Justus II vs. Akots

Justus II · 15-10-2004, 17:32

Akots and myself have discussed starting a PBEM game, so I'm opening this thread to discuss it. We still have to decide on world size, civs, AIs, well, everything! I've only recently started to play PBEM, and my first two are both Conquests (RoR, AoD), so this will be my first 'normal' Civ PBEM. (Wish me luck, as I know Akots is a pro!)

After looking over some other threads, I'm thinking I'd like to play a map with Akots, myself, and 2-4 other AIs, preferably where we start on seperate continents. I really enjoy the naval warfare, but AI usually does not handle it well at all, so I'd like a game where it could be a factor mid-to-late game, but not the overriding factor like an archipelago map.

I know I DON'T want AP, and would prefer all victory conditions except Diplomatic, as it appears there have been issues with how it is implemented in MP. I would also be willing to agree to whatever rules Akots prefers, I generally play RB Civ rules, but I'll accept his recommendation. One question I have is ship-chaining, it appears that there are opinions on both sides in the PBEM community, I'd like to decide on that before we start. (I'd prefer to do without it, but if it is allowed, I will make use of it!). The other issue I see debated is razing/abandoning/gifting cities, I'm more open to debate on this one, although I'd prefer no abandoning.

Any other issues I've missed?

akots · 15-10-2004, 18:56

May be there are some other issues, don't really know. If it is 4 AI (1 human + 2 AI on each continent) it might be small size map. But for 2 AI it might be something in between small and standard size map. Demi-God difficulty is fine with me.

I suggest using the MSDG-UN rules where ship chaining is allowed.

If focus is made on naval warfare, it might be possible to play seafaring civilizations.

Do we allow SoZ, KT, and SGL?

Justus II · 15-10-2004, 20:18

Small map with 4 AI should be OK. We'll need a map made, preferably with a couple continents, 2AI on each. Demigod is agreed, and what about barbs, maybe roaming? Not raging, but something where they're there.

Can you post a link to the MSDG-UN rules? I've seen you reference that, is that the same as the ISDG? I want to be sure we both reference the same rules.

As for the others, I'd prefer NOT to have SoZ, or SGL, they both seem too random for my taste. I don't have a problem with KT, as anyone can build it, whether it's worth the cost is a matter of strategy, but at least it's not tied to something random (like ivory for SoZ).

Seafaring civs would be available, might be good or bad. I don't want Archipelago (where it might be too unbalancing if one were seafaring and one not) with continents, it gives some advantages but not too much. I haven't really thought about what Civ I'd like, I have a few in mind, and will try to post my choice this weekend.

akots · 15-10-2004, 20:35

The link to the rules:

http://www.cdgroup.org/forums/site/m...topic.php?t=49

They are for demogame but most of it is applicable to the PBEM. As far as our behavior towards the AI, we can do without RBC exploits or without GOTM exploits. Either is fine with me, just have to agree on something.

We can probably kindly ask the mapmaker to have food bonus on start and resources close to the start or no food bonus and remote resources or leave this one to mapmaker to get a nice surprize. After all, demigod is not that extremely tough but might be very unpleasant with a tundra start.

I would also suggest we keep all the save files for the game and then we can exchange passwords and save files and analyze the game.

Pastorius · 15-10-2004, 21:08

Are you going to request a map? Perhaps the thread should be in the map forum?

akots · 15-10-2004, 22:05

We decided we want some map-irrelevant discussion of rules, features, etc.

Justus II · 18-10-2004, 19:46

OK, I didn't have as much time over the weekend as I'd like (do we ever?), so I haven't chosen a civ yet. But otherwise, I'd go with RBCiv rules in terms of defining exploits. Honorable or Dastardly are obviously both open, and I'd expect some pretty dastardly behavior in a 1v1 match! The one exception as we've already noted is ship-chaining, which will be allowed.

Any preferences on razing/abandoning cities? I dislike abandoning in the scenarios, it may not be as much an issue in a 'normal' game. I think just following the RBCiv rules on abandoning should be sufficient, prevents 'throwaway' cities, but allows for abandoning 'real' cities if the tactical situation demands. Razing is OK also.

Do we need to post a new thread in the Map-Making forum? Or do we need to decide on civs first? As for the start, I'm not picky, as long as they're balanced, don't need to be identical.

akots · 18-10-2004, 20:31

Yes, go ahead and pick something up. I'll then pick another for balance. There are few unbalanced traits (agriculutral, industrious somewhat, commercial, seafaring (not much in our map but still starts with Alphabet), scientific sometimes). Please, don't pick Iro though. I hate them, everyone is playing Iro.

I would also like to disable barbarians and goodie huts. Not sure though since barbarians somehow can be fixed but still on Demi-God they don't matter, just another distraction for AI.

SoZ and SGL - whatever you want, I'm fine with or without them.

