To create historical saves in a sequential pitboss, save the game while logged in during your team's turn. The save will default to the "multi" directory, it can be directed elsewhere in the save game dialog.

To view a team save, go through the multiplayer menu and open it either as PBEM or hotseat. It should ask for your team's password. If it asks for another team's password, cancel out, you don't have the right save.

BTW if we had to switch to PBEM for some reason, this procedure could be used to make such a switch. Playing the turn and sending the resulting output turn would change game modes. It should also be possible to switch a PBEM to pitboss by loading the PBEM save in the pitboss window, but I have not tried that.

Thanks for looking into this, DS :)

I've had success translating a game between PBEM and hotseat, back and forth several times. Only once or twice have I encountered a problem, which was easily resolved by re-opening in the save in the original mode, saving a second time, then opening in the target mode.

I had no idea this could also be done with Pitboss :D

Ah, this is indeed good to know. Thank you, DaveShack.

To create historical saves in a sequential pitboss, save the game while logged in during your team's turn. The save will default to the "multi" directory, it can be directed elsewhere in the save game dialog.

To view a team save, go through the multiplayer menu and open it either as PBEM or hotseat. It should ask for your team's password. If it asks for another team's password, cancel out, you don't have the right save.
Hmm, I'm not sure that this works. How do you get this "right save"? From my experience, when loading up a game in Hotseat or PBEM, it will always ask for Player 1's password first. Thus, only the team that is first in the turn order will be able to make historical saves.

Unless you've found some alternative way? :confused:

That is because you usually play simultaneous turns...

That is because you usually play simultaneous turns...
Ah, okay. So in sequential turns, it will load up the player whose turn it was when the game was saved? That's handy then. :)

...when loading up a game in Hotseat or PBEM, it will always ask for Player 1's password first.

This hasn't happened to me. Just be sure to save in the middle of a player's turn, then open the mid-turn save in the new format.

At least, that's how I've transferred games from Hotseat to PBEM.

hotseat is sequential. Lord Parkin was talking about simaeltaneous pitboss, which isnt what we are doing.

Just to see if I understood right:
When not in my team turn, I just can see the game from a save done by my turn player,
and not from the actual game itself.
Is it that?
Thanks,

You can always see the current save when it is not your turn, however if you want to see previous saves you can get them that are saved when it is your turn...

So, let's say it is Turn 15, it is Team 3's Turn-to-Play and I am on Team 1. I want to check something on Turn 14.

I can log into the game and

see what Team 1 did on Turn 15
change something that Team 1 did on Turn 15
see what Team 1 did on Turn 14
download the save from Turn 15, up through what Team 3 has done
download the save from Turn 15, which only has Team 1's portion of the turn
download the save from Turn 14, which only has Team 1's portion of the turn
download the fully played save from Turn 14

I'm not really confused by this idea but I do want to know what can and cannot be done.

This is asking a lot I know, but is there a pitboss game like ours so that we (those of us out in the field, so to speak) could expirement / learn how to do this?

You can only open a save if you at turn when you download.
A save downloaded when It's another team turn, is for nothing, because you can't open it.
You can log on and see all in the game, but the changes ahaven't consequences.

btw
I haven't played a pitboss til today.

I still don't get why people want sequential turns instead of simultanious with long clock (72 hours for example).

In simultanious you can log in and change/correct things, in sequential you cannot....

So effectivelly you have less time in sequential....even though it seems more.

I still don't get why people want sequential turns instead of simultanious with long clock (72 hours for example).

In simultanious you can log in and change/correct things, in sequential you cannot....

So effectivelly you have less time in sequential....even though it seems more.
I think the most common argument is that it is this "changing/correcting" things that means that simultaneous turns do not necessarily give as much time. If a team at war logs in at the start of a turn, then logs back in later and finds that the situation has changed (e.g. their opponent has adjusted their unit positions), they will need additional time to discuss this changed situation.

Although my personal view is that we could always agree on movement orders during wartime, and outside of wartime this issue doesn't even matter. But it looks very unlikely that anything will change with respect to the sequential turns, unfortunately. ;)

Of course during war teams will have to take turns, but this is only 5 teams...it should not be a problem.

sequential is also very unfair in regards to order of play.

