I was browsing through Civstats, and just noticed that SANCTA has recently started up an intra-team pitboss game between some of their members. (Link (http://www.civstats.com/viewgame.php?gameid=1186)) This is in addition to the Mad Scientists, who set up their own intra-team game a month or so back. (Link (http://www.civstats.com/viewgame.php?gameid=1163))

So, I thought - why don't we see if we can't start up our own intra-team pitboss game? It's easy, it's fun, and it helps in team bonding. Plus, of course, it allows the opportunity for all of the team members to learn successful strategies first-hand from other players - and we all become more skilled as a result. Basically, it's all good. :)

If you'd be interested in playing such a game, just between us folks belonging to Team Saturn, then please post below. It doesn't matter how "good" or "bad" you think you are - the point of this game is to have fun, and learn new things from each other while we do it. So go ahead and join up... don't be shy! ;)

Better still, if you have a server that could host the game (you just need a computer with Civ4 and an internet connection which can stay turned on 24/7), then let us know! You don't need to have had any previous experience with setting up a pitboss game - I (and others) can help you out there. So if you have a computer with Civ4 and a 24/7 internet connection, let us know! :)

Map size and other settings and such can be decided once we know roughly how many players we will have - but feel free to offer any suggestions if you'd like to!

Players interested so far:
1. Lord Parkin
2. plako
3. Scuum
4. Dux_
5. Joshua368
6. Toch
7. hell_hound
8. DMOC
9. Elucidus (host)
10. Amethyst224
11. Clamburger
12. Hercules90

Map type:
Huge Size, Medium Sea Level. Big_and_Small, Normal Continents, Islands, Islands Mixed In.

Game settings:
Vassal states off. All other settings defaults.

Ecellent idea. I would definately participate. After demogame started, I've lost most of my intrest to play against AI and hoped that some pitboss game would start, but haven't seen any.

I could consider setting up pitboss server. I don't know if my network is suitable, but I could try. How powerful machine is required? I've old computer that I could commit for this. I wouldn't use this machine for anything else (e.g. playing civ) so would this setup require another BTS license/disc?

I could consider setting up pitboss server. I don't know if my network is suitable, but I could try. How powerful machine is required? I've old computer that I could commit for this. I wouldn't use this machine for anything else (e.g. playing civ) so would this setup require another BTS license/disc?
You wouldn't need another BTS license or disc, because it's still for your own use. It would only be a "problem" if you were installing it on someone else's computer (and even then it doesn't really matter).

As for the computer, it does need to be capable of installing and loading up the main menu of Civ4, but that's all. I'm almost 100% sure that the server doesn't need to be able to actually load up a game (although of course it might be handy). All of the loading of graphics is done on the individual players' computers when they log into the game, so the server doesn't need to be a very modern machine.

I'm interested too!
But i cant guarantee that i'll be available for turns every day .. :(
So will there be a turn timer? How fast do you want to play?

I'm interested too!
But i cant guarantee that i'll be available for turns every day .. :(
So will there be a turn timer? How fast do you want to play?
Yes, there'll be a turn timer. 24 hours in real time seems the most sensible setting. Any longer and the game kind of drags.

You don't have to be available for turns every day in order to play, by the way. If you're away, you can always queue up your moves (workers, movements etc). Alternatively, if you have a friend that plays Civ, you could get them to log in and play your turn for the day. Otherwise, if all else fails, you can always set the AI to play for you temporarily until you get back. Nothing wrong with that. :)

These kind of games are the most fun when there's the most possible players - so if you think you'll be around even part of most weeks, there's no reason why you can't join. ;)

I would be interested, should be fun, but how do you log into pitboss hosting computer?

yeah..the queue-up is a good idea! I'm kind of an inet-addict, so i'll be around most of the time.

I'm in!

I would be interested, should be fun, but how do you log into pitboss hosting computer?

There are step-by-step instructions in the Demogame lobby "A guide to playing a pitboss game".

