30% Iron Civer Tournament

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
i thought there's a 24hour response tolerance, then general rommel and the league of replacement players take over!?!

Yeah, one player got replaced already

Originally posted by sabrewolf
don't forget that our turns were only the first fast ones. you controlling only about 1-3units and 1-2 cities. maybe your group consists of some rushers who'll finish the game before you get to the next era

mmm.. 2 cities... i will have them in - six months or so

[Conqueror]

Originally posted by McMeadows I'm just as eager as you Conqueror, I hope it's just a bit of bad luck and some unfortunate start-up troubles.

True, true. I'm just spamming here cause its my day off and i dont have anything special to do

[McMeadows]

I'm waiting for my next sequence of samples to be taken in 10 minutes. Tomorrow is a national holiday in the Netherlands. Then I'll be available... Have a good one today, and maybe even an extra turn for the both of us..

[sabrewolf]

for those who aren't happy with the speed of their tournament game and would be interested in another PBEM (frequently available european latenighters and others who can play between approx. 19:00-24:00 UK-time), check this out: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...48#post2930948
please only if you fit the profile in the first post of the thread ( http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...43#post2873643 )

maybe i'll get banned for misusing this thread for advertising something else , so please reply in the other thread...

[Rommel2D]

I haven't brought up planned absences since the beginning of the March Madness! thread and no one had any comments then. I just posted this in the game D thread:

...the plan is to allow everyone [up to] two weeks worth of time to 'freeze' the game if they know they are going to be gone. Beyond these two weeks, either you have to find yourself a temporary sub (who will become inelligable to replace anyone else later in the game) or I will play the turns, following any instructions you leave me.

Does anyone see any potential problems with this?

[Rommel2D]

I've tried to make the exploit/etiquette list clearer with a rewrite. I've also included the newly discovered money bug alexman brought to my attention. Since the games are already started (well, three of them anyway)-: , I'll give everyone a chance to object to any additions/changes/omissions before posting the new version at the top;

Revised content in orange text

1 Intertribal cooperation

1-1 Players shall not conspire to use irregularities of the game engine's turn sequence to gain extra use from units or resources. They shall not declare frivilous wars. Deals shall not be canceled on the same game turn as they are made unless due to a legitimate war. Resources intentionally removed from a trade network cannot be reconnected to that network on the same game turn. Players shall not make deals that include money they will not pay for.

1-1.1 Getting double-duty out of artillery and Workers
1-1.2 Sharing a Luxury or Strategic resource
1-1.3 Generating Leaders and Golden Ages by sacrificing cheap units
1-1.4 Declaring war for happiness
1-1.5 Inflation bug
2-0.2 Accepting a Peace Treaty from a civ then immediately declaring war


1-2 Players shall not exchange in-game information until they are represented on each other's foreign advisor's screen. They shall not exchange graphic map information before both have knowledge of Navigation.
a) In diplomacy without an embassy between the Tribes, a player may only offer technology already known by their Tribe. They may not offer or ask for unknown techs.
b) Players shall not coordinate military action unless an alliance is formally declared in the foreign advisor's screen.
c) Players shall not refer to specific distances or directions before both have knowledge of Map Making.
d) Players shall not make Mutual Protection Pacts or Trade Embargoes unless they are declared in the foreign advisor's screen.

1-2.1 Exchanging map/minimap information before Navigation.


2. Intertribal conflicts

2-1 Players shall not rename units or cities to disguise the content of unit stacks or diplomatic offers.


2-2 Cities may be offered diplomatically only as part of a peace treaty.

2-2.1 Teleporting units by abandoning or gifting cities


3. The individual turn

3-1 Players may only use drop-down menus to make changes during the 'production phase'. They should not zoom to cities or advisor screens from the pop-up boxes.

3-1.1 Using F1 to change production during the 'production phase'
3-1.2 Using city screen's arrow keys to change production during the 'production phase'


3-2 Last player in turn sequence shall not use the GoTo command's double movement to gain strategic advantage over an opponent.