First team will have 24 hours to play will last team 5 days.....not what I call fair

additioannaly last team will have all the info on what the other 4 teams did before they play....a big advantage to team 5

First team will have 24 hours to play will last team 5 days.....not what I call fair
I don't understand what you're saying here. Each team should have 24 hours in sequential play.

additioannaly last team will have all the info on what the other 4 teams did before they play....a big advantage to team 5
This isn't really a problem at all. It is the case in every single PBEM game ever played. Yes, the last team knows what the previous teams did... but then the first team knows what the last team did, and the second knows what the first did, and so on.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Each team should have 24 hours in sequential play.


This isn't really a problem at all. It is the case in every single PBEM game ever played. Yes, the last team knows what the previous teams did... but then the first team knows what the last team did, and the second knows what the first did, and so on.

Let me clarify...
First team will have 24 hours from start of turn to play, while last team will have 5 days from start of turn.

PBEM is far from a good format....there are so many things that the last team to play benefits from...I will name a few:

Military moves...you know where everyone moved and then you make yours..moving second in war is always a plus
Tech...through espionaze you can see what others are teching, thus chose your research
Bulbs...you will see every bulb that happened in this turn, thus adjusting your research
Wonders....you will see what was completed
Slaving...you will see the slaving done

First team has to wait for next turn to see all that...

Sure, but the first turn gets the opportunity to get to these things first so it is weighted out... this really belongs in the other thread on sequential vs simultaneous turns though...

Every multi-player suffers from this, whether it be Monopoly, Risk or Poker.

And yes, this issue has been debated elsewhere for this game and already decided.

This thread is focused on how to get/find/keep earlier saves of the game. In PBEM this is not an issue since the save game is sent to the next team, but with Pitboss this method does not work.

(It must be a Monday because even to me I sound a bit crabby. :eek: Sorry.)

You can always see the current save when it is not your turn, however if you want to see previous saves you can get them that are saved when it is your turn...


Yes this belongs in another thread, but since you mentioned it this is only true about bulbs....wonders and tech that offer something (GP) are random and do not go to the team that plays first.

PBEM is far from a good format....there are so many things that the last team to play benefits from...I will name a few:

Military moves...you know where everyone moved and then you make yours..moving second in war is always a plus
Moving second in a war is certainly not always a plus. In fact I would argue that making the first move is far more powerful, due to the element of surprise.

Besides, the player that is last in the turn order may declare war on another team, in which case their units will move first. I think you're not seeing the bigger picture here: teams move one after another in a continuous circle. The start of a new game year is barely relevant except for healing. Player 1 moves, then Player 2 moves, then Player 1 moves again and so on. In each case the player currently playing knows what the player before them did. I don't see how your point is relevant.

Tech...through espionaze you can see what others are teching, thus chose your research
Huh? All teams can do this, regardless of their position in the turn order. This would only be relevant in a situation where every single team finished their research on the same turn and didn't have research queues set up - a very contrived situation. And besides, the benefit is so minor that I don't see any issue. Teams usually know what other teams are researching primarily due to diplomacy, not espionage. And what kind of team picks a tech to research based on what the other (unallied, spied upon) teams are researching anyway? Not a very good one, that's for sure. We're not playing with AI's where researching a unique tech will automatically allow free trading with everyone else.

Bulbs...you will see every bulb that happened in this turn, thus adjusting your research
Again, this is a very minor point, and it isn't even really relevant due to the circular order of turns mentioned before.

Wonders....you will see what was completed
You're completely missing the fact that the huge advantage of going first in a PBEM is that if you're racing for a wonder on the same turn as the last player, you automatically get it. Thus, the first player always has an advantage in terms of wonder races (or religion races, or the Liberalism or free Great Person races for that matter). Thus, the first player has far more of an advantage than the last in this case.

Slaving...you will see the slaving done
Yes, and then the first team to play will see the slaving done by the last team... what's the advantage?