I would certainly be interested in playing, though I can't set up a 24/7 dedicated server.

Count me in, as plako sad AI is not so fun anymore :)

Definately want to be a part but as I said before I am at a very low skill level (though I hope I am improving). Would be great to learn how to improve in an actual game.

Cool, barely 14 hours and already 7 potential players. Looks like we won't have a problem with numbers, for sure. :)

I would be interested, should be fun, but how do you log into pitboss hosting computer?
As plako said, there are instructions around. Basically, once the game has been set up, you just need the host to send you his IP. Then you can log straight into the game quite easily. :)

plako: When do you think you'll have a chance to do a test run with your computer (installing civ, setting up a test game to log in to, etc)? I'd be happy to help you walk through the process, if you need any help. :)

The machine had hard drive failure long time ago. I'm now replacing it, but can't make any promises about schedule.

The machine had hard drive failure long time ago. I'm now replacing it, but can't make any promises about schedule.
Okay. I do have a friend (from a different website) who could potentially host the game if no-one on our team is able to. Although of course, it's usually better to have the host also playing in the game. (That way, whenever the server has issues or goes down, the host catches it quicker and there isn't as much down-time.)

Okay. I do have a friend (from a different website) who could potentially host the game if no-one on our team is able to. Although of course, it's usually better to have the host also playing in the game. (That way, whenever the server has issues or goes down, the host catches it quicker and there isn't as much down-time.)

After installing Windows to new hard drive I couldn't get network working. I've some ideas how to continue, but this will delay setting up the server. I'll try again during the weekend. Could we start the game in your friends computer and then transfer it, if it seems that my configuration is good enough.

Okay, I'll talk to my friend. Actually, thinking about it, he could just join up to our team, then play in the game with us. That'd make things a heck of a lot easier. :)

I don't want to rush the start too much though - there are several active players who haven't yet replied to this topic (DMOC, for one). Let's not leave anyone out by starting too quickly. ;)

We need DMOC! :run:

I'll be interested in joining. The only problem is that I rarely have access to CIV on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays (and, judging from my extremely slow deity game here, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday as well). Of course, there will be exceptions (such as president's week in February where I'll have access every day).

I guess I'll have to learn how to queue up things...any tips? Especially on worker movements.

Also...if I queue up my scout's movements in anticipation of NOT playing the next day, but I do find the time, will I be able to stop the scout's movements the next day before it moves into the "queued" direction? A barbarian might be in the way (coming from in between turns).

I'll be interested in joining. The only problem is that I rarely have access to CIV on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays (and, judging from my extremely slow deity game here, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday as well). Of course, there will be exceptions (such as president's week in February where I'll have access every day). I also have internet 24/7.

I guess I'll have to learn how to queue up things...any tips? Especially on worker movements.

Also...if I queue up my scout's movements in anticipation of NOT playing the next day, but I do find the time, will I be able to stop the scout's movements the next day before it moves into the "queued" direction? A barbarian might be in the way (coming from in between turns).

I'll be interested in joining. The only problem is that I rarely have access to CIV on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays (and, judging from my extremely slow deity game here, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday as well). Of course, there will be exceptions (such as president's week in February where I'll have access every day).

I have barely any experience queueing movements and builds so I can't help you there, but what kind cruel job/school/etc do you have that would keep you off of a computer game for just five minutes of a day, even late at night? :mischief:

Oh, the reason I don't play CIV like that is because when I do play CIV on the weekdays, I always feel the urge to play more and more turns.

I am in school right now (no job) and have a very rigorous courseload so it's vital that I keep focused.

Maybe this could be the...ah...cure? :eek:

Anyway, when will the game start?

Sorry for double posting but my computer doesn't let me edit posts today. :mad:

I was actually able to connect to this game, so I think my internet works well. ;) Although I didn't see an option to play as our team...someone must already be logged on.

