Ancient Empires #2

[RobRoy]

Originally posted by Palaiologos
The ToT option sounds good, although if its the gfx update that made you consider it then i assure you the same can be done for MGE...

I think that was one motivation for Tecumseh's facelift. ToT graphics were weak IMHO. These are better, even if that huge health bar and tiny ownership shield still look odd.

My interest is really in the possibilities for expanded event files.

Originally posted by Palaiologos
...Actually there are no events aimed to help the AI, but it would be cool if all the events could fit in a MP game.

I'm referring to events in one nation's event file that help another nation. For example, several of the non-Persian event files give Persia an extra settler around turn 10 (not the PBEM event file though). The AI Minoans also receive extra settlers on islands (an extra Palace Guard, too, IIRC). The Persians probably need the help, but the Minoans shouldn't get goodies that don't appear in their own event files, unless I'm playing them of course. Goodies within a nation's own event files are presumably offset by extra barbs, but that might be debatable.

Events designed to instigate and replicate conflicts are tougher to handle. For example, the Hittites/Egyptians, the Minoan/Greeks, the Assyrians/Babylonians, and others all have units appearing in the other's event files. We could either discard these sequences, modify them to barbs, if appropriate, or keep them if they seem to be balanced/appropriate in the grand MP scheme of things.

A minor issue with ToT is the fact that towns (airbases) don't have the bug/feature of being roads/railroads/irrigation/farmland. Frankly I liked the extra little bonus you got from building a city near a town; it was like a minor special tile. But that's a minor loss. More significantly, there are several river crossings that only had towns, and are now not bridged in the ToT version until the Bridge Building tech comes along. This effects the Greeks and Babylonian a bit, the Persians a bit less, and anyone interested in the Levant. I'd suggest we put at least roads back on towns/airbases, if not the whole set of improvements. The only downsides I see are: that it would take longer to pillage the tile; and that a mouse-over would report all the improvements rather than just "town".

[Palaiologos]

No prob with any of these.
Truth is i had taken a quick look at the events files before i posted but didn't notice the AI bonuses.
In any case if this PBEM ever gets rolling we could easily solve these issues.

[Peaster]

Welcome RobRoy! I guess we have about 5 players now. Perhaps if we contact our Civ2 / PBEM friends, we can find 2 more players and get started.

I don't have ToT, so I'd prefer an MGE game. Tweaking the events file or map is OK with me, but let's try to do those things before deciding who gets each civ.

[RobRoy]

Originally posted by Peaster
...I don't have ToT, so I'd prefer an MGE game. Tweaking the events file or map is OK with me, but let's try to do those things before deciding who gets each civ.

Oh well...best not to monkey around with anything, then. The event files are already at/near max, so there's not much we can do there anyway. And I like the map as is, even if the exploration component is missing for people who've played it before.

I would like to play with barbs, though.

Let us know if you or others decide to get ToT...might be worth tinkering then.

[Peaster]

I notice that SlowThinker does not have ToT either, so MGE seems best.

RobRoy, I am putting you with the Babylonians for now. They are doing quite well in Game #1 at the moment. AFAIK none of the 7 civs is a really bad choice.

I am OK with barbs, or without. So, Hotseat mode should do the trick ? Slowthinker and I played a PBEM that way once, and it worked OK, though I don't think we ever used civ2dip in it (since it was a 2-player game).

[RobRoy]

Originally posted by Peaster
...RobRoy, I am putting you with the Babylonians for now.

If the Minoans aren't available, my second choice would be the Hittites, actually.

It's got little to do with the Civ's desirability - yes, the Bab's starting position is probably nicer. My motivation is to have one of the civs at the "end-of-turn" sequence, in case there are problems with getting barbies to work.

Of course, I still think something random or a preference list is a better method of selection than crying "dibs". I think it would be easier to attract the last couple of players if they know they have an equal shot at their favorite nation and won't be "stuck" with whatever nation(s) have been rejected by the other players.

[Peaster]

OK. I've moved you to the Hittites. The last players to join will probably still have some choice, since most of us are flexible about which civs we get. Do other players have any opinions about how to do the assignments ?

[Palaiologos]

BTW i am equally flexible in my choice of civs. If Assyria or Greece are taken i could do with Babylon or Hitites.

No problem really.

[Straybow]

At present it appears that barbs are either out, or would fall primarily upon the Hits and Mins. Either way, it seems Civ2 wasn't really set up to handle PBeM.

I'm of two minds about starting another game. It's amazing how much time it can eat up. I'm a definite maybe.

[RobRoy]

Originally posted by Straybow
At present it appears that barbs are either out, or would fall primarily upon the Hits and Mins. Either way, it seems Civ2 wasn't really set up to handle PBeM.

Using hotseat mode appears to let wrathful barbies swarm just fine.

You can wade through some of my verbose posts on barbie tests in the other thread. But to summarize: the Hittites, Babs, and Greeks each got a land horde near them; and there were pirates galore. Yes, the Minoans suffered more from pirates, but not exculsively, and since they had more coastal/island cities it seemed about appropriate.

The downside is that there still seems to be something magic about actually ending the player turn (NOT just pressing Ctrl-N). Which means you'd either have a brief glimpse of the next player's map, or the previous players map, depending on how we'd do it. You might also be limiting diplomatic options, since you could probably never engage in a .net game without screwing up the .hot file (you'd be able to load it, but I suspect altering the file would introduce the anomaly that is suppressing barbs in your current game).

I also have a vague recollection that there were some other reasons why PBEM players prefered .net mode rather than .hot mode, which I can't seem to recall. And it now sounds strange...when you think about it, hotseat mode is much closer to the PBEM concept...

[Peaster]

Welcome Straybow! I have assumed the better of your 2 minds will prevail, and put you down as the Minoans, but almost any civ you choose should be OK.

I think we still need one more player. Also, if anyone is willing to serve as a regular sub, or as an occasional referee, please volunteer here!

[Addled Platypus]

I could save the day

MGE ?, if so -Yes I could save the day

sub/referee

[Peaster]

Welcome Platypus ! Yes, we are planning to use MGE.

IMO we will need a sub/ref (which might be a tough job - see the Game #1 thread, for May 2006 ). Wouldn't you like to play instead ? I am sure we have at least one slot still open.

[Addled Platypus]

sure, will play

I will need a sub sometime in aug/sept fro work trip

[Palaiologos]

Cool!
Lets get started!

But can we agree to something like: "the first 20 turns in 2 days time?"