turn for each player manually (to preserve sea starts).

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by snoopy369
UO if you skip the ... propoganda ... from your last post you're pretty much right. Poly players, as a group not as individuals, are probably less interested in unpredictable features, rather in having a game that is consistent and predictable.

Roleplaying is what you'd be doing, though, by my definition: not playing the game 'straight up', but taking on a role that's not part of the traditional game and sticking to it.

Aye, but it's limited mostly to the Civ III players on Poly. Go look at the ACDG, and there's so much roleplay one can wonder if Alpha Centauri is even being played anymore.

What Propoganda?

I left out the pictures I could have inserted...

Then, give Civ III another couple years, and it's players might be looking for something other than totally in-game as well.

Every demogame that starts, I will be proposing a Merc team though. We've been very business like, and hope to contribute to the first demo involving merc-team positively. Get a few positive contributions under our belt and folks will be open to the idea.

Anywho I appreciate the offer to head up the game! Hang out and we'll see how many teams we get etc... i definitely like the idea of a previewed random map. We can give you passwords for each team and you can check it by skipping the first turn for each player manually (to preserve sea starts).

I'll be waiting.


To explain the origin of the Merc team and desire to have a goal that excludes winning, one need only look at the venemous fallout of the first couple of wars in the PTWDG. I needed to find a way that allowed me, and others who wish to, to partake in the game without becoming emotionally attached that a goal of beating another team seems to create.

By not caring who wins, and only enacting limited contracts against other teams, the Merc concept allows for little to no emotional attachment. Hopefully for both sides, since the team on the receiving end knows we are not out to wipe them from the planet. It's been surprisingly fun to date to see the reactions of people to the existing team, and to the concept in general.

How the other teams decide to utilize the Merc team has never, frankly, been my problem. Biggest fear is always that no one would hire us and we'ld waste away through the game doing nothing.

[snoopy369]

Don't get me wrong - I actually am amused by the concept and have though in similar terms about certain teams', not to be mentioned, in PTWDG1, that their interests might be best served in playing such a role - particularly once winning is no longer reasonably possible (without a major turnabout and/or another team stepping in and trying to set them up). I think the idea sounds worse than it actually is, in the scheme of things; it probably wouldn't have that drastic of an effect on the game overall.

That said, I didn't expect it to fly; it is a bit ... odd ... especially for those who take the game more seriously.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Sadly, neither did I expect it to fly here at poly. It was a dogfight to get it started in MZO, and the ACDG even axed the idea (ironically for not lining up with roleplay ENOUGH, there.)

So, I'm 1/3 so far. I'll be back anytime a demogame starts.

As I said, i'll never play another way, though. It's been that rewarding so far.

Anyone that wants can join the Merc team on MZO here: http://forums.mzocentral.net/index.php?showtopic=1586

game is still fairly early.

[OPD]

This sounds like a really good idea,

6 civs (not 8)
Small map
Pangea 60% water
AP ON (remember we need to finish this reasonably quickly!)
STRICT 24 hour turn limit (unless something big is happening) enforced by a game master/mistress (someone with not enough time to play but who can hit "spacebar" when needed)

*No Agricultural Civs (Not my idea but i'm sure it's going to be the general consensus)
*Fast start?? (3 settlers/workers; 6 settlers/3 workers; etc.)

6 civs sounds good, 5 might even be better....
Small Pangea map sounds really good for some early excitement rather than the usual 6 months or so before anything interesting starts to happen. The extra settlers/workers at the start and AP will also help make this good, almost right from the word go. You might loose a little in terms of gameplay but it would be worth it for the time saved and would make the game more about fun than precision economics. Might be worth throwing in a few spears as well to protect the early settlers.

In fact I'd say this is the almost the exact formula you need to make a dg interesting.

With the small Pangea map were you thinking of something whereby the teams would all be very close with early diplomacy and warfare a likelyhood?

If need be I'd be interested in helping out UnO with making sure everything runs ok, I could get a balanced map built and set up properly from some people I know, and then maybe set up a gmail account for all saves to be sent to and then monitor the amount of time each team takes etc.... and possibly keeping track of major events.