I was actually able to connect to this game, so I think my internet works well. ;) Although I didn't see an option to play as our team...someone must already be logged on.
Yep, that'd be it. ;)

I guess I'll have to learn how to queue up things...any tips? Especially on worker movements.
Sure. For Worker queues, all that you need to do is click on a Worker, then use a combination of the "Shift" key and the "Goto" button to get them to do what you want to do.

For instance: your Worker is currently chopping a forest. After that, you want him to move to a Cow resource and build a pasture and road. You click on the Worker (still chopping the forest), press "G" (for "Goto"), hold down "Shift" and click on the Cows (tells him to finish chopping and then move there), hold down "Shift" and click on the "Pasture" button (tells him to build a pasture once he gets to the Cows), then finally click the "Road" button (tells him that his final order for now is to build the road after the pasture). The Worker will now be deselected since you didn't hold shift on the last order, but you can still give him new orders after the road building by selecting him again manually and holding "Shift" while clicking any new orders. Also, if you want to cancel any orders (they're cancelled in the opposite order that you gave them), just press the "Cancel" button a few times.

I hope that was relatively clear and easy to follow. :)

Also...if I queue up my scout's movements in anticipation of NOT playing the next day, but I do find the time, will I be able to stop the scout's movements the next day before it moves into the "queued" direction? A barbarian might be in the way (coming from in between turns).
You'll need to have a unit which doesn't have orders for that turn (eg a Warrior sitting around). Otherwise yes, the Scout would move automatically when you logged in. But it's not really a huge issue, and anyway can be solved by logging in before the next turn comes around to cancel the order.

Oh, the reason I don't play CIV like that is because when I do play CIV on the weekdays, I always feel the urge to play more and more turns.

I am in school right now (no job) and have a very rigorous courseload so it's vital that I keep focused.

Maybe this could be the...ah...cure? :eek:
I certainly know the feeling of having the urge to play more and more turns when you're supposed to be doing schoolwork - I've had to battle with it the past few years while at university. ;) But for these kind of games, at least for the first 100 or so turns, all you need is a spare 5 minutes during each day. (After that, maybe 10 minutes a day for the next 100 turns, and so on.)

Personally, I actually find these games to be an excellent way of getting my dose of CIV without letting my studies fall behind. That's because you're restricted by the pitboss to only playing one turn per day. You can't play "just one more turn", because the game won't let you. So you can actually play the game for 5 minutes, then get off. It's brilliant. :)

Anyway, when will the game start?
I'll chat to my friend next time he's around, and see what we can arrange. All going well, I think we should be able to start in a few days. :)

We should start discussing map settings and the like at this point. We'll have 9 players (assuming my friend wants to join our forum to play in the game), so my line of thinking is that we'll want either a standard map with low sea level, a large map with medium sea level, or a huge map with high sea level. As for the map type, Big_and_Small (with "Normal" or "Snaky" continents) tends to yield very good results for multiplayer maps in my experience.

What about game options? I prefer to play with Vassal States off, but that's my only preference. Everything else I'm happy leaving to the defaults. :)

Okay, my friend Elucidus seems happy to host (and play in) our game. He's just signed up to join us, so he should be here shortly. :)

Nice to hear this!

Seeing as we have nine players, I would propose this:

Map: Pangea (so that we all have some contact with each other). Big and Small would also be a nice option.

Speed: Normal (well, that's obvious)

Size: Large

Sea level: Medium

Shoreline: Natural (for some islands outside of the pangea to add flavor)

Difficulty: Monarch (so that there are some barbarians but not too much nor too less)

Additional options: No huts, No random events

Oh and have a "temperate" climate as well. (Sorry, for some reason I can't edit my posts on this computer :mad:).

Ack! Sorry for posting in a row again, I also would like vassal states off. If they're on, someone could just voluntarily vassalize to someone else and cause problems.

The only problem with this game is that I'll feel bad if I declare war on a fellow "teammate."

Nice to hear this!