First team has to wait for next turn to see all that...
Sure. But then the second team has to wait until next turn to see what the first team has done, the 3rd has to wait a turn to see what the 2nd has done, and the last team has to wait a turn to see what the second-to-last has done.

The funny thing is, I agree with you on your overall argument that PBEM/sequential turns aren't as handy as simultaneous turns. It's just that the particular points you're bringing up don't really support your overall argument! ;) :lol:

In general, it is the first player in PBEM/sequential turns who has the slight advantage in most matters - not the last. The advantages of the last player are mainly in seeing AI/barbarian moves at the end of their turn.

EDIT: Apologies for the threadjack. I'll keep quiet about this now, I promise. ;)

EDIT: Apologies for the threadjack. I'll keep quiet about this now, I promise. ;)
I thought it was a good reply; far better than mine would have been (I haven't had any coffee yet, so maybe that's why I'm crabby! :crazyeye:)

Overall, I prefer rational discussion of a subject no matter what thread it is in. I am always willing to learn.

Moving second in a war is certainly not always a plus. In fact I would argue that making the first move is far more powerful, due to the element of surprise.

Besides, the player that is last in the turn order may declare war on another team, in which case their units will move first. I think you're not seeing the bigger picture here: teams move one after another in a continuous circle. The start of a new game year is barely relevant except for healing. Player 1 moves, then Player 2 moves, then Player 1 moves again and so on. In each case the player currently playing knows what the player before them did. I don't see how your point is relevant.

I am surprised you don't understand this....if you play second you see the unit comming at your cultural border, so can prepare in case he attacks.

If you play first however you will have one less turn to prepare.

Example: Team 1 plays sees nothing outside cultural border..continues normally...team 2 has 10 horse archers and 4 workers just out of vission of team 1 cultural borders...they road..attack..team 1 has just lost a city

On the other hand if team 1 did that, then team 2 could slave and move units from other cities for defence.

How more simply can I explain?


Huh? All teams can do this, regardless of their position in the turn order. This would only be relevant in a situation where every single team finished their research on the same turn and didn't have research queues set up - a very contrived situation. And besides, the benefit is so minor that I don't see any issue. Teams usually know what other teams are researching primarily due to diplomacy, not espionage. And what kind of team picks a tech to research based on what the other (unallied, spied upon) teams are researching anyway? Not a very good one, that's for sure. We're not playing with AI's where researching a unique tech will automatically allow free trading with everyone else.

Minnor issue, maybe the most minnor of all I mentioned but....having techs qued? Why do that?



You're completely missing the fact that the huge advantage of going first in a PBEM is that if you're racing for a wonder on the same turn as the last player, you automatically get it. Thus, the first player always has an advantage in terms of wonder races (or religion races, or the Liberalism or free Great Person races for that matter). Thus, the first player has far more of an advantage than the last in this case.


Really? I am pretty sure it is randomelly decided!?


Yes, and then the first team to play will see the slaving done by the last team... what's the advantage?

You see that they are building an army?


Sure. But then the second team has to wait until next turn to see what the first team has done, the 3rd has to wait a turn to see what the 2nd has done, and the last team has to wait a turn to see what the second-to-last has done.

Again...it is important to see all that the same turn so you can slave, change builds, techs, moves wonders etc...what good is seeing it next turn...it is already over..

Look, Indiansmoke, this discussion probably doesn't belong in this thread, and even then(though it is to many folks' chagrin, apparently) it's already been decided on sequential turns. Secondly, you almost seem to me to not understand whether you are talking about simultaneous or sequential turns. All of the points in the post above, at best relate to simultaneous (=teams take turn at same time, within one overall time window) and even then many are mistaken.

First, Lord Parkin is entirely correct that on sequential (one after the other) turns, the person who gets a wonder/research first ALWAYS gets it. When was the last time you were playing an AI (sequential) and built a wonder completely, and then during the AI's turn it was built somewhere else- never- just replace this with two humans. On simultaneous turns, two people can build a wonder on the same turn, but then it goes to the person with more overflow or something.

