CTP PBEM Challenge Ladder -- Feb 2004

[Dimytes]

Blackice is also challenged, awaiting reply.

©Dimytes 2004

[Dimytes]

Challenge match Dimytes vs The Birdman started

©Dimytes 2004

[TheBirdMan]

To WAR.

For the dead King Christian IV (that old drunkass and lunatic scoundrel).

[quinns]

87. Chlg 87 Dimytes vs. TheBirdMan; Started Mar-2004 -- In progress.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Pave
Started a dual-duel with mpteach, hopely I done it right just need your e-mail address.

Just curious, what ever happened to this game?


That is, as I have a Lien on this property

[blackice]

Dimytes email me with details, remember to chew your food slowly... That way you know when you bitten off more than you can chew... ;0)

Challenge accepted, on the condition we agree on game settings.

Protoss72000 while Quinn has set the record straight, I also have questioned the ranking over the Civ score.

I too have witnessed countless games, late in the game usually. In these games the 4x pg ranker has lost, it may have taken 10 turns or 100, but the top pg has lost.

I think, assume, the pg ranking win here would be based more on the obvious. If your opponent say has SOLS and you have tiremes, or they have mills and 10 techs on you... Your dead for the most part obviously.

Now if in fact you have made contact and see these senarios and know in your heart your toast. Pg win is for you and your challenger. There is always the rematch.

But if in your heart you know, for instance you have 2x the cities or great land, or better science once you grow abit... Protest it I would.... Meaning we should have a member commity or revolving volunteers to rank the games. Thumbs up, thumbs down, no more no less. Either you win the appeal or not.

I would also challenge you to a game but the ranking will be the civ score not the ranking, PG. Your settings and lets test the civ score option.

Just a thought, this revolving volunteers on a per sittuation base could also be useful for resolving player quits in mid game. If in fact the quiters civ sucked we could rule a win for the victim.

If in fact they were losing two choices one for the die hards, wait until resumed, or take it in the chin and conceed...

Food for thought.

[Dimytes]

Blackice, I allready mailed you on on blackicegl(at)cogeco(dot)ca Is that the adress I should use?

©Dimytes 2004

[TheBirdMan]

Try this Dimytes: blackiceapolyton@cogeco.ca

[Protoss72000]

Thanks Quinns and Black. Yeah I would give up if they had a superior army or something, I was just saying that cause, as Black said, I have won games where I wasn't the 4X pg person.

Bird: Thanks for that email, that might explain why I havent been getting a response from Black latlely.

[blackice]

No biggy hey blackiceglatcogecodotca does work, but as I found out lately some of my emails are not getting out either.

Must be a mail server glitch, tested it today all seems ok.

[Dimytes]

Challange 73 - Mathemagician vs Dimytes ended at turn 96 due to me having 4xPG.

©Dimytes 2004

[Mathemagician]

Dimytes beats me around turn 96, although he had 4xPG on me long before.

also, id like to suggest a few changes to the ladder rules:

- 4xPG only after turn 100

- make it standard to have the players not take positions 1 and 3 or further down because of the difference in starting positions (river and such).
an idea would be for both players to check at the start of the game if they have either both river or both no river.

- for the dual duel i would like to address one thing:
the current rule is that in case of each player taking one game the faster win counts.
however, considering the case where a militaristic player plays versus a perfectionistic player, even if both players win one game each the militaristic player will usually win faster.
as this gives and advantage to the militaristic player i suggest finding another way of determining the winner, for example winner's civ score divided by final turn number.

[blackice]

Also, I’d like to suggest a few changes to the ladder rules:

- 4xPG only after turn 100

- Make it standard to have the players not take positions 1 and 3 or further down because of the difference in starting positions (river and such).
An idea would be for both players to check at the start of the game if they have either both river or both no river.

- For the dual duel I would like to address one thing:
the current rule is that in case of each player taking one game the faster win counts.
However, considering the case where a militaristic player plays versus a perfectionist player, even if both players win one game each the militaristic player will usually win faster.
As this gives and advantage to the militaristic player I suggest finding another way of determining the winner, for example winner's civ. score divided by final turn number.

All good idea’s Math, the land has to be equal or one player has an advantage. The last game I had sent to me the other guy had rivers and mountains, I had trees, more trees and more trees. I had few goods also. Would have been a quick unequal game. The main advantage of restarts is equal footing, it makes for a better game.

I have noticed online that position 2 usually gets the choice land, four and six do well too. With the N.O.A.I. mod., we can now find the best, most equal starting positions. We can start with 4-7 civ’s because they would all die would they not?

But why turn 100? In the scenario where the perfectionist plays the militaristic player the perfectionist may beat the militaristic on turn 200. They could defend because of better science and growth, or land. That could be the same in reverse.
Another way to do the same thing would be to build cities very close to one another. Your PG will soar but you will not be able to win in the long haul. At least not against a science guy with room to grow.
Just say “uncle” people we all know when we have been beaten don’t we? Just a thought.
I would be interested in seeing the civ score of games that have been won with the 4x rule.

In the case of dual duel the civ score is a great idea, but why divide it?

[quinns]

Congrats, Dimytes!

*73. Chlg 73 Dimytes def. Mathemagician; Started Nov-2003 -- Finished Mar-2004; Turns 96.

[Protoss72000]

Originally posted by Mathemagician
Dimytes beats me around turn 96, although he had 4xPG on me long before.

also, id like to suggest a few changes to the ladder rules:

- 4xPG only after turn 100

I agree with that one, for the reasons stated above or possibly removing it because you can do stuff early game to make the pg shoot up in your favor but your gonna be weak in the long run as black said.