Seeing as we have nine players, I would propose this:

Map: Pangea (so that we all have some contact with each other). Big and Small would also be a nice option.
I'm not a big fan of Pangaea. We'd be better off going with the Big_and_Small "massive continent" setting, since at least it's more varied and interesting (IMHO).

Anyway, contact with everyone isn't necessary for an interesting pitboss game - just as long as people have contact with at least a couple of others initially. Actually, it's quite fun having multiple continents, since then you get somewhere to explore and new people to talk to in the later game. :)

Speed: Normal (well, that's obvious)

Size: Large

Sea level: Medium
Agreed.

Shoreline: Natural (for some islands outside of the pangea to add flavor)
This won't be relevant if we don't have Pangaea. Big_and_Small tends to produce much more natural islands - check it out in WorldBuilder and see for yourself. :)

Difficulty: Monarch (so that there are some barbarians but not too much nor too less)
Bear in mind that the main effect of the difficulty level in multiplayer is in research costs. Monarch seems like a good level to play at, though. I'm assuming that we'll be playing with tech trading on (if it was off then Noble would be more appropriate). :)

Additional options: No huts, No random events
Given that this is supposed to be a fun game (as opposed to a brutally competitive game), I'd prefer to leave huts and events on for flavour. Sure, they can be a little unbalanced at times, but they make the game that little bit more exciting. ;)

Ack! Sorry for posting in a row again, I also would like vassal states off. If they're on, someone could just voluntarily vassalize to someone else and cause problems.
Every player I know would never do this, though - because it sucks to be a vassal. :p

But anyway, it won't be a problem without vassal states.

The only problem with this game is that I'll feel bad if I declare war on a fellow "teammate."
Heh, yeah. But Civ isn't Civ without at least the occasional war. I think everyone understands that. ;)

The only problem with this game is that I'll feel bad if I declare war on a fellow "teammate."

Yeah I agree, we don't want to fight. Let's be best friends instead. :)


:backstab:

Also if there are 9 players, instead of a large map, how about a medium map with low sea level? It's like the same idea but with less ocean, help with early access. I'm fine with Big and Small.

Yeah I agree, we don't want to fight. Let's be best friends instead. :)


:backstab:
:lol:

Also if there are 9 players, instead of a large map, how about a medium map with low sea level? It's like the same idea but with less ocean, help with early access. I'm fine with Big and Small.
I quite like having more sea, though. Keeps things from being too claustrophobic.

Also, it's better to have more land rather than less in these sort of games, since you tend to run out surprisingly quickly otherwise. It removes some of the need for early rushes, which frequently happen when civs are cramped too close together. And if I recall correctly, large with medium sea has more land than standard with low sea.

Big and small is fine. I like normal sized maps, but large is also ok. Standard options, except vassal states should be off.

As I have said before i'm very low in terms of skill level, and plan to be very open with where I am and what i'm doing etc. for advice to help me improve. Also I would like to be able to know I am not going to be killed in the first 100 turns. Otherwise all these settings are fine.

Big and small is fine, prefer large, events huts on vassal off.

As I have said before i'm very low in terms of skill level, and plan to be very open with where I am and what i'm doing etc. for advice to help me improve. Also I would like to be able to know I am not going to be killed in the first 100 turns. Otherwise all these settings are fine.
Perhaps we could all agree on a game rule: no declarations of war before, say, 1 AD (turn 115 at Normal speed)?

I'd agree with no war before a certain time period. I think that instead of 1 AD it should be 375 BC
(100 turns).

Anything after that should be fair game, because you've had 100 turns to prepare.

I have changed my mind and decide that a Big_and_Small map would work best anyway. I'm also for allowing random events and huts. I still think we should use a Large map with medium sea level and have vassals off.

Are we ready to start signing up and choosing civs?

What no risk of a pre-catapult war? :confused: Oh well whatever everyone wants.