[snoopy369]

Hmm. I was thinking random previewed map, but I'm not that experienced with DGs. Is a pre-built map better? It's more even I suppose - but don't you lose something in the variety?

5 is what we'll get if 20 people are interested to start with instead of 24

[UnOrthOdOx]

I'm not good at making the random part, which is why I said random preview but IMO, a well made premade map is better, and you don't lose anything as a player.

If OPD knows someone that'll make a map, I say go for it. And, OPD, if you want to play, please join a team. If not, it's always good to have more than one person watching JUST in case a decision needs to be made (hopefully not) on a situation. Seems every Demogame crops up more possible exploits or some such...

One thought I'll just throw out that's working well in one of my PBEM's is an enforced time limit where your turn is skipped if you miss it. (course, that's an hour window in the pbem...turn/day...) Say, 24 hours or whatever is decided upon.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
I'm not good at making the random part, which is why I said random preview but IMO, a well made premade map is better, and you don't lose anything as a player.

If OPD knows someone that'll make a map, I say go for it. And, OPD, if you want to play, please join a team. If not, it's always good to have more than one person watching JUST in case a decision needs to be made (hopefully not) on a situation. Seems every Demogame crops up more possible exploits or some such...

Ok, sounds good to me pending other people's opinions. If something good that still has the random "feel" to it while having a decent balance to it, I say go. (We'd have to agree on how evenly the resources will be distributed, and I'd still ask for a randomization of who starts where, but that can be worked out.)

One thought I'll just throw out that's working well in one of my PBEM's is an enforced time limit where your turn is skipped if you miss it. (course, that's an hour window in the pbem...turn/day...) Say, 24 hours or whatever is decided upon.

Absolutely - I believe I addressed that. I'd ask the organizer(s) to do precisely what you say - 24 hour time limit, or some other duration of time, unless announced ahead, then skip-a-roo. I'd suggest 24 hours is ok for the start of the game but pretty soon we'd need longer so people can decide what to do (and have a real demo feel to it rather than just a straight succession PBEM) ...

[UnOrthOdOx]

Speaking of exploits...here's the list from the MZO game. The ISDG's may have a better list?

The following is a list of some known exploits. Note that these are not all the exploits, so if an exploit doesn't appear here, it is still illegal. The administator may edit this list as exploits are discovered/fixed.
1. Alliance tricks

Basically the idea of most points in this section revolves around two teams flipping back and forth between peace and war to abuse certain game mechanics.

1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers

Two (or more) teams can get double (triple...) use of bombardment units and Workers by using the units on their respective turns, then letting their "enemy" capture and use them in turn. When facing an alliance of two civs with 20 Catapults among them, it's quite disconcerting to have to face 40 rounds of bombardment.

The simple solution is to require alliances and peace treaties to be respected through in-game diplomacy.

1.2 Sharing a Luxury or Strategic resource

Two teams can get the use of a single resource by repeated gifting and then cancelling of the trade. One Iron should only supply one civ at a time.

Repeated cancellation of trade is okay for supplying bursts of a resource for a civ upgrade, as long as it is not also being used for making a dual supply out of one resource.

1.3 Generating Leaders and Golden Ages by sacrificing cheap units

A team can build a bunch of Warriors and let another team slaughter them with Elites, in hopes of generating a Great Leader. This is actually quite costly, but the results can be dramatic (fast Forbidden Palace or Palace) if the teams get lucky.

The same applies to the generation of golden ages through the use of war with allies.

The solution to this one is the same as in 1.1.

1.4 Declaring war for happiness

Two teams can declare war on each other for purposes of generating a little Happiness, which can lead to increased production through WLTKD.

1.5 Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation.

In Conquests, map trading is pushed back to Astronomy. If two teams can exchange maps out-of-game, the Seafaring trait becomes a lot less attractive.


2. Metagame tricks

2.1 Reloading to alter unwanted random results

It is possible to alter the results of combat (even with preserve random seed turned on) by reloading the save and playing out the turn slightly differently (i.e. by attacking in a different order, or basically by playing around with things that trigger the RNG). This can result in finding highly one-sided battles, and the appearance of an inordinate number of Elites and Great Leaders.