Abandoning cities and razing is fine unless they are "throw away cities". As well as RBC list of exploits. However, I assume we are permitted to scroll the cities to adjust happiness in-between turns. Otherwise it might be messy. Also, in PBEMs (seldom in SP game) I've encountered that when you re-negotiate the deal regarding luxuries and take that luxury off the table then returning it to the table (with AI, don't know about humans) this luxury is present but happiness granted by it is missing IBT sometimes in some cities. Hence, scrolling through cities is essential IMO.

Please also note that we are allowed to have only one alliance with one AI against another human ppl at a given time point.

Justus II · 18-10-2004, 22:51

OK, scroll ahead for happiness purposes is OK. Actually, scroll ahead even to change production queue (but not tiles worked) is allowed under RBCiv, as long as you're not taking advantage of the "Big Picture" screen. I'd even allow for use of the Big Picture, so you can change pre-builds for new techs, if you want, as long as we both agree. But it should not be used to change tiles worked, as that leads to too many exploits (sharing cows, etc.).

No barbs, no huts is OK, it does remove one of the more random factors (as well as making Expansionist less useful). Same reasoning I prefer not to have SoZ and SGL. Makes it more a level playing field, than one player getting an unfair advantage.

I would like to play as the Netherlands, I haven't played them yet, and they seem to have a good combination of traits. I know Agricultural can be unbalancing, so feel free to choose an agricultural yourself, or if you'd prefer, we can agree to go with non-agri civs, and I will change my choice.

akots · 19-10-2004, 04:42

It is all fine with me.

I'll pick probably... Rome. Might be a stupid move I will regret but just too tempting to try. If we are agreed, I'll then tomorrow try to formulate what we want from a mapmaker. And then pray or bribe that he is nice to us.

I would also assume we want iron within a reasonbale reach and other things including starting terrain, neighbors, etc all more or less even for balance.

15-10-2004, 17:32	#1
Justus II Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Peoria, IL. Posts: 173	Justus II vs. Akots Akots and myself have discussed starting a PBEM game, so I'm opening this thread to discuss it. We still have to decide on world size, civs, AIs, well, everything! I've only recently started to play PBEM, and my first two are both Conquests (RoR, AoD), so this will be my first 'normal' Civ PBEM. (Wish me luck, as I know Akots is a pro!) After looking over some other threads, I'm thinking I'd like to play a map with Akots, myself, and 2-4 other AIs, preferably where we start on seperate continents. I really enjoy the naval warfare, but AI usually does not handle it well at all, so I'd like a game where it could be a factor mid-to-late game, but not the overriding factor like an archipelago map. I know I DON'T want AP, and would prefer all victory conditions except Diplomatic, as it appears there have been issues with how it is implemented in MP. I would also be willing to agree to whatever rules Akots prefers, I generally play RB Civ rules, but I'll accept his recommendation. One question I have is ship-chaining, it appears that there are opinions on both sides in the PBEM community, I'd like to decide on that before we start. (I'd prefer to do without it, but if it is allowed, I will make use of it!). The other issue I see debated is razing/abandoning/gifting cities, I'm more open to debate on this one, although I'd prefer no abandoning. Any other issues I've missed?

15-10-2004, 18:56	#2
akots Nebuchadnezzar II Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Glover Park Posts: 4,459	May be there are some other issues, don't really know. If it is 4 AI (1 human + 2 AI on each continent) it might be small size map. But for 2 AI it might be something in between small and standard size map. Demi-God difficulty is fine with me. I suggest using the MSDG-UN rules where ship chaining is allowed. If focus is made on naval warfare, it might be possible to play seafaring civilizations. Do we allow SoZ, KT, and SGL? __________________ Cujusvis hominis est errare; nullius, nisi insipientis in errore perseverare Ciceron (Marcus Tullius)

15-10-2004, 20:35	#4
akots Nebuchadnezzar II Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Glover Park Posts: 4,459	The link to the rules: http://www.cdgroup.org/forums/site/m...topic.php?t=49 They are for demogame but most of it is applicable to the PBEM. As far as our behavior towards the AI, we can do without RBC exploits or without GOTM exploits. Either is fine with me, just have to agree on something. We can probably kindly ask the mapmaker to have food bonus on start and resources close to the start or no food bonus and remote resources or leave this one to mapmaker to get a nice surprize. After all, demigod is not that extremely tough but might be very unpleasant with a tundra start. I would also suggest we keep all the save files for the game and then we can exchange passwords and save files and analyze the game. __________________ Cujusvis hominis est errare; nullius, nisi insipientis in errore perseverare Ciceron (Marcus Tullius)

15-10-2004, 21:08	#5
Pastorius Custard used tile Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Opening a can Posts: 3,158	Are you going to request a map? Perhaps the thread should be in the map forum? __________________