With picking leaders maybe we should limit the financial trait to lower-level players as a handicap. :mischief:

So I assume that picking Julius Caesar should be limited to me? :mischief:

Nah, I don't think I'll pick him. If we plan on not declaring war until 1AD, then I'll probably be better off with another leader. Of course, I may get too great an urge to play as him....

EDIT: I changed my mind and decided that I'd like to avoid declaring war until 375 BC (turn 100). To me, it just seems that the 1 AD rule limits too many early game opportunities and removes some of the suspense. It also means that we have some pre-game knowledge that we don't need ANY military at all before that time.

Also, I don't claim to be the best multiplayer person because I never play multiplayer. I'd like to have some "suspense" of not knowing when a human is about to declare war.

I'll be honest in that if there's anyone I'd declare war on pre-1AD it'd be one of the expert players so newer players won't have much to worry about me.

Lastly, I hope we can get some more players!

ok on leader selection, I normally choose to play as luis due to the Ind/ Cre. However I know wonders will be far harder to get in multiolayer, especially as everyone else is better than me so would it be advisable to play as someone such as willem?

I'd recommend playing leaders that have traits of: Financial, Creative, and Philosophical. Those seem to be the best traits for MP assuming that it's not going to be a war-fest (otherwise Aggressive would be there). Willem is a good choice.

I'll probably make my pick someday later or, possibly, tomorrow.

I generated some Big and Small maps today and they look good! It was so tempting to play out that 5-gold + floodplains start I got as Charlemagne but I just wanted to see what the maps looked like.

I like these settings:

Normal Continents
Islands enabled (regular size, not tiny)
Island regions mixed in (this is to prevent isolated starts -- with this setting it seems that 1 or 2 civs out of 9 will start on a different landmass but that civ can connect to the civs on the mainland due to galley access).

Overall, I like the Big_and_Small map! With 9 players, there's tons of room to expand, so this could be a good game! There's also MANY smaller islands available after Astronomy. I only hope that none of us get an isolated start like Joao did (but this was done with the setting "Island regions separate"):

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj197/DMOC_album/Civ4ScreenShot0042-3.jpg

Lol what a shity start :) poor jao :)i would like to see how would AI use this start.

DMOC - I agree with the settings proposed (normal continents, regular islands, islands mixed in). That's actually exactly what I was going to suggest. ;)

What no risk of a pre-catapult war? :confused: Oh well whatever everyone wants.

With picking leaders maybe we should limit the financial trait to lower-level players as a handicap. :mischief:
How about this revision then: the experienced players are not allowed to declare war on the inexperienced players before turn 100 (375 BC). However, it's perfectly fine for the inexperienced players to declare war on anyone they choose at any time, and fine for the experienced players to war amongst themselves at any time. How's that? :) (I count myself, Joshua, DMOC, plako, and Elucidus as the experienced players - anyone else I'm missing?)

Alternatively, we could make the rule: nobody is allowed to declare war on the inexperienced players before turn 100 (375 BC). However, everyone is free to declare war on the experienced players at any time. (The difference with this scenario being that the inexperienced players can't rush each other early on.)

Disallowing the experienced players from picking Financial leaders would also be very interesting, IMHO. I'd quite like that actually, it's about time I played a game with a non-Financial leader. :)

I'm okay with what Lord Parkin says. I'm not sure about disallowing financial leaders, though. I'd like to play one for my first multiplayer game. :)

Maybe I'll just pick a non-Financial leader myself then. I'll see. :)

Hopefully Ginger_Ale will get around to accepting Elucidus into our forum soon, so he'll be able to participate in the discussions here - he's the one who'll be hosting this for us after all. ;)

That would be good for you. How about America? ;)

Heh. Actually I've played with America before in a large multiplayer game, when we had random civ allocations. Ironically though, it happened to be back with vanilla Civ4, when Washington was Financial/Organized. :p

Ginger Ale has updated the teams! :)

I know who I pick (not financial either), but should we all decide who we want to be first so undecided players don't pick "counters" to leaders they know they'll be fighting against? Or maybe we could all just tell the host and we won't find out who our opponents are until the game begins.

