New "Ancient Empires" PBEM created

[SlowThinker]

Straybow, could you e-mail me your collection of smilies?

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by germanos
This game is more or less the last one running at Apolython, and I would surely hate to see this forum die.

Why there is no people playing PBEM at Poly and CivFanatics? I noticed many threads in opereation at http://cdgroup.org/ - did people move there or was cdgroup.org always so busy?

[Sparrowhawk]

While you are correct about the Forum being largely dead, there are surely still several games ongoing?

My current PBEM Game involves two of the Players from your game (La Fayette and kengel) and 4 other players (in addition to myself, DaveV, Carolus Rex, Mostly Harmless and Eddy) who are all registered at Apolyton, they just don't post often (and use the thread of our game even less). While our game has slowed to a crawl (your game would be considered fast by our standards ) it does still have interest and I look forward to playing it for several years to come (I have been a part of it for several years now).

I think the low number of players have gotten used to using alternate forms of communication for their PBEM Games (email, instant messaging, PM's) and thus posting to a forum isn't always necessary.

Having said that it would be a true shame to see this forum die as I enjoy reading about the ongoing games, even while not playing in them.

/me

[germanos]

Over the last year or so activity in this forum has dropped to allmost nill.

I do think many players went over to the cdgroup and left the forums here. I don't know why though.


I concur with Sparrowhawk: it's fun to read other games/threads, and it is a pity to see so many threads die.



As far as the wonder is conceirned: I will not veto any hexediting, so if you guys feel such a thing should be unanimous decided, lets just say I abstain from a vote in favor of it

[Straybow]

OK, matter not settled quite yet

OK, Germanos. I had whined to my ally La Fayette, and also lamented to kengel but they should respond here in the thread. If we get timely replies from Stefan and Kull before my 2900 turn fine, otherwise the matter is closed.

I'm not holding my breath.

Heh, heh, my Smilies folder is 382k 114 gifs. Some I very rarely use but gotta have, just in case. I recently added about 2 dozen from http://mazeguy.net/ and other sited linked from there, one with an even larger collection.

/me checks site links…

Ah, the big site is http://www.smilys.net/

Years ago I got bunches from smilies.org (which no longer has any smilies ) http://www.clicksmilies.com/ (they were under renovations for a while, now back online) and http://mysmilies.com/ (also was long offline and now back in business).

Then of course there are some I don't know where I picked up (see below). The banner add on my free Opera is presently hawking http://www.smileycentral.com and http://www.freesmileys.org. I'd check them out but I hafta go sleepy now.

[Kull]

Re: OK, matter not settled quite yet

Originally posted by Straybow
OK, Germanos. I had whined to my ally La Fayette, and also lamented to kengel but they should respond here in the thread. If we get timely replies from Stefan and Kull before my 2900 turn fine, otherwise the matter is closed.

I'd go along with a hex-edit fix, but also propose that we impose a one-turn limit on problem fixes such as this. Historically, rulers who weren't paying attention to critical aspects of their civilization tended to suffer serious consequences as a result, so why should this simulation be any different?

[germanos]

Re: Re: OK, matter not settled quite yet

Originally posted by Kull


I'd go along with a hex-edit fix, but also propose that we impose a one-turn limit on problem fixes such as this. Historically, rulers who weren't paying attention to critical aspects of their civilization tended to suffer serious consequences as a result, so why should this simulation be any different?

My idea exactly .

Oh, and I DO insist the whole process will NOT slow down the game.

[germanos]

PS: my mail to Stephan has bounced

[SlowThinker]

Straybow's case induces a question about our rules. We could make this point clear. I think we could express our behaviour by a following way:

New rule

You have a right to ask for a rectification if AI messes your civ (by replay or other method). But you must claim it immediately within your next turn.
Exception to a rule is possible but no player may disagree ( notice I do not write 'all must agree': it is sometimes hard to extort an opinion (or a turn here).

Straybow
I understand germanos' philosophy that Straybow should live with the fact of lost shields, because rules should be simple and without exceptions. On other side if I empathize with Straybow I understand 60 lost shields must really annoy. I don't want disgusted players here (an exception: frustration after Babylonian troops take your capitals).

Originally posted by germanos
As far as the wonder is conceirned: I will not veto any hexediting...

I am interested if the scenario menu thing would work. It could be a useful tool if somebody whines about corrupted civ and 6 players must replay.
BTW the method cannot be used for cheating because any use of the method is visible: next turn players are alerted about their 'starting' techs.

bulletin board
If anybody objects to regeneration of Straybow's shields by hexediting post it before start of 2890BC pls.

[SlowThinker]

Sorry, I didn't read your new posts. I write offline then post...

It looks in principle I agree with you except...

Originally posted by Straybow
If we get timely replies from Stefan and Kull before my 2900 turn fine, otherwise the matter is closed.

As I explained IMHO a no-objection should be sufficient (with a longer period of waiting).

[germanos]

I must point out that there are two excellent programs (LazyCiv and CivDip) available that will restore production that is screwed up by the AI. I therefore see NO reason to add your proposed rule.
IMO, in this case it is a courtesy that is granted, but surely not something that should be a 'right' that can be 'claimed'.

The F11/demographics issue is a little different, but all of us are aware not to use this feature. Since in that case no other means exist to restore the game-malfunction, hexediting or replaying seems only a fair thing to do.

[Straybow]

No new rule

Yeah, this is just a "help the dufus fix his screw-up" thing.

Looking back I see that the turn was in the midst of my spywear struggles. Every time I tried to d/l Ad-Aware my connection would lock up. Quite worrisome. Made me paranoid that I had an anti-anti-spywear spywear.


Two days after getting La Fayette's save I must've hurriedly loaded and played the turn without thinking about the Civ2Dip fix. I recall that they changed my schedule to work the 3pm Sunday shift, which I found out when I arrived for my Saturday 11pm-7am shift. Anyway that would wipe me out from play time after my day job on Monday and before my regular night shift at 11:00 pm. So the few hours between church and that 3pm shift I needed to do something to stay awake.

And it was nearly a full month since germanos' Wonder-stealing-building turn.

[germanos]

Hehe




Happy birthday Stephan

[SlowThinker]

rules

Originally posted by germanos
I must point out that there are two excellent programs (LazyCiv and CivDip) available that will restore production that is screwed up by the AI. I therefore see NO reason to add your proposed rule.

I do not understand why the rule shouldn't be added:
The rule allows you to claim a rectifications in following situations:
1) the F11 problem; up to this point a fix was a question of courtesy, and I have a feeling that you agree with me that it should be guaranteed
2) changed production or government: the permission to use LazyCiv or CivDip is not included in rules yet
3) other possible problems caused by the AI - I don't know if they exist, but I see no reason why not to guarantee reparation of ANY mess caused by AI (except those where player himself is culpable for the mess (forgot Ctrl-N)): for example workers may be relocated also without Demographics window(?}

IMO, in this case it is a courtesy that is granted, but surely not something that should be a 'right' that can be 'claimed'.

IMO my rule agrees perfectly:
Exception to a rule is possible but no player may disagree ( notice I do not write 'all must agree': it is sometimes hard to extort an opinion (or a turn here).

[germanos]

ad 1) AFAIK the use of F11 itself is forbidden by the rules we set out.

ad 2) Well, if you insist on adding a new rule, lets add the use of these programs then.

ad 3) I think it is more usefull to tackle unexpected events when they actually occur.

and ad 4): I principally oppose the idea that when we will put the rules aside for whatever reason, merely an absantee to vote is enough to give the proposal a 'go ahead'. In fact this invalidates the very idea of rules.