15-10-2004, 22:05	#6
akots Nebuchadnezzar II Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Glover Park Posts: 4,459	We decided we want some map-irrelevant discussion of rules, features, etc. __________________ Cujusvis hominis est errare; nullius, nisi insipientis in errore perseverare Ciceron (Marcus Tullius)

15-10-2004, 20:18	#3
Justus II Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Peoria, IL. Posts: 173	Small map with 4 AI should be OK. We'll need a map made, preferably with a couple continents, 2AI on each. Demigod is agreed, and what about barbs, maybe roaming? Not raging, but something where they're there. Can you post a link to the MSDG-UN rules? I've seen you reference that, is that the same as the ISDG? I want to be sure we both reference the same rules. As for the others, I'd prefer NOT to have SoZ, or SGL, they both seem too random for my taste. I don't have a problem with KT, as anyone can build it, whether it's worth the cost is a matter of strategy, but at least it's not tied to something random (like ivory for SoZ). Seafaring civs would be available, might be good or bad. I don't want Archipelago (where it might be too unbalancing if one were seafaring and one not) with continents, it gives some advantages but not too much. I haven't really thought about what Civ I'd like, I have a few in mind, and will try to post my choice this weekend.

18-10-2004, 19:46	#7
Justus II Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Peoria, IL. Posts: 173	OK, I didn't have as much time over the weekend as I'd like (do we ever?), so I haven't chosen a civ yet. But otherwise, I'd go with RBCiv rules in terms of defining exploits. Honorable or Dastardly are obviously both open, and I'd expect some pretty dastardly behavior in a 1v1 match! The one exception as we've already noted is ship-chaining, which will be allowed. Any preferences on razing/abandoning cities? I dislike abandoning in the scenarios, it may not be as much an issue in a 'normal' game. I think just following the RBCiv rules on abandoning should be sufficient, prevents 'throwaway' cities, but allows for abandoning 'real' cities if the tactical situation demands. Razing is OK also. Do we need to post a new thread in the Map-Making forum? Or do we need to decide on civs first? As for the start, I'm not picky, as long as they're balanced, don't need to be identical.

18-10-2004, 20:31	#8
akots Nebuchadnezzar II Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Glover Park Posts: 4,459	Yes, go ahead and pick something up. I'll then pick another for balance. There are few unbalanced traits (agriculutral, industrious somewhat, commercial, seafaring (not much in our map but still starts with Alphabet), scientific sometimes). Please, don't pick Iro though. I hate them, everyone is playing Iro. I would also like to disable barbarians and goodie huts. Not sure though since barbarians somehow can be fixed but still on Demi-God they don't matter, just another distraction for AI. SoZ and SGL - whatever you want, I'm fine with or without them. Abandoning cities and razing is fine unless they are "throw away cities". As well as RBC list of exploits. However, I assume we are permitted to scroll the cities to adjust happiness in-between turns. Otherwise it might be messy. Also, in PBEMs (seldom in SP game) I've encountered that when you re-negotiate the deal regarding luxuries and take that luxury off the table then returning it to the table (with AI, don't know about humans) this luxury is present but happiness granted by it is missing IBT sometimes in some cities. Hence, scrolling through cities is essential IMO. Please also note that we are allowed to have only one alliance with one AI against another human ppl at a given time point. __________________ Cujusvis hominis est errare; nullius, nisi insipientis in errore perseverare Ciceron (Marcus Tullius)

18-10-2004, 22:51	#9
Justus II Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Peoria, IL. Posts: 173	OK, scroll ahead for happiness purposes is OK. Actually, scroll ahead even to change production queue (but not tiles worked) is allowed under RBCiv, as long as you're not taking advantage of the "Big Picture" screen. I'd even allow for use of the Big Picture, so you can change pre-builds for new techs, if you want, as long as we both agree. But it should not be used to change tiles worked, as that leads to too many exploits (sharing cows, etc.). No barbs, no huts is OK, it does remove one of the more random factors (as well as making Expansionist less useful). Same reasoning I prefer not to have SoZ and SGL. Makes it more a level playing field, than one player getting an unfair advantage. I would like to play as the Netherlands, I haven't played them yet, and they seem to have a good combination of traits. I know Agricultural can be unbalancing, so feel free to choose an agricultural yourself, or if you'd prefer, we can agree to go with non-agri civs, and I will change my choice.

19-10-2004, 04:42	#10
akots Nebuchadnezzar II Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Glover Park Posts: 4,459	It is all fine with me. I'll pick probably... Rome. Might be a stupid move I will regret but just too tempting to try. If we are agreed, I'll then tomorrow try to formulate what we want from a mapmaker. And then pray or bribe that he is nice to us. I would also assume we want iron within a reasonbale reach and other things including starting terrain, neighbors, etc all more or less even for balance. __________________ Cujusvis hominis est errare; nullius, nisi insipientis in errore perseverare Ciceron (Marcus Tullius)