I actually had a bit to argue about this in the other thread as well, but all your points about military/slaving are not valid for sequential turns. Some may be valid for simultaneous turns but that is beside the point. For a sequential turn, everything for one team happens during that team's individual turn. They heal, promote, move units, etc... at the end of the team's individual turn any built units/structures appear in their cities. So, if another team declares war, it does not matter what order in the sequence they are; the defending team always get to take every opportunity that they ever would anyway (again, sequential is the same format as single player- when someone declares war on you, you still have a chance to respond right?) It seems like you might be picturing double moves or some other exploit in your head; I agree that there are differences for simultaneous turns about how warfare can work, however none of the points you make even really addresses sequential turns.

Finally, at least for sequential turns the time given to every team is pretty much entirely fair- 24 hours for that team's individual turn. The only possible turn where this is different is the very first turn of the game; but then I can't see any trouble because nobody will have contact, and everyone will likely know the starting position in advance and have already planned out. After that, Lord Parkin is again correct - there is no such thing as an "overall" turn that matters (except maybe time victory:lol:) as much as each team takes a turn one after the other.

It is randomly decided in simultaneous turns, not in sequential ones obviously...

I am surprised you don't understand this....if you play second you see the unit comming at your cultural border, so can prepare in case he attacks.

If you play first however you will have one less turn to prepare.

Example: Team 1 plays sees nothing outside cultural border..continues normally...team 2 has 10 horse archers and 4 workers just out of vission of team 1 cultural borders...they road..attack..team 1 has just lost a city

On the other hand if team 1 did that, then team 2 could slave and move units from other cities for defence.

How more simply can I explain?
I think you still can't see the bigger picture. :) In order to understand what I'm saying, just consider the reverse situation:

Team 2 plays sees nothing outside cultural border..continues normally...team 1 has 10 horse archers and 4 workers just out of vission of team 2 cultural borders...they road..attack..team 2 has just lost a city

Can you not see that the two situations will be identical, and thus that your point is irrelevant? ;)

Minnor issue, maybe the most minnor of all I mentioned but....having techs qued? Why do that?
Mainly because it's convenient. It also saves you losing some research if you don't log in for a few turns, but that's fairly minor (most teams won't be doing that, hopefully).

Really? I am pretty sure it is randomelly decided!?
In simultaneous turn games, yes. In PBEM games, no. It's like single player games: the human gets first dibs on wonders/religions/techs/GP's because they always go first in the turn order.

You see that they are building an army?
That doesn't help out team 2. Team 2 whips -> Team 1 sees and responds. Or: Team 1 whips -> Team 2 sees and responds. No real difference.

Again...it is important to see all that the same turn so you can slave, change builds, techs, moves wonders etc...what good is seeing it next turn...it is already over..
Yes, but the turn order is circular, so this applies to every player.

I think you still can't see the bigger picture. :) In order to understand what I'm saying, just consider the reverse situation:



Can you not see that the two situations will be identical, and thus that your point is irrelevant? ;)





You still do not get it :) .....in the reverse situation team 2 will be able to slave..move troops in the same turn....team 1 will not be able to do this...

It is randomly decided in simultaneous turns, not in sequential ones obviously...

Obviously? You are 100% certain about this? I thought that all calculations are made before the bigging of turn...who gets the wonder is decided before anyone plays..it is irrelevant who plays first and who second...

You still do not get it :) .....in the reverse situation team 2 will be able to slave..move troops in the same turn....team 1 will not be able to do this...
Team 2 cannot slave while Team 1 is roading and attacking unless they are playing simultaneously with Team 1. Really, this is a very basic concept. :)

One team roads, attacks, destroys the city. The other moves units to respond next turn. It does not matter whether you apply this to Team 1 or Team 2.

Since several other people have already backed up what I've said, you need to consider whether you've got more than a bit confused here. :)

Finally, at least for sequential turns the time given to every team is pretty much entirely fair- 24 hours for that team's individual turn. The only possible turn where this is different is the very first turn of the game; but then I can't see any trouble because nobody will have contact, and everyone will likely know the starting position in advance and have already planned out. After that, Lord Parkin is again correct - there is no such thing as an "overall" turn that matters (except maybe time victory:lol:) as much as each team takes a turn one after the other.

