Pitboss Diplomacy Game

[Toni]

The 10 tech trade limit in HOTW12 has totally destroyed alliances based on tech trading

That was the IDEA guys and it worked!

[Whip[lash]

Ozzy said:

[/I]No comments on my idea to queue up turns in the early game and play them through rapidly with a very quick turn timer? We could cover a lot of ground that way with minimal pain.[/I]

I love the idea. One problem though. I just tested this, and as I suspected, the PitBoss setup screen will only allow an integer for input in the turn timer length field. So the quick turns need to be at least one hour. Even so, I'm in favor of this kind of setup.

[OzzyKP]

Ok, great. Yea, even 1 hour turns would move things along nicely.

[MMC]

The great thing about pitboss is the fact that everyone can connect like a regular game, and since it's a server, there's almost no peer2peer problems. So an initial opening session or two can blaze through turns, with no need to change the turn timer.

Tech trading destroys alliances based on tech trading... yet what limit is opposed on real life? I'm sure there are plenty of tech alliances in RL. Part of the US-UK alliance (outside of NATO or the UN) is something along those lines (plus a few other major points).

Also, isn't there a feature where each player get so many "points" to spend and can place a ton of cities and units in the first turn, and then play normally after that? Or am I thinking of a different game?

[Blackdragon921]

The great thing about pitboss is the fact that everyone can connect like a regular game, and since it's a server, there's almost no peer2peer problems. So an initial opening session or two can blaze through turns, with no need to change the turn timer.

IF we can get it to work. Might be hard getting 18 players from around the world to log in at the same time even for one single session.

Tech trading destroys alliances based on tech trading... yet what limit is opposed on real life? I'm sure there are plenty of tech alliances in RL. Part of the US-UK alliance (outside of NATO or the UN) is something along those lines (plus a few other major points).

Short term alliances are not the issue. We are talking about entire game long alliances. This does not occure in real life.

Also, isn't there a feature where each player get so many "points" to spend and can place a ton of cities and units in the first turn, and then play normally after that? Or am I thinking of a different game?

Yes that is this game, it is called the advance start option. I shy away from this however as the first sessions lay the groundwork for alot of future diplomacy.

Ok, great. Yea, even 1 hour turns would move things along nicely.

Only issue I see with this is the "scout" effect mentioned earlier. Maybe start with a two hour timer, then move to eight, then move to 24?

[Pinchak]

The above post is mine, not Blackdragon's. I am using the same computer at work that he used to make an account from, and it remembered him in the cookies.

[MMC]

lulz :P

I have stated from the beginning that I don't like artificial limits on things. However a requirement that the reasons for each trade needs to be explained fully in the role play thread could be something to consider. Combined with a 1 tech per trade per turn (or per x turns) rule, the game could be interesting without too much restriction to force players to micromanage outside of the game as well as inside.

Also, if every one has a turn within the same 5-10 mins then the turn will only last 5-10 mins, so even a 24 hr timer will tick over after said 5-10 mins. Also I assume we're talking about Sim turns as regular turns would be agony even in fast mode - although it would completely cure the double turn issue.

[Heraclitus]

The 10 tech rule does not eliminate alliances like UK-US. But I need to point out that even this is much more temporary that than the game-braking alliance the like the ones we see forming in some MP games of Civ.


In fact the world of HOTW 12 is very realistic and feels very natural, the 10 tech rule dosen't feel like it is detracting from this, it feels like it is contributing to this.

Also I once again ask people to consider the voucher system, which allows the people to trade rights to trade tech. This helps nations with few tech trades, and civs with no good tech to trade.

Also many people not in HOTW12 are underestimating how well players have adapted to this. They are gifting and trading vast ammounts of gold, great people, they spend more on espionage.... all this because of the 10 tech rule.

For 18 players I would change it to 14 techs and use the "voucher" variante of the rule.

[Pinchak]

For 18 players I would change it to 14 techs and use the "voucher" variante of the rule.

Still not sure EXACTLY how the voucher thing works, but it sounds good.

[deity]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
More new blood.

1. CyberShy
2. Heraclitus
3. Toni
4. Pinchak
5. OzzyKP
6. MMC
7. Rasputin
8. Deity
9. Beta
10. Whip[lash
11. Blackdragon921
12. Wittlich
13. Vampgelus
14. ...

No comments on my idea to queue up turns in the early game and play them through rapidly with a very quick turn timer? We could cover a lot of ground that way with minimal pain.

As for tech trades... I'm really quite enjoying the set up in HOTW12. Alliances really have been destroyed. This is one of the most open and fluid games I've seen in a long time and it makes a big difference in enjoyability. Part of that is the tech trade limit, though part is also anonymous and just an unspoken commitment from the players to avoid long term alliances.

It is true though that this system, as feared, has hurt civs that are behind the pack. A system of being able to trade X times with each civ would be a possible solution, but it seems even more artificial, takes more decisions away from the player, and would be extremely tricky with 18 players.

I think overall 10 was a decent limit. Maybe we can expand that to 12 or 13 overall, but I wouldn't want much more than that. With the limit being less than the number of players, trades will definitely be spread around.

Maybe, to give more help to lagging civs we can go with the tech voucher system (which I don't think anyone has yet taken advantage of) and give out 1 extra tech trade to the last place civ every 100 turns.

I agree with all this ozzy.

The no tech brokering 10 (or 13) tech trade limit is essential to a fluid and open game a la HOTW 12.

With the queueing I'd rather be online at the point of the rapid advance and to play it real time if a time slot can be arranged for the start please?

[deity]

Yeah Heraclitus - voucher variant is fine....

[deity]

OK, we have another player, Jon, who is in self imposed exile from Poly (!!), is wanting to sign up for this!!

Cool...

[Pinchak]

Wow, this is filling up QUICK.

I just hope all who are pledging are prepared to participate in the diplo aspect of this game which includes making story posts and voting!

Perhaps it is time to discuss the expectations regarding this... and the penalties associated with not meeting expectations.

[deity]

I think posting should be optional, sorry.

1. CyberShy
2. Heraclitus
3. Toni
4. Pinchak
5. OzzyKP
6. MMC
7. Rasputin
8. Deity
9. Beta
10. Whip[lash
11. Blackdragon921
12. Wittlich
13. Vampgelus
14. Jon

[deity]

My preferences:

Marathon with 2 turns a day the whole game after a quick startup session

Terra map please - this is diplo

Diplo/gameplay post mandatory per 100 turns (fantasy/historical/story posts optional - which is the case now in diplos)

13-15 tech trade limit with no tech-brokering a la Heraclitus vouche variant (I swear I Think of sex every time I read that name...)

Tech voucher for the bottom civ by international agreement or something

I'm not oipposed to civs doubling up - let's just let everyone pick their favourite and then work the rest into the gameplay; BUT read ozzy's analysis to encourage you to pick a new civ at least and try the lesser utilised civs out.