3-2.1 Using GoTo to get extra movement


4. Options

4-1 Naval chains are allowed unless players agree otherwise in advance.

4-1.1 Chaining naval transports to quickly move land units across water

4-2 If players agree to it in advance, the offensive player in a battle must send a combat report listing the resulting details to the defender.

[sabrewolf]

btw: http://apolyton.net/civ3/ should get updated (newest message: "FINAL STAGES OF `IRON CIVER` PLANNING")

[Rommel2D]

Just waiting until I take care of one last thing for the tournament. I'd like to see if we can set up games for the replacement players that will produce results faster than the main games. Rather than using the first come-first served selection process, I think it would be better to choose someone as a replacement because they were the first to win a qualifier game.

I'm thinking of using the same setup as the main games except for two things:
*Accelerated Production
*Elimination Mode

Elimination mode is an MP setting where a Civ that loses any of its cities is eliminated completely. I'm not entirely sure if it works with PBEM, a little experimentation is in order...

It may not be "real" Civ, but the point here is less about finding those with the best playing ability (that's what the main games are for) and more about seeing who understands the rules and can play consistently.

So, are any of the replacement players interested in this? The ICR games will also be considered, but since they are with the same settings as the main games, it seems possible, if not likely, they won't finish before the main games are done.

[snoopy369]

lol

I'd definitely be interested. Elimination mode kind of scares me, but is doable. I'd say Accel Prod., Pangea, tiny map would do it (or small map for 5+ players) nicely.

I'll even start it up (unless Rommel you would like to) ...

[sabrewolf]

Elimination once got me killed after 20 turns. i was expansionist, popped a village 2 tiles away from the enemy capital... no time for rush-building defense units

i don't know if i tried abandoning the city, but i know i was dead 2 turns later

[Rommel2D]

I would do these just like the other games (4 players per game, I'll take passwords and enter them for the first turn), except I won't track down delinquent players until someone else in the game sends me a message about it.

If we get four responses, I'll set the first one up. MFCamillus has already said he'll play.

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
Elimination once got me killed after 20 turns. i was expansionist, popped a village 2 tiles away from the enemy capital... no time for rush-building defense units

i don't know if i tried abandoning the city, but i know i was dead 2 turns later

20 turns! That would give us some win/loss percentages to go by pretty quickly. ;-)

There's a few ways to handle this (apart from MPTournament.biq, which eliminates city-popping in elimination):
* play on demi-god or higher, so that all goody huts have barbarians
* set barbarians to whatever level eliminates goody huts
* do nothing about it- no one says you have to pop the huts near enemy units.

[snoopy369]

I just don't pop the huts until I have enough def units to survive

edit: realize this sounds like I didn't understand -- I mean I don't pop huts with only one def unit if I am anywhere near enemy territory.

I like elimination. I think we could have quite an interesting game with it.

One caveat: I think it would be at least a little more competitive if we played on islands - perhaps a small island map 4billion years old. That would allow at least a tiny bit of time to build a halfway decent civ (until mapmaking) and elim the "zergling rush" style of play that I could see making it a lousy game. We'd still be done by Cavalry (by that point offense has a big advantage, 6 to 8 versus 4, so there's no way we survive beyond that without losing ONE city imho unless you're REALLY good on defense). I'd play Monarch level and go with option 3 (don't pop goody huts unless you don't care about consequences )...

Perhaps also require either random civilizations or prevent certain civs (i'd nominate Mayans, Ottomans, and maybe one or two of the seafarers, maybe norse or english) just because that might be too much of an advantage. I suppose you could argue for any given civ, but especially if we don't play island I think certain of those would have too big an advantage with their UU...

-Joe

[snoopy369]

and I'd hope they disallowed abandoning cities, or we forbid it, in elimination. Otherwise it's not elimination, just normal civ -- you just abandon any given city if you're going to lose it. Of course that would take a while with a larger city, but it's not infeasable as a strategy.

[BigFurryMonster]

Why is this tournament called "30% Iron Civer" ?