AU 602: FFA1 tracker

[Rommel2D]

3950

To Platypus Rex

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by snoopy369
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 don't see an either/or situation here. 'Silent' games are about in-game methods only. My goal with the IC Warrior Code is to keep out-of-game methodology from conflicting with the in-game methods. The Warrior Code is about making everyone aware of (as few as possible) simple ground rules, and letting out-of-game diplomacy go wherever the players would like from there.

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.

First off, I hope you can see some irony in the phrase I bolded.

As far as the navigation point goes, if you are refering to idea that graphical map informatin should not be exchanged until Navigation is attained, I don't know what else to say. Firaxis made a point of changing this for Conquests, and trading screen shots is irrefutably an exploit of stock rules. If you have a number of good players in a game who care about it, it isn't much of a stretch to carry a PBEM into the late Middle Ages, where maps come into play in due course. (A Civ guru once pointed out to me how exchanging map information early basically promotes backstabbing in PBEM- an unpleasant event that doesn't exactly need any encouragement.)

I think the rest of the limits you mention are all contained in the optional (blue- everything in the quote I took from Krill) text, which I've stated my own preference for not using. While I think these improve PBEM diplomacy much like the AUMod improves single player games, we've already decided to stick with stock for these games. I don't see anything else in the Code as deviating from a 'normal' game though- just clarifying common ways the game can be exploited in PBEM when players don't pay attention, or worse- wish to gain undue advantage...

[Rommel2D]

For obligatory reporting this is how I have it broken down:

Level 2> Active
A player making any attack must indicate to the defender that it has taken place and provide a brief summary of units involved, along with damage taken.

Level 3> Intensive
A player making any attack must indicate to the defender that it has taken palce and provide a detailed account of each unit's location and resulting damage status.

I'm fine with any level, just so long as everyone is aware of it in advance.

[Addled Platypus]

3950 to Krill

[Krill]

not recieved yet. Could you post the save please?

[Addled Platypus]

resent and here is the post

[Krill]

Got the save this time around. Save to Swissy.

Thanks PR

[Krill]

Uploading the save for Swissy, and resending.

[Addled Platypus]

Whats the best why to take notes for reporting?

Do you plan that far in advance to have the units already listed with HP ?

Then to start, do battle, state starting HP, continue battle, state ending HP?

When notifying of an attack, this offline by e mail or PM?


Yes, I am a novice ...hate me now and/or later

[Addled Platypus]

[color=dark green] Below are some examples I was able to find.

What do you think[/color]


Jackson bombed, Stock Exchange destroyed
- Jackson bombed, Citizens killed (17)
- Jackson bombed, Barracks destroyed
- Jackson bombed, Citizens killed (16)
- Jackson bombed, Kittens killed (failed)
- Jackson bombed, Temple destroyed
- Jackson bombed, Infantry 2/4
- Jackson bombed, Kittens killed (failed)
- Jackson bombed, Kittens killed (failed)
- Jackson bombed, Marketplace destroyed
- Jackson bombed, Kittens killed (failed)
- IR Iron Lady sunk. DD ¾
__________________________________________________ ______________________
11) 4/4 Lego bomber bombs a 3/4 GS DD at Abilene 4411; misses
12) 4/4 Lego bomber bombs a 3/4 GS DD at Abilene 4411; DD down to 1/4
13) 4/4 Lego DD attacks a 4/4 GS transport at Abilene 4411; wins (3/4), promoted to elite (4/5)
14) 4/4 Lego DD attacks a 4/4 GS transport at Abilene 4411; wins (2/4)
15) 4/4 Lego DD attacks a 4/4 GS transport at Abilene 4411; wins (3/4), promoted to elite (4/5)
16) 3/3 Lego DD attacks the 1/4 GS DD at Abilene 4411; loses, GS DD promoted to 2/5
17) 3/3 Lego DD attacks the 2/5 GS DD at Abilene 4411; wins (1/3)

Total:
15 attacks, 14 won, 1 lost, 5 promotions.
2 bombing runs, 1 successful (2hp off a DD).
We lost 1 DD, GS lost 9 DDs and 5 transports.

[Rommel2D]

There isn't a real standard established for Combat Reporting. Attackers should do what they think best and defenders should ask for more information if they don't see what they need for their own purposes. Chances are there will be a few skirmishes to practise up on before the spit really hits the fan. CRs have been slow to refine because the info usually just passes by email between players.

Technically, you shouldn't post anything in the tracker until you've met all of the other players. Its generally good strategy to send them by email anyway, rather than let everyone know how your forces are being applied.

In the examples, the dashes on top and the numbers below would be level 3 reporting. The summary at the end I think would be good enough for level 1 or 2. [well, actually the summary should also include at least a list of all the units that attacked]

[Swissy]

au602, 3900bc, to Aeson

my email is swissyciv AT gmail DOT com

I thought I PMed that to Krill a couple weeks ago

[Aeson]

au602, 3900bc, to snoopy369

[Rommel2D]

Would anyone care to pop into Other Games and let snoopy know the turn is waiting?

[Rommel2D]

Enough hangman, how about playing Civ?
(PM sent)