The simple solution is to require each team to open the save only once. This means that only one sequence of moves/orders is allowed to be viewed per save.

2.2 Manipulating a savegame file

Crafty players use the PBEM savegames to obtain information, or worse.

Again, let's play Civ3. If we allow tools like MapStat, then the door is wide open for any other file-manipulation program, which is a can of worms.

2.3 Loading a save while zoomed out

A team's turn-player can configure his or her game to be zoomed out, then load a PBEM savegame, which can reveal certain facts about the previous team's location.

Solution: all teams must agree to zoom in before loading the savegame and/or zoom in before saving the game.

2.4 Renaming units/cities to confuse/mislead opponents

Cities can be renamed to names of techs ('Monotheism') or sums of Gold ('210 Gold') or anything else that can be traded in the diplomacy screen. This allows a team to screw over another in a very weird way.

Worker and Settler names can be interchanged to hide their identities in stacks (since their stats are the same). Units with identical stats can be renamed for the same effect (Enkidu Warriors and Spearmen, Ancient Cavalry and Gallic Swordsmen).

Units/cities, therefore, may not be renamed for the specific purpose of fooling opponents.


3. Game Mechanics tricks

3.1 Fortifying a ship without any movement points left to obtain extra vision radius

A ship that fortifies sees an extra 1 tile in all directions at the beginning of the next turn. This can be accomplished by waking up the passengers of a ship (if there are any), and giving the Fortify All order.

3.2 Hitting F1 to change production

It is possible to use F1 to go into city views and change production before a city has been reached in the pre-turn production queue. This can result in tech-enabled units and Wonders being completed the very turn the tech is researched, or production to be changed in response to an enemy's actions (like Walls if a stack moves toward a specific city and not another).

Let all cities finish their growth/production phases, and only enter the city views when the first unit is highlighted and ready to move. This does away with tricks like avoiding riots, using tiles twice per turn, and other such nonsense.

3.3 Using GoTo to get extra movement

The last civ in the turn order can issue a GoTo command to a unit, and have that unit move twice before the next turn begins. This is very strong in war-time, and benefits one team only.

3.4 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

It is possible to wake a land unit at sea, and transfer it from one transport to another. Given enough ships, a chain can be created to instantaneously move units across bodies of water (by ending in port).

3.5 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities

A team can instantaneously transport units from any city back to their capital by simply disbanding it or gifting it to another team. This results in very weird strategy.

3.6 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war

A team at war with another can accept the latter's Peace Treaty, then declare war afterward in order to eliminate War Weariness from that civ. This results in a huge advantage if the peace-seeking team is not aware of the trick.

I could add a thing or two I personally feel is an exploit, but it'll cause problems I don't care to deal with right now.

[OPD]

I don't really want to play another one, but it would be really cool to watch things develop as the game goes on as that's the really fun part. Seeing alliances formed and wars start and such. For which I'd be more than willing to monitor save playing times and maybe publish info relating to that, leaving all the important stuff to UnO

If you haven't already done so it might be a good idea to start contacting people to get them to join in. Particularily with people who play pbems as there seem to be alot of them, and that way if participation wanes it can drop back into more of a standard pbem.

Fun fun fun!!!!!!!!!!

[snoopy369]

I've sent emails to everyone in my addy book excepting inactives that don't seem to be around any more. I bet my addy book is almost as big as Paddy's Didn't have yours, oddly enough.

UnO, that's a pretty good exploit list. Some are debatable, but that's what the debate is for (Ship Chaining, last player GoTo, etc.)

I've asked Markos to give us a forum or a CivGroupForum (like PTWDG1) or both... hopefully then we can get this going in details like this one.

[UnOrthOdOx]

I didn't 100% agree with them all, personally. Just the biggest list I knew of.

I'm not saying this is exploitive or not, just an abnormal situation:

Hiding a settler in another teams territory (with their permission of course) and using anarchy to support (remnants of) a military after cities are destroyed.