Also don't worry DMOC I haven't played like any true multiplayer games either. We can be inexperienced together...

...and gang up on parkin. Shhhh.

Good point. We could all send a personal message to someone to tell him the decision. It lets that person find a counter to some civs but hopefully he'll be honest and have a civ choice beforehand.

Maybe that person should be the host that Lord Parkin found?

Oh and I'm okay with the rule with me not being able to attack "inexperienced" players before turn 100, on the grounds that they allow open borders. I'm sure most would open them anyway, but I don't want to be blocked off due to rules. :hammer: (alternatively if a player will not open borders, that's fine but I'm allowed to attack them whenever :) )

So do we start picking leaders now? I've got mine in mind already.

considering you all already know my leader, I would be happy to be the organiser of leaders. Also are we allowing duplicates

We should definitely allow duplicates! This isn't a competitive game or anything, it's just for us to get to know each other, and maybe conquer each other. :)

That being said, maybe you should organize the leaders, hell_hound. How about starting your own thread here and listing all the interested players in this game? You can put a note next to each of our names saying "civ picked" or "still deciding." Once everyone has messaged you (privately), you can post the leaders.

okay.

I plan to play this game openly with screenshots of my lands and actions as to learn and improve so I hope no-one will take advantage of this knowledge, although these will probably be 20 or so turns behind the game as to not give anything away.

In the interest of this game, I think it might be best not to show us actual screenshots, but maybe tell us generalizations, such as: I have a city with 2 fish but 1 is a clam and the other is a fish and should I make 1 wb or 2.. OR tell us your initial tech and build order while telling us what kind of start you've got, etc. that kind of stuff. You can show us screenshots, but if so, could you zoom in so that no tiles are revealed that aren't necessary? For instance, if it's the capital you're talking about, double click in the city screen so that we see the tiles in the city screen but few tiles elsewhere.

We're more than willing to help, of course.

So we pm hell_hound our choice of leader?

Yes, the reason being that he already told us what his leader will be (Willem van Orange). If we PM him, no one else will be able to know what each of us picked until he reveals all the leader choices.

It wouldn't be fair if one person chose Julius Caesar and then the other 8 picked Sitting Bull. :lol:

I thought we would tell Elucidus who are leader choices are because he's the one hosting the game? :confused:

Edit: Okay I see how it works. I guess that's fine.

Well, hell_hound suggested it so I guess it's all OK. Once we have the leaders done, then Elucidus can create the game.
:)

How about this revision then: the experienced players are not allowed to declare war on the inexperienced players before turn 100 (375 BC). However, it's perfectly fine for the inexperienced players to declare war on anyone they choose at any time, and fine for the experienced players to war amongst themselves at any time. How's that? :) (I count myself, Joshua, DMOC, plako, and Elucidus as the experienced players - anyone else I'm missing?)

This makes most sense. Game can be played quite differently, if you know there will be peace.

Oh and I'm okay with the rule with me not being able to attack "inexperienced" players before turn 100, on the grounds that they allow open borders. I'm sure most would open them anyway, but I don't want to be blocked off due to rules. :hammer: (alternatively if a player will not open borders, that's fine but I'm allowed to attack them whenever :) )
Okay, let's add in the requirement that the less experienced players can't abuse the no-war thing in the early turns to block off other players from expanding. (Although I doubt that will be an issue on the kind of map we'll have - have you generated a map in WorldBuilder to test out just how much space each player will have? ;) )

By the way, in case it wasn't already obvious, if a less experienced player chooses to declare war on an experienced player, then obviously it becomes fair game for the experienced player to retaliate after that. :)

We should definitely allow duplicates! This isn't a competitive game or anything, it's just for us to get to know each other, and maybe conquer each other. :)

That being said, maybe you should organize the leaders, hell_hound. How about starting your own thread here and listing all the interested players in this game? You can put a note next to each of our names saying "civ picked" or "still deciding." Once everyone has messaged you (privately), you can post the leaders.
Here's a link to the leader picking thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=306758).