How is that? Team 5 can log into the game from turn roll but not make any moves until all othrers have played correct?

So it has 5 days after seeing whta is going on after turn roll to decide waht to play...team 1 only has 24 hours after turn roll to decide..

Obviously? You are 100% certain about this? I thought that all calculations are made before the bigging of turn...who gets the wonder is decided before anyone plays..it is irrelevant who plays first and who second...
No, this is definitely not the case for sequential PBEM turns, all single player and all hotseat games.

Might I suggest that in future you do some research before stating things as if they are fact? It'll help avoid potential embarrassments. :)

How is that? Team 5 can log into the game from turn roll but not make any moves until all othrers have played correct?

So it has 5 days after seeing whta is going on after turn roll to decide waht to play...team 1 only has 24 hours after turn roll to decide..
But teams 1, 2, 3 and 4 will move their units before team 5 starts their turn... thus team 5 will only have 24 hours after seeing the final situation after all units have been moved.

No offense intended, but really, you seem to be getting so hopelessly confused that it's a bit funny. :lol:

How is that? Team 5 can log into the game from turn roll but not make any moves until all othrers have played correct?

True. Team 5 cannot do anything until it is their turn.

So it has 5 days after seeing whta is going on after turn roll to decide waht to play...team 1 only has 24 hours after turn roll to decide..
In theory yes, but in the real world, no. It just doesn't work that way. The 'turn roll' that you are concerned about is not an issue.

I am going to guess that you have not played a PBEM game. :D

Well, Indiansmoke, as I said at the bottom of my post, there is no such thing as a "turn roll" for sequential turns because there is no "overall" turn. Each team's turn is done and complete one at a time. This "turn roll" you're talking about only happens for simultaneous turns where everyone is moving at the same time (although we'd have rules to prevent double moves). Are you sure you're understanding the difference between the two. Finally, to sum things up:

Gameplay Differences:

Sequential Turns
None

Simultaneous Turns
Warfare - When units are built/slaved and when units heal - can have slight differences
Who gets a wonder or a religion-decided somewhat randomly between two teams
Exploits like double moves - you have to follow additional rules against these exploits

Time Differences:
Sequential Turns
Every team gets the same amount of time, but slower overall because the aggregate clocks are longer (5*24 hours standard)

Simultaneous Turns
Teams all play within overall time clock (48 hours or something); might be necessary to have pauses and such occasionally. Faster for the game to play out because clock is shorter

So, since it's already basically decided to play sequential turns, there are virtually no additional exploits for you to worry about. It might be debateable whether it's good for the game to go slower or faster - get things moving quicker versus more time for discussion. But then again, you can always have your team try to rush through each turn in blazing speed if you're worried about time - I'm sure they'd like that too.

Team 2 cannot slave while Team 1 is roading and attacking unless they are playing simultaneously with Team 1. Really, this is a very basic concept. :)

One team roads, attacks, destroys the city. The other moves units to respond next turn. It does not matter whether you apply this to Team 1 or Team 2.

Since several other people have already backed up what I've said, you need to consider whether you've just got a bit confused here. :)

I am certainly not confused...

Simply expalined on your reverse scenario.

Assuming defending city has second border pop

It is turn 100.

team 1 plays first it roads and moves horse archers within cultural borders....HA are now within 3 tiles of city..

It is still turn 100

team 2 plays it has only 1 defender in city but...sees the horse archers, slaves one defender

It now turn 101

team 1 plays horse archers move to 1 tile from city

It is still turn 101

team 2 plays it now has 2 defenders and slaves another

Turn 102

team 1 attacks.. in the city are 3 defenders

Reverse scenario

It is turn 100

team 1 plays..nothing special

It is still turn 100

team 2 plays moves in cultural border 3 tiles from city

It is now turn 101

team 1 sees the attack now...slaves 1 defender

team 2 moves 1 tile from city

It is now turn 102

team 1 has 2 defenders in city Team 2 attacks

ONLY 2 defenders in city...while team 2 had 3 defenders in reverse scenario

It is still turn 100

Here's your problem right away. There is no such thing as "still turn 100" for sequential turns. What you're thinking of is simultaneous turns. Furthermore, it has already been concluded (I'm pretty sure) that the game will be using sequential turns. While I agree it is nice to think through possible concerns, we won't have to worry about things like this because that game format is already decided. Yes, simultaneous turns can give that problem on when a slaved unit pops out, but we are using sequential turns (your "original" scenario- the one that's ok).

