epic game PBEM with multi-turn-sessions

[sabrewolf]

i like that idea with 2 AI civs per player a lot!

but then, shouldn't we go for large land mass? or squash in 12 civs on standard (in that case, a 60% water map).

and then i'd recommend getting a neutral person to set up the game that 2 humans don't end up next to each other. (maybe 4 equal sized islands with 1 human+2 AI?).

smellymummy, imho a great idea!

[smellymummy]

IIRC, paddy the scott's idea, not mine

[sabrewolf]

ok, so far we've got the time between 20:00 and 23:00 GMT that suits 4 of us (smellymummy, EliitMees, ChrisiusMaximus and sabrewolf). most start earlier (except smellymummy) and most can do at least an hour longer (except EliitMees).

the currently likely succession would be
EliitMees --> sabrewolf --> ChrisiusMaximus --> smellymummy
or
EliitMees --> ChrisiusMaximus --> sabrewolf --> smellymummy

no answer so far from jshelr. i guess he'd fit in somewhere before CM or me... jshelr, please do answer about your availabilities soon...

to all: could we even have 5 human players or is this overkill? multi-turn sessions could be quite difficult.
so far i can vouch for chrisiusmaximus and smellymummy as i've seen them to be very efficient and reliable with their turns. i havn't been bad so far an never missed out a day's turn, (except when the save came 4 hours late and i was in bed already ).

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
well, 1.20 was a fiasko for multiplayers, but PBEM was fine... 1.22 is a quite good version (despite the things still missing)

Well there's still confusion over upgrading old games and holdouts against moving them to 1.22.

rommel2d, unfortunatly your times aren't really suitable for this fast pbem. maybe we could parallel start another PBEM which suits you better (1 turn per day)? i'd volunteer to join in

I'll take you up on that, but I'm not interested in starting any new games unless all players would be able to check for turns daily. This could mean a maximum of 2-3 days per turn, but hopefully at least 1 per day on most days. Availability to do play sessions on the occasional weekend (evenings GMT/UCT) would be good, too.

your suggestion to have 4 humans+4 AI on a small map seems to favour rushing too much. and having an AI nearby of which you can capture 3 cities after 30 turns isn't very fair.

My thought was that a small map with 40% ocean would have at least as much land as a standard at 70% (3840 vs 3000 land tiles). Plenty of room for 8 tribes to grow and develop.

Alexman offered an explanation for the stated 40% ocean condition of the MPTournament.biq: less chance of someone starting on a peninsula and being stuck with a remote palace. This sounds like the most likely explanation to me. Unfortantely, I've been unable to test it out. When generating maps with MPTournament, I'm only given the options of 60-70-80 for oceans, and it is pretty clear the results are not 40%. Am I generating maps wrong, or is this feature missing from 1.22? Is it possible Jesse meant 40% land, not ocean?

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
i like that idea with 2 AI civs per player a lot!

but then, shouldn't we go for large land mass? or squash in 12 civs on standard (in that case, a 60% water map).

I know I'm not in on this one, but I think the idea was no AIs, each human plays 2 civs for 8 total.

Can you play MP with more than 8 tribes using a mod or something?

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
I know I'm not in on this one, but I think the idea was no AIs, each human plays 2 civs for 8 total.

ah, now i get it! (after rereading smellymummy's post)
well, i that case i don't like the proposal as much as before because imho the AI is nice for tech trading, etc. in MP games you're often locked centuries in wars and diplomacy agreements and trade contracts against the other humans hardly ever get done (is it even possible in PBEM?).

Can you play MP with more than 8 tribes using a mod or something?

i don't think so. iirc, multiplaying is limited to 8 human players, maybe even 8 players in total.


2 civs per player sounds good if you want to have a more likely chance of a good start. i'm worried because i can imagine the turns per day going down with this.
what do the others think?

[smellymummy]

in the other game I'm in that's 2 civs per player.. it's pretty much just as fast. it's still very early though.

imo, the AI sucks, and if a player starts near one, the more likely that player can take advantage of the AI cheats. Not that I'm against having AI, with or without, suits me fine.

I just want to play

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
My thought was that a small map with 40% ocean would have at least as much land as a standard at 70% (3840 vs 3000 land tiles). Plenty of room for 8 tribes to grow and develop.

are you sure it's 40% water?
i think it's 40%, 30%, 20% land (and therefor 60%, 70%, 80% water). i've never seen 40% water (=60% land!).

btw: a standard map has a total of 50'000 tiles (100*100/2), small maps have 32'000 (=80x80/2). your number seem a bit too low.

[Rommel2D]

From the current MPTournament.biq:

v1.18 Changes: No Scientific Leaders, Retain Culture on Capture, 40% ocean,

From the 1.22 readme:

* MPTournament: Map sets Oceans to 40%

When playing with the editor, I don't see a 40% option listed, but when I've checked into it before, I've been told MPTournament.biq has special, uneditable features.

Again, I think the theory is that with a high percentage of land, the odds of being stuck on a peninsula or isthmus at the start are less.

btw: a standard map has a total of 50'000 tiles (100*100/2), small maps have 32'000 (=80x80/2). your number seem a bit too low.

You've added an extra 0 to your numbers. If dividing by two is how you get the total for an isometric map, the figures would be 1500 land tiles on standard with 70% ocean vs. 1920 tiles on small with 40%.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

so what are we playing here and are we ready to go

[sabrewolf]

well, the 2 others (jsheld and elliot) have been quiet for quite some time. i thought we'd give them a day or two to answer or otherwise start without them.

what are we going to play? well... your opinion counts too... what would you want/suggest?

[ChrisiusMaximus]

I like big maps the bigger the better and I like archipelogo's especially.

I like the seafaring civs and particulary Byzantines. My favourite civ is Rome but I know its not the best civ in the game.

we could play all one trait or two civs each x 4 players.

Im really easy though as I just want to play mostly. I dont mind random everything for a challenge.

[sabrewolf]

so if i understand you correctly, you want something like this:
large map, archipelago, you playing byzantines and romans.
right?

and what do you mean with play all on trait? everyone eg. having seafaring civs?

to me one thing is important: i want a few AI civs who make our lives a bit different. if we play small, standard or large doesn't really matter (but just not huge or tiny).

i prefer randomness so you really don't know where you are and what civs to take (eg. expansionist sucks on archipelagio but rules on pangea). as a matter of fact, i wouldn't even mind 100% random stuff (even our civs), but i can imagine that you guys wouldn't agree on that

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Totally random is OK with me, and I like to have AI too

[smellymummy]

all random and 4 AI civs is good too

standard, or large map size though?