In the interest of this game, I think it might be best not to show us actual screenshots, but maybe tell us generalizations, such as: I have a city with 2 fish but 1 is a clam and the other is a fish and should I make 1 wb or 2.. OR tell us your initial tech and build order while telling us what kind of start you've got, etc. that kind of stuff. You can show us screenshots, but if so, could you zoom in so that no tiles are revealed that aren't necessary? For instance, if it's the capital you're talking about, double click in the city screen so that we see the tiles in the city screen but few tiles elsewhere.

We're more than willing to help, of course.
I agree with DMOC, best not to post screenshots - at least until other players have actually found you and explored your land for themselves. Knowing you have or don't have Copper/Horses/Iron would be a major advantage to everyone else, for instance. ;)

Do you think that we should adopt the rules taken from Chaos and Civility II? I think they're pretty nice concerning double-moves during wartime. Just ignore rules 4, 6, and 7. I also like their opinion on "missed turns."

http://www.chaosciv.com/index.php/topic,255.0.html

Elucidus mentioned that he'd like to added to the list of players that won't be rushed in the early game. I think it's fair enough, he's our host after all, and it's much better to have a host that's actively involved in the game. ;)

I'm sure he'd be happy to agree not to rush anyone else in the early game in return. He's not a very aggressive player - unless provoked. :)

No problem here. :goodjob:

Hey guys, I haven't played many PTBS games since BTS came out, in fact one ended badly a team game where the team couldn't get along, and the other I am currently in with Emperor.

My connection is stable and it is on a dedicated server. I hope to host it on my web server, but I am coming up short on Linux knowledge. Just thought I would mention that as that is where I would like to host all of my PTBS games.

Welcome to the team. :goodjob:

Did you PM hell_hound about a leader choice?

Do you think that we should adopt the rules taken from Chaos and Civility II? I think they're pretty nice concerning double-moves during wartime. Just ignore rules 4, 6, and 7. I also like their opinion on "missed turns."

http://www.chaosciv.com/index.php/topic,255.0.html
Yeah, I've seen those rules before. They're pretty good, and I'm sure they'd serve us pretty well. :)

I was going to join that game, but they started somewhere in July/August where I had to be away from my computer for 3 weeks. :cry:

I was going to join that game, but they started somewhere in July/August where I had to be away from my computer for 3 weeks. :cry:
Yeah, I would have joined as well, except that I could never get the mod to work properly in multiplayer on my computer.

Hey guys

~Luc
Good to see you've arrived, Luc. :)

Would you guys mind an addition, my wife likes to play civ? She is a beginner. If not its cool, I'll still host.

Personally, I have absolutely no problem with that. It'd be nice to have Amethyst around again. :) (Plus, it's kind of an all-male environment here at the moment, so it'd be good to have a representative of the fairer sex. :p )

I don't mind at all. Let's make the map Large but with low sea level.

So is this right:

Large/Big and Small/Normal Continents/Normal Islands

No vassals


If you allow my wife, should we increase the map size?

Sorry, I wasn't here for the initial discussion, just want to make sure I have everything right?

That looks good.

If it's 9 players, use normal sea level. If it's 10, use low sea level for more land.

Don't forget to use island regions mixed in.

I don't mind at all. Let's make the map Large but with low sea level.


Or that? :)

I think 10 players with medium sea level will still work well. Medium sea level with 9 players had a lot of land per player. Plus multiplayer games tend to be more interesting if every player doesn't have a massive amount of land to expand into. ;)

I'm okay with low seas though, if that's what the majority wants. Bear in mind though that more empty land = more barbarians.

I'd prefer low sea level, but still, I'm willing to play with medium. It's just that more land=more fun. ;) There's less chance of being boxed in.

