Reply With QuoteHow about a game where you and Trip play against the old CtP veterans, like Gramps or me?
So I've never played a real game of Civ4 PBEM before.
Who would like to show me how it's done?
How about a game when the Warlords patch comes out?
How about a game where you and Trip play against the old CtP veterans, like Gramps or me
Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man
How about a Chinese Unification scenario PBEM?
Wah, another game with alex in it?
Anytime!
I'm not sure how much I can teach you (maybe I can teach you how NOT to play) but I'm a reliable player and that counts for something in the PBEM world.
I tried the Chinese scenario and found it a little dull. Well, very dull, to tell the truth.
Formerly known as Masuro.
The sun never sets on a PBEM game.
Just a suggestion. Though I think it would be great for multiplayer diplomacy, balance of power, etc.
If you want to be taught btwI'd say I'm one of the best SMAC players in existence. Don't know yet about Civ4 though.
Last edited by Maniac; October 7, 2006 at 20:05.
I'm seconding for the Warring States scenario.It's on a small map so my notebook can handle that just fine.
If you're interested, I suggested the same in the rec commons thread in the C4DG AC forum. Perhaps post there as well.
I'm sorry, I don't seem able to find that post... unless of course it's in the AC team forum on which I'm no longer a member.
I'd rather play a standard game - no scenarios.
SO what is a good setup for PBEM? I like Terra for single player, but is it any good for MP?
Terra makes up for nice SP games, even though the AI doesn't realize how important the beeline to Astronomy is and thus the human has an advantage and can pick the best spots in the new world. In a PBEM I suppose it would be more interesting.
There are more nice setups. Highlands, for instance. No navy, but a nice game involving strongholds, securing narrow passes, siege. If it's a toroidal setup (I don't know if that is now possible, I hope it so), there's no safe direction.
Or it could be conventional, fractal or pangea.
Everything has its strength and weaknesses.
I enjoy terra standard games but haven't tried a MP terra game. I'm not sure if there are any game balance issues on that kind of map for multiplayer or not.
I'm playing just one Warlords PBEM on a Pangea map, so still getting to know the ropes on Warlords multiplay. But if you're looking for fast reliable players, count me in!
edit: I just checked, and actually the Warlords PBEM I'm playing is on a Fractial map.
Last edited by Andydog; October 10, 2006 at 17:51.
I also enjoy Terra in SP, but I think a Pangaea or a Fractal is better for PBEM. Then again, a PBEM isn't the same as regular MP, it's not necessarily cutthroat with a lot fighting. The very reason I like PBEM is that it has diplomacy, building and peace.
Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man
Terra sounds fine to me, as long as the map isn't too big.
I'd play in thisI don't check this forum that often though, so please PM me once it gets set up
My setup preference: Pangea or Fractal ... or continents
Random leaders of course...
Oh, and this would be my first PBEM so i suspect i should be quite reliable (compared to civ3 which was a bit over the edge for me)
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.
Err, i can't read euro dates, this is a month old. We still doing this?
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.
Well, the patch came out only last week.
So I guess first the interested ones must be gathered again.
Still in
Shall we set a 6-player max? From Civ3 experience, more than 6 players per game results in a dead game pretty fast.
Alternatively, we could try a simultaneous-move pitboss game with more players than 6. These go faster.
A pitboss game sounds great, except who will host? It's quite a big effort for the person who hosts. Their computer has to be on constantly and that is often difficult from what I've experienced.
I'd be more inclined to stick with who we have and get the game started as a normal PBEM. But I'm easy with whatever is decided.
I'm also still interested. Have only one other game running, there's certainly a lot of capacity left.
I'm unsure about pitboss. To be honest, I don't even know exactly what that is.
Too bad we don't know anyone who works at a company that has a few of those always-on computers, and is somewhat likely to be okay with a civ game running from one of them ...Originally posted by Andydog
A pitboss game sounds great, except who will host? It's quite a big effort for the person who hosts. Their computer has to be on constantly and that is often difficult from what I've experienced.
I'd be more inclined to stick with who we have and get the game started as a normal PBEM. But I'm easy with whatever is decided.
If that's not an option, I can host; my computer is nearly always connected, excepting for a few minutes occasionally when the wireless LAN decides to jump ship.
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.
Sir Ralph, Pitboss just means that you can play a game that:
1. Has a turn pass once per day
2. Allows each player to log in at any point in the day and play a turn.
3. Runs smoothly with no delays from people forgetting to play their turn.
4. Allows you to set up multiple moves ahead of time such that you can skip a few turns if you want and still have the turn process as you want it to.
You connect to it as a Multiplayer game, connecting to the DirectIP address of the PTBS server, or through Gamespy (preferably not GS... groan ..) Then you play your turn, and ... there you go.
Simul turns are fine as long as it's not an overly competitive game such that people will race to be first to log on at the turnover point to get their move in first ...
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.
Originally posted by snoopy369
Too bad we don't know anyone who works at a company that has a few of those always-on computers, and is somewhat likely to be okay with a civ game running from one of them ...Sure, I can host a pitboss game if that's what we would like to do.
Hmm, on second thought I used the wrong smiley in that post.
Looks much better with
Anyway, I vote PTBS
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.
OK, so how about a Pangaea toroidal map, normal speed?
Pick your leaders in the next 48 hours.
If there are more than 6 of us by then, let's turn it into a Pitboss game.
Toroidalbut
I'll take ... Mansa Musa
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.
I'll take Augustus.
Alex, if hosting a pitboss game is no problem, I'd suggest going with that no matter how many players we get. In addition to the benefits that Snoopy lists above, pitboss also allows rapid fire sessions should everyone be around at the same time. This can knock weeks even months of a game.
Shaka for me.
We can certainly have a pitboss game for fewer than 6, but in that case I think it should at least be sequential turns, which is a lot more like PBEM.
Last edited by alexman; November 8, 2006 at 08:18.
I'll take my choice this evening. I don't yet know the trait combinations in Warlords (and even their benefits) without seeing the game. We're playing Warlords, right? I wouldn't like to switch DVDs all the time.
Given snoopy369's description, I'm all for a pitboss game, sequential or simultaneous don't matter.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks