Dead forum?

[Sparrowhawk]

I am only in one game (Scorched Earth) and have held that one up repeatedly, so a good thing I am not in any others. I have considered taking the free-for-all ("us against them") a couple of times, and still might, but I am wondering about the number of turns in all succession games. Is the number of turns a "suggested maximum" or an expected. I recall several times recently where a player has played less then the number of turns (and a few times more), sometimes this seems to be accidental, sometimes deliberate, but what is the expected? I am wondering if those up in a game if they are unable to play the expected number of turns could post what they are able to play and keep the game going on that way? (Speaking for myself, it took a long time to finish 8 turns in Scorched Earth....though the majority of the time was spend writing and I would like to see Scorched Earth shortened to 5 turns in the next round).

It seems to me that the game is losing members, and as such less people means more likely that the same person is up in multiple games. As a result the loss of one regular Succession Gamer could bring a number of games to a stop. If there is a loss of more then one regular gamer (such as it seems to be right now...examples include an errant Archer, an Elderly Gentleman, and a Jedi Knight), and you couple this with real life difficulties of those who remain, then the entire forum grinds to a halt.

However, I suspect this is a blip on the radar, not a trend that we need to raise the alarm bells for.

Having said that, I would still like to see General combined with Strategy and thus give both forums a boost with the increased activity (hoped for )

/me

Edit: reread my own post and couldn't understand my own point, so I did some considerable editting

[Bloody Monk]

I bet -Jrabbit can come up with a name for the combined fora.

Monk

[Scouse Gits]

On the Point of Information: the recommended number of turns is intended to be a maximum - to keep the game going. If events either game or RL related preclude a player from playing the full turnset - so be it. Similarly, there are occasions when the turnset is too short to achieve a game objective and one might over-run - but this is (slightly) frowned upon.

As far as the free-for-alls are concerned - grab one and play what you can - that is the intended spirit - we want players not lurkers.

- to BM & debeest - You (BM) know that our souls ache for you in this your time of ill-health. Likewise, debeest, we are all sure that your motives are of the best - but as you yourself admitted your tone was less than supportive so hackles were raised. Let the perception of animosity cease and as BM says - lets play some Civ.

Stu

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

I haven't been pulling my weight either, obviously. RL has been keeping me busy on several fronts.

I'd be at sea in all the ongoing games so I shall remain a lurker for the time being.

[Sparrowhawk]

Ah, the "Elderly Gentleman" I referred to above makes an appearance!!

[-Jrabbit]

STYOM sighting!!!!!

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
Ah, the "Elderly Gentleman" I referred to above makes an appearance!!

Hey, who the h*ll are you calling...











... "Gentleman"??

[MrWhereItsAt]

So what are these 'free-for-all' games and how are they played?

[Scouse Gits]

A free-for-all is a slight variant upon the Succession Game theme where a group of players take it in turn to play the Civ -- normally we start off with 20 turns each then reduce to 10 and sometimes even to 5 turns apiece.
We find them extremely enjoyable.
In a free-for-all anyone can pick up the game once it has been posted only the last few players are precluded - so far we have found that barring the last four seems to have worked out about right

Stu

[-Jrabbit]

This approach gives more people the chance to play...

1) Allows newbie and occasional players to sample the succession experience.
2) Keeps games progressing, with multiple players eligible at any given time.

Nice to see you here, MWIA. Why not pick a game and join in?

[MrWhereItsAt]

Succession, eh? I did one of them with Civ3, even though I arrived quite late in the day.

Maybe I will try one.

[Sava]

I still visit the Civ2 Forums on occasion. I play Civ2 ToT more than I play Civ3 because Civ 3 sucks. I've created a set of rules and graphics that I use with my ToT. Among the new units, I have a Wagon Settler (Settler but with 2 movement), a War Galley (ancient precursor to a Frigate), Frigate (changed original Frigate to a War Galleon, 0 transport, upgrades into Ironclad), and I added an Infantry unit to succeed the Rifleman.

ToT is great because I can easily add things that improve gameplay. Civ3 is more difficult to create stuff for.

But anyways, I still visit the forums, primarily to see if Mercator Uno comes out with new stuff because he is the Civ2 Adonis.

[Rasbelin]

I'm not that much into Civ right now, so Civ II playing has pretty much been put aside until further notice. Would be fun, but I lack that crucial motivation that would prompt me to act.

[duke o' york]

I still love Civ (especially Civ 2 ), but RL is very busy at the moment at work and at home so I can't take many succession game turns.
I'll still turn up here during the week to offer support and wield RCC where necessary.

[Traianvs]

I still don't see the difference between a succession and a free for all game. In both games players take turns and give their savegame to the next ruler?