AU 602: FFA1 tracker

[Theseus]

Free For All #1:

[Rommel2D]

Thanks T

my eddress: jwala at fastmail daht fm

I don't have a regular work schedule and should usually be available from ~18:00 to 09:00 GMT daily.

[Addled Platypus]

the Mighty Platypi can be reached at

prext2000 ta yahoo tod moc

[Krill]

What the hell...

chris (TA] jackos (TOD] f2s (TOD] com

What rules are we following? Iron civers (ettiquette, at least?)

[Addled Platypus]

sounds like a winner to me

[snoopy369]

I don't play by iron civer rules, generally. They are too strong for most games in their limitation of diplomacy, particularly for a game intended to show off the use of diplomacy, not the lack thereof. I'd rather play by common sense pbem rules (no obviously abusive actions, unlimited communication after contact).

[snoopy369]

oh, snoopy369 yahoo if you didn't know that already, but i play with all of you already except aeson ... oh wait, that's who sends me the save

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I don't play by iron civer rules, generally. They are too strong for most games in their limitation of diplomacy, particularly for a game intended to show off the use of diplomacy, not the lack thereof. I'd rather play by common sense pbem rules (no obviously abusive actions, unlimited communication after contact).

Since we have players from at least three distinctly different gaming backgrounds here, I don't expect common sense to be exactly mutual. One of the basic points of making up the Iron Civer Code (or any exploit list) is so that people used to playing by different standards can agree on some ground rules up front and refer back to them when disputes arise. If we don't agree to Iron Civer Warrior Code, I'd like to at least use something from CFC or Beta's thread as a definitive list.

If the optional blue text is thrown out of the IC Code, the only considerable limit on diplomacy is prohibiting allies from sharing battleplans without an F4 alliance declared. This is done to prevent players from circumventing the war happiness stuff (a pretty clear exploit IMO).

With the focus on diplomacy, I'd expect we'd want a more structured approach with the frequent rules discrepencies outlined in advance, not pushed off into a corner while we cross our fingers and promise to keep warm fuzzy attitudes toward each other...

[Rommel2D]

What do we want to do about combat reporting? Passive (when requested only), active (mandatory), or none at all? These are covered in more detail in the IC Warrior Code also, if anyone wants to refer to that.

Active (level2) seems to be the most popular in substantial games...

[Krill]

I'd pick the one where you have to report the outcome of a battle (including HP of all units, before and after), and bombardment.

[Krill]

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. Players shall not coordinate military action unless an alliance is formally declared in the foreign advisor's screen. Players shall not make Mutual Protection Pacts or Trade Embargoes unless they are declared in the foreign advisor's screen.
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 make reference to specific distances or directions until both have knowledge of Map Making.

That is the gist of the ettiquette...

[Aeson]

bc3950 sent to snoopy369

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Krill

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 make reference to specific distances or directions until both have knowledge of Map Making.

That is the gist of the ettiquette...

I'd suggest dropping those last 4 lines (a+b) with a group unfamilliar with the Code in general.

Anyone else care to comment on exploits and ettiquette up front?

[snoopy369]

Combat reporting as Krill describes (level 2a i think?) is fine and preferred. I don't prefer to have much else though; I think that while IC is intending to ask people to use in-game methods to play, this game is mostly out of game methodology.

I'd rather have no limits on out of game contact at all once you meet. Yes this makes embassies nearly worthless - so what. The point of this game is diplomacy - ie, getting someone to ally with you to accomplish a goal, etc.

I suppose i don't object in principle to parts of the etiquette; however, the Navigation limit I absolutely object to, that's too late for any PBEM game (as is generally the consensus from what I can tell). I just don't see why the rest (other than "represented on the F4 screen", which I admit is a good idea) is necessary.

[snoopy369]

3950 to Rommel