[PtBS] The Return Of Rhothaerill

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by GeoModder
It's a bit of a far-flung possibility, so I don't think a special rule should be made. I'd say just keep it fair. If you're playing last in a turn, and move a scout or settler for the first move, and see a settler supposedly ready to settle (great spot from the surrounding resources) or a scout next to a tribe, show some consideration.

For me it won't mosttimes not be an issue, since I'm probably the first to play from this gang. (Central European Time)

Sounds fine.

Okay, tech brokering is in, now let's await the verdict on free religions.

You asked for it, Snoop said sure, and Witt and I are fine either way, so I'd say Beta is outvoted if he says no.

Anonymous on the other hand is out. Snoop and I, and by extension Witt, are against it.

For financial civs...Snoop is for financial, Beta against (unless he changes his mind). I think I'm going to go against simply because it would be fun to play a different civ and not have to worry about getting far behind simply because I'm not financial (getting far behind for other reasons is different ). With Witt that makes it 3 against, 1 for, and 1 undecided so no financial.

Let's pick civs. I think I'll try one that I've never played before. Gilgamesh of the Sumerians.

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by Rhothaerill
Regarding Geo's other thoughts on double moves, that's probably trickier. During wartime it's one thing to avoid playing again, but during regular turns it's natural if you're the last person to finish up one turn and start the next. I know I have a limited amount of time in a day to play a turn (basically one block of about an hour or two in the later evening Pacific time).

It's a bit of a far-flung possibility, so I don't think a special rule should be made. I'd say just keep it fair. If you're playing last in a turn, and move a scout or settler for the first move, and see a settler supposedly ready to settle (great spot from the surrounding resources) or a scout next to a tribe, show some consideration.

For me it won't mosttimes not be an issue, since I'm probably the first to play from this gang. (Central European Time)

Okay, tech brokering is in, now let's await the verdict on free religions.

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by Wittlich
Actually, I don't have an opinion one way or the other ... so since this game is "The Return of Rhothaerill" I will go with whatever Rhoth wants to have.

From now on I'm going to name every game "The Return of Rhothaerill".

Just remember that later on when I'm annihilating your cities...you want me to have whatever I want.

[Wittlich]

Actually, I don't have an opinion one way or the other ... so since this game is "The Return of Rhothaerill" I will go with whatever Rhoth wants to have.

[Rhothaerill]

Witt, how about you? And Beta, what are your opinions on Geo's other modifications?

I'd say a 36 hour turn timer would probably be good. With that we can also do the 'no successive turns for 12-18 hours during wartime" to eliminate the double moves. Regarding Geo's other thoughts on double moves, that's probably trickier. During wartime it's one thing to avoid playing again, but during regular turns it's natural if you're the last person to finish up one turn and start the next. I know I have a limited amount of time in a day to play a turn (basically one block of about an hour or two in the later evening Pacific time).

I think Beta's misfits idea will be shot down so we need to decide whether or not to have financial civs and then pick our civs.

[Rhothaerill]

Like I said above I'm fine either way with having financial as a pickable civ, or not (if it is then I will still pick the Inca, if not I'll pick someone else). I would definitely prefer to pick my own civ rather than do Beta's misfits idea (sorry Beta).

No tech brokering - yes
Choose religions - don't care, it's cosmetic
Anonymous - no

[snoopy369]

I am great with no tech brokering - or even no tech trading - but I don't want to ban financial civs; a lot of people play financial strategies (including some in this game, as far as I remember). FIN is certainly not the only way to win a no-tech-trade/broker game anyway...

Select our own civs, certainly. Choose religions, sure. Anonymous, I'd prefer not, I think these games are more fun when we know who the other civs are; I don't think anyone here is a horrible enemy after all

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by proviisori
I have BtS but it is the last test version that Firaxis was kind to give to us beta testers. It is not compatible with the "bought version" IIRC

I doubt it would, since latest test versions are usually ahead of the official version.
So, is a post-BtS 313 patch still in the pipeline or what?

[proviisori]

Originally posted by Rhothaerill
Hmm, sorry Provi I didn't know you didn't have BtS.

I have BtS but it is the last test version that Firaxis was kind to give to us beta testers. It is not compatible with the "bought version" IIRC

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by Rhothaerill
What do these entail exactly?

Free Religion gives the first player who researches a religion founder tech to choose which religion he takes. For instance if a player finishes first Polytheism, he normally gets Hinduism. Now he can choose between all 7 religions. The second to finish a founder tech can choose between the 6 remaining religions and so on.

As on peaceful conversion, it means that a city overwhelmed by another civs borders can switch allegiance to this civ without an automatic DoW. In practice this mostly happens with recently conquered cities with still a strong national presence of the original civ, and close borders from their former civ. So the player has no absolute control if he can keep the city or not. It depends partially on the inhabitants.

The anonymous option is supposed to show the civ's leaders name on the score display, not the players name. Thus you can converse in the diplobox with your worst RL enemy without realizing its him/her.

[GeoModder]

Well, enabling the "permanent alliance" option solves the first event for sure once such an alliance is signed. But it makes it crystal clear to the other players that there's a team outthere.

An issue that often comes up is the double move. I don't mean specifically during wartime, but more like settlers which take a good spot or scouts picking a hut with a similar unit from another player in plain view.

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by GeoModder
There are a few more like "free religion choice" and "peaceful cultural convertion after conquest" I prefer, but those are less important.

What do these entail exactly?

I wonder, how would you all feel about testing the "Anonymous" option under the multiplayer tab in the staging room?

I've never done that. What does it do?

[Rhothaerill]

Oh, one other thing. Part of the reason I left last time was because of a series of events that happened in a game. Part of it was a guy who went back on his word with regard to an alliance. I can't control that in any game other than trying to get a small group I trust to keep their word. The other event was gifting a city during war time. It was never explicitly talked about beforehand in that game, but it became an issue.

I wanted to make sure it didn't become an issue in this game too, as well as any other "exploits" that anyone has. If you know of one lets discuss it quick before we get going. I really don't want to have issues like last time.

[Rhothaerill]

This is because I mentioned the Inca isn't it? I swear, I've never played them before in an MP game. In fact I've only ever played them once in an SP game.

I don't mind not having a financial civ if no one else does. We could do that and the no tech brokering thing. But I'm good either way.

Misfits could be fun. I don't really see any Civs that are significantly weaker than any others, depending on circumstances, though there are certainly those that are stronger than others. I could make a go of just about any Civ, but if we go with no financial for anyone it would be easier to stomach getting a non-MP-optimal Civ.

I just don't want Rome again.

[GeoModder]

Well, since the Aegean game is slowly coming to an end, I'll definitely have time for a new game. 36-48 hours sounds just fine for me.

As on parameters, I'm pretty fond of the "No tech brokering" option too.
There are a few more like "free religion choice" and "peaceful cultural convertion after conquest" I prefer, but those are less important.

I wonder, how would you all feel about testing the "Anonymous" option under the multiplayer tab in the staging room?

But that would only be a good option if a gamemaster of sorts starts the game so none of us knows who's who to start with.