:lol: Seriously... are you joking?

Here's what you've done:

Team 2: Start 1 defender + slave 1 + slave 1 = 3 defenders

Team 1: Start 0 defenders + slave 1 + slave 1 = 2 defenders

You've started off team 2 with an extra defender! Of course they'll have an extra one in that case! :lol:

Please, if you don't know about these things, or haven't played sequential turn multiplayer games before, then stop posting and do some research. You're only making things worse. ;)

It is turn 100.

team 1 plays first it roads and moves horse archers within cultural borders....HA are now within 3 tiles of city..

It is still turn 100

team 2 plays it has only 1 defender in city but...sees the horse archers, slaves one defender

It now turn 101

team 1 plays horse archers move to 1 tile from city

It is still turn 101

team 2 plays it now has 2 defenders and slaves another

Turn 102

team 1 attacks.. in the city are 3 defenders

Reverse scenario

It is turn 100

team 1 plays..nothing special

It is still turn 100

team 2 plays moves in cultural border 3 tiles from city

It is now turn 101

team 1 sees the attack now...slaves 1 defender

team 2 moves 1 tile from city

It is now turn 102

team 1 has 2 defenders in city Team 2 attacks

:lol: Seriously... are you joking?

Here's what you've done:

Team 2: Start 1 defender + slave 1 + slave 1 = 3 defenders

Team 1: Start 0 defenders + slave 1 + slave 1 = 2 defenders

You've started off team 2 with an extra defender! Of course they'll have an extra one in that case! :lol:

Please, if you don't know about these things, or haven't played sequential turn multiplayer games before, then stop posting and do some research. You're only making things worse. ;)

Yea sorry typing error, both teams start with one defender...the argument still stands...due to the fact that slaved units appear at begging of turn (the overall turn not your turn.

Yea sorry typing error, both teams start with one defender...the argument still stands...due to the fact that slaved units appear at begging of turn (the overall turn not your turn.
NO. I think you are used to simultaneous turns. Sequential turns work differently. Slaved units appear at the END of each player's turn, NOT at the end of the "overall" turn. Thus there will be no difference between team 1 and 2 at all.

Team 2: Start 1 + slave 1 + slave 1 = 3 defenders
Team 1: Start 1 + slave 1 + slave 1 = 3 defenders

NO. I think you are used to simultaneous turns. Sequential turns work differently. Slaved units appear at the END of each player's turn, NOT at the end of the "overall" turn. Thus there will be no difference between team 1 and 2 at all.

Team 2: Start 1 + slave 1 + slave 1 = 3 defenders
Team 1: Start 1 + slave 1 + slave 1 = 3 defenders

I checked it...you are right, units appear when you end your turn....sorry for the confusion..

As I never played sequential,just to see if I'm right:
Really there is no overall turn 100, just turn 100 for team 1, then for next team,
and so on.
Is it that?
Best regards,

You're exactly right; hope there's nothing else anyone said causing too much confusion. Though, really, I think it's impossible that you've never played sequential! Unless all the civ you've played is multiplayer, sequential is exactly the same as any single player game - you just replace AI teams with all human teams, and everybody takes turns like normal. Just because it's Pitboss doesn't change how sequential turns work out, though of course simultaneous turns is a different option. The biggest concern of some people is that sequential can take longer, but we're on teams with lots of people to discuss/decide/play the game, so I'm not worried about it myself.

Part of the reason for the thread was to close the one apparent difference between PBEM and Sequential Pitboss, namely that in PBEM you have historical saves to look back to. The experiment showed that sequential does have saves as well.

