HOTW7 Set up thread

[deity]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Game Settings

- Terra
- Marathon
- Large or Huge (depending on number of players)
- Restart if people spawn too close
- Warlords
- Game starts in 1 month

Things to Decide

- Tech trading, in or out
- When to play
- Victory conditions
- Pitboss?

NO TECH TRADING
On balance I finally think we should have no tech trading. It's the only way to control it. WE tried the "only trade techs you learn yourself but with subs coming and going I'm certain a few mistakes were made in HOTW5.

USA FRIDAY NIGHT OR USA SATURDAY LATE ARVO/NIGHT
The latter may help with Franks problem. If Capo doesn't play we really need Frank as one of the diplo-vets.

SS VICTORY PLUS POINTS SYSTEM
The only reason HOTW5 actually finished was because of this. Domnination doesn't work and the first civ to launch surprise attack (like mine in HOTW4) will win. But it produces bad feeling and understandably the game fails near the end. In our diplo-light Ausse/USA games we have agreed on limitations to the number of cities one can take in a war. Maybe some rule is needed on this? The diplo-consensus is that you would never take someones capital nor wopuld you eliminate their civ; but this was never a rule, simply good form. With all other civ games ending in wars it's nice to have a genre that ultimately ends up in an exciting SS race - and no tech trade will makle this even more prominant.

PITBOSS
We should run an experiment. Why not the folks who are around in the agreed timeslot/s start experimenting with this a few hours each week? We could also discuss the map situation too.

HUGE BALANCED TERRA sounds good with 12 players

[LzPrst]

my 5 cents.

Terra
Marathon
9-10 players - large, more - huge.
I dont care about close or bad starts, i will accept the will of the majority.

tech trade only what you have researched yourself (and possibly also spoils of war)
i can be quite flexible if we play in the weekend. (friday evening - sunday evening)
a points system for victory. something close to what ozzy boiled up earlier + some kind of voting points added in after.

what is pitboss?

[LzPrst]

we could throw in a rule that says you can only make one tech trade per session. that would be easy to keep track of and so.

[LzPrst]

also i feel i must mention that the imperialist trait seems slightly beefed. I need to get home and try out warlords...

[deity]

Originally posted by LzPrst
we could throw in a rule that says you can only make one tech trade per session. that would be easy to keep track of and so.

Not a bad idea lz. One trade of one tech you learnt per session and posted in the stories.
I like it.
(Where were you when I frwaking needed you! We woulda won HOTW5 if you'd stayed with England and Inca! Curse you!)

[MMC]

Pitboss is a server to replace the PBeM format. But it allows the save to be stored in a single central location as well as (when coupled with www.civstats.com) public stats can be shown easily.
On that note, www.civstats.com will soon be able to recreate the advisor screens for each player (privately unless the player chooses to make an individual section public).

Plus, it's easier to enforce our own tech trading rules with it switched on, than off

[LzPrst]

uh. err... what?

but we're not playing by email... i will look into it when i get my hands on a proper computer.

sorry deity, i wanted to see the real germany also i really needed some offline time for myself. and yes, i am quite sure things would have turned out very differently had i ran germany. i had so many plans. but they are now lost forever and i will have to make new ones. looking forward to it

going back to germany now. prague is nice, but I guess I'm just a sucker for the fritzes.

[OzzyKP]

Personally I really think we shouldn't double up on civs. I think the game would be hurt and just be confusing by having two Englands or two Americas. There are plenty of options out there, we should seek some variety.

Imagine trying to write a story thread describing how you are at war with England, but also allied with England...

I'm ok with a 1 tech trade per session rule. I think the tech trade issue becomes worse the more players we have. If we really did have 12 players it could quickly get out of hand.


Updated civ list:

Ozzy - Arabs - Confirmed
LzPrst - Vikings - Confirmed
Nolan - Egypt - Confirmed
Kuno - China - Confirmed
CyberShy - India - Confirmed
Prussia - Carthage - Confirmed
MMC - England - Confirmed
Sabrdrak -
TheCapo -
Deity -- Confirmed
Frank Johnson - Inca - Confirmed

Other possibilities:

Ljube
Rasputin
OmnipotentTrout
Metaliturtle
Toni
Thrar

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by LzPrst
uh. err... what?

but we're not playing by email... i will look into it when i get my hands on a proper computer.

I really don't know anything about pitboss myself either, but someone said that if we are all online at the same time and playing, then the game goes just as fast as normal MP. So if we just played with sessions like normal, maybe using pitboss would iron out some of our connection issues.

But again I've never done a pitboss game and I'm not sure how it works.

[condor223]

Ozzy, CS is mr Pit Boss.. Have a few words with him, hes back now.

What time have we agreed on? I will try to meet that.

[The Capo]

I want to play, but it may not be another month until I can do so. So if you want me around we'd have to wait that long, probably less than a month though.

And I don't know if I want to be America or Rome, someone help me!

[MMC]

If everyone is connecting together, then there is no problem virtually no difference from normal DirectIP or Internet game. The main exception is the ability for the admin to kick a player mid game and let the AI take over. With the 'Take over AI' feature switched on, a new player can then join the game and carry on where the old one left off, but the game can continue with the AI if a new player can't be found for a couple of turns. I believe the AI will honour build/order queues during this time, although micro-management could be thrown out of the window pretty quickly.

[MMC]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Personally I really think we shouldn't double up on civs. I think the game would be hurt and just be confusing by having two Englands or two Americas. There are plenty of options out there, we should seek some variety.

Imagine trying to write a story thread describing how you are at war with England, but also allied with England...

If deity picked Elizabeth, then he could have 'England', and I'll rename my civ to 'Britain' under Victoria. Then it would be historically accurate as far as the leaders are concerned.

[Frank Johnson]

I'd throw my influence behind NTT. A "session" is subjective, open to disucssion, and manipulation. If I have alot of tech to trade, all of a sudden its in my interest to slow the game down.

Have we decided on warlords/vanilla yet?

[OzzyKP]

Yea I think Warlords is the consensus.