So what we're left with is, sequential pitboss is exactly the same thing as PBEM from the game play point of view. It has these additional benefits over a PBEM.


No need for the admin to force an absent team's save. Just let the timer roll.
Anyone on the team can look at the save. This is possible in PBEM but clunkier.
Multiple people can play parts of the turn in a pitboss. In particular, a team can have a builder do the cities, and a general move the units.
No "mail delivery delay" excuses. ;)


One disadvantage of pitboss -- no easy way to capture saves for the admins other than to have teams capture a save at beginning (or end) of turn and email it or upload it.

Part of the reason for the thread was to close the one apparent difference between PBEM and Sequential Pitboss, namely that in PBEM you have historical saves to look back to. The experiment showed that sequential does have saves as well.

So what we're left with is, sequential pitboss is exactly the same thing as PBEM from the game play point of view. It has these additional benefits over a PBEM.


No need for the admin to force an absent team's save. Just let the timer roll.
Anyone on the team can look at the save. This is possible in PBEM but clunkier.
Multiple people can play parts of the turn in a pitboss. In particular, a team can have a builder do the cities, and a general move the units.
No "mail delivery delay" excuses. ;)


One disadvantage of pitboss -- no easy way to capture saves for the admins other than to have teams capture a save at beginning (or end) of turn and email it or upload it.
Can you explain the bit about multiple people playing the turn? That sounds very interesting.

If the admin have access to the server there will certainly be dozen of autosaves generated every turn that can be looked back on...

@ CommandoBob : Just try to set up a pitboss.. It is pretty simple to see how different people can play different parts of the turn just by logging in at different times...

Don't forget:
The best advantage Pitboss against Pbem is:
There will be no cheat accusation/reproach, if you fight with <50% chance and win.

@ CommandoBob : Just try to set up a pitboss.. It is pretty simple to see how different people can play different parts of the turn just by logging in at different times...
Sorta difficult at the moment since I don't have a copy of the game. :sad:

But I am hoping to change that on Dec 25. :xmas:

Can you explain the bit about multiple people playing the turn? That sounds very interesting.
From the beginning of a team's turn until the end turn is pressed (enter or the end turn button) you can login any number of times. Two can't login at the same time of course, but the team can use as much or as little of their 24 hours as needed to let anyone look or act who wants to. It's not like the old PBEM method where you had to either keep the game open or use task manager to kill the civ process to keep it from making a save.

From the beginning of a team's turn until the end turn is pressed (enter or the end turn button) you can login any number of times...It's not like the old PBEM method where you had to either keep the game open or use task manager to kill the civ process to keep it from making a save.

That sounds Nice!

One issue I have had as Turn Player is just finding a big enough block of time to get everything done for one turn. Normally, it takes me 2 hours to play one turn (which includes everything from modifying the last turn log, downloading the save, playing the turn, logging stuff, screenshots, sending the turn on, uploading images and posting the turn log).

To be able to do a little bit at a time; Wow!

This I know is definitely the question of an Inquistive Idiot. :D

Here goes:

Since the game is hosted on a server, does any player need to have Civ IV?

Could I, currently lacking Civ IV/BtS, log into the save (at the proper time) and do things (change build orders, reassign citizen tiles, start a war, etc.)?

...does any player need to have Civ IV?

Yes, anybody connecting to the PitBoss server must have a working copy of cIV BtS [v.1.37??] installed on their machine.

WIthout BtS, you're a blind teammate ;)

Yes, anybody connecting to the PitBoss server must have a working copy of cIV BtS [v.1.37??] installed on their machine.

WIthout BtS, you're a blind teammate ;)
Indeed. All the players must have the correct expansion and version of the game to be able to log in. Only the host can do without some of the game files - and then only a few (like the Art folder, I think).

Another question (for me of some importance)

The save has the same fight-probability? If yes, then we have the same with cheat accusations as before.

I would prefer, that we the game then has:

New random seed on reload

Art and sounds.

The save you download can't be uploaded again... It is only the official save at the host that matters... New random seed on reload means that new reloads will be totally different from previous ones. Without this they will be the same if the same actions are taken...

oyzar
Can I make with the save a try to fight and get the same result as in the PB?
Yes or no

Don't think so... But then i've never played sequential turns in pitboss so i guess it might be possible... This will be a severe disadvantage of sequential turns then... Either lose replayability of give unscrupulous people the opportunity to preplay battles to their advantage...

Surely we could turn on to get a new random seed on reload? That wouldn't be good in solo games, but in this setting it shouldn't be a problem, and would save us from the kind of exploits that oyzar and HUSch are hinting at.

You are right random seed on reload would prevent this specific abuse of pre-playing. There are still half a million exploits you can do with pre-playing though(mostly to do with information you should not have).. I had not considered this at all as i have very little experience with downloading saves and sequential pitboss... Basically if you can download the current save you can abuse it. If we can't trust people to not abuse it i don't see how we can play sequential pitboss at all.. Hence i believe random seed on reload should be off(since we have to trust people to not abuse the exploits anyways).. Should probably add a rule about pre-playing in the ruleset though...

The more I hear, the more I wish we would switch to Simultaneous turns instead. I've been opposed to it before, but it certainly has lots of benefits, and far fewer drawbacks than Sequential it seems.

Yes, there are half a million exploits that can happen in any game. But speaking for the veteran MTDG players, I'm confident they won't allow any of that sort of thing to happen on their team. It goes completely against the spirit of these games. We don't have to make an explicit rule about every conceivable situation.

Another question from the Inquistive Idiot.

Given that several people could log into the game and do stuff, how does one person log out and not end the turn?

And somewhat related: If someone else has logged in earlier, is there a way for the current person to know that fact?

pg: That's certainly true enough, though having been at the wrong end of accusations thrown around in the Civ3 MTDG for exactly this kind of thing I would prefer if it wasn't possible at all. I'm sure no team would actually use it to cheat, but just the possibility could mean bad blood, as witnessed before. :sad:

Given that several people could log into the game and do stuff, how does one person log out and not end the turn?
Exit to Main Menu without clicking on the End Turn marker. Couldn't be simpler. :)
And somewhat related: If someone else has logged in earlier, is there a way for the current person to know that fact?
There is a tool called Civstat that can keep track of that. Though it would probably be good for each team to have a thread in their forum where they post their intention to log in, and when they have logged out again.

Since we are discussing how pitboss works before the game kicks off I have another question:

Can teams log onto pitboss and make all of their moves and then just wait for the timer to automatically end the turn? Would the player actions be saved?

Granted that the following team might be chomping at the bit and hoping that the team before them won't take all 24 hours. But I can see how using the timer to automatically end the turn would make teams feel more comfortable with multiple people logging on- there wouldn't be the stress about missing a turn.

Can teams log onto pitboss and make all of their moves and then just wait for the timer to automatically end the turn? Would the player actions be saved?
Yes, all the player actions would be saved. However, I can't see why any team would want to do this. If you've played all your moves, then end the turn - otherwise it's just irritating waiting for a full 24 hours every time when it could be about 6 or 8. And since anyone who wants to can log into the game, even when it's not their team's turn, then there's absolutely no reason for a team to drag their feet and force their turn to last the full 24 hours - especially in the early game.

And since anyone who wants to can log into the game, even when it's not their team's turn...
Oh?

:eek:

I did not know that was possible.

But what could you do?

But what could you do?
Nothing of significance. You can rearrange build queues and research queues for the upcoming turns, but you can't make any moves or do any slaving or anything like that. Basically, outside of your turn, logging into the game will only let you observe what's going on, not participate in it. (Which is of course fair - it would defeat the point of sequential turns if you could slave defenders when it wasn't your turn, and so on.)

From my experience of Pitboss,while Simultaneous:
The possibility to log in when it's not our turn is a very important one,mostly when there are partners from Europe,America and South Islands.
One can see the game and post about and propose the next moves. It always works well, but to war things when war is running or very close.
And have two players to play the turn is usually a good idea: let builders and warmongers do what they know better.
Best regards,