I actually find being boxed in quite fun. ;)

But it'd be nice to play a different game where there was plenty of space to expand into, I guess. :)

Yeah, I agree with DMOC, most games I ended up boxed in, and in the game with emp, both my wife and I are. She got stuck next to an aggressive Rome player, no less.

I prefer medium sea level. There is enough room for 10 civs.

Presented rules are ok as well as Elucidus's wife participating to the game.

First of all I'm totally ok that Elucidus is the host of the game. However I might have interest to host another one at some point and would like to hear hints from you and possibly test my setup.

Currently I'm running Win2000 machine that has Civ installed and pitboss running. I can connect to this machine from my LAN and play the game. Now I would like to reveal this game to you. What is the best way to do this? I'm mainly looking for hints how to configure my firewall (I'm not very experienced). Easisest is probably to put this machine on DMZ zone, but that sounds little unsecure to me. How have you done this?

Looks like I'm bringing along a friend, Clamburger. Qualifies as "less experienced". :king:

Also whatever map style we get, just make sure everyone starts out around a few other players. Should we have someone check for isolated starts? Also enough room for 4-6 cities would probably be good for the no-early-war rule.

With 11 players, we should definitely use Low sea level along with a large map. Having a huge map would probably put strain on some comptuers (not mine, but some).

If the map were to be checked, the only way would be for someone else to make the map, right? Someone who's not planning on playing.

Edit: I think the game should be considered "closed" as we've got plenty of players.

First of all I'm totally ok that Elucidus is the host of the game. However I might have interest to host another one at some point and would like to hear hints from you and possibly test my setup.

Currently I'm running Win2000 machine that has Civ installed and pitboss running. I can connect to this machine from my LAN and play the game. Now I would like to reveal this game to you. What is the best way to do this? I'm mainly looking for hints how to configure my firewall (I'm not very experienced). Easisest is probably to put this machine on DMZ zone, but that sounds little unsecure to me. How have you done this?

Do you know how to forward ports on your firewall? Is it hardware or software or do you have both (using windows built in firewall and a firewall built into a router for instance)?

I've hardware firewall and I did took a look at long stickied pitboss thread and configured "virtual server" that forwards port 2056 to machine in my LAN. Now I would appreciate if you some of you would test if you can contact using following information:

ip-address:
game password (given under the ip adress in connect window):

There is a game with 10 players that don't have passwords defined. You can do whatever you like, but please inform me if you we're able to connect sucesfully.

I'm not satisfied to the security of my current configuration. I won't keep this long online. I'll let you know, if I take it offline.

Looks like I'm bringing along a friend, Clamburger. Qualifies as "less experienced". :king:
Okay, cool. I see (s)he's posted in the sign up thread. :)

Also whatever map style we get, just make sure everyone starts out around a few other players. Should we have someone check for isolated starts? Also enough room for 4-6 cities would probably be good for the no-early-war rule.
I suspect we'll all have room for more than 4-6 cities on the kind of map proposed. :)

Also, Elucidus could probably skim over the map to check that nobody is isolated. He's checked out a heap of maps for fairness in pitboss games that we've played before. It doesn't actually matter if he's playing in them, because there's so many different maps he's done that he's unlikely to remember how the latest one looks. ;)

Of course, we could always get someone outside the game to check over a map for us... DaveShack might be a good choice.

With 11 players, we should definitely use Low sea level along with a large map. Having a huge map would probably put strain on some comptuers (not mine, but some).
Actually, that's something we should check - does everyone have computers capable of running large/huge maps in the late game?

Assuming they do, then I'd prefer a huge map with medium sea level over a large one with low seas.

Edit: I think the game should be considered "closed" as we've got plenty of players.
Well, there's still technically room for more. I doubt that anyone else will join at this late stage though. Even if they did, it's not much of a problem - we can fit them in. :)

If we go with the less experienced no rush option AND the open-borders agreement i'd like some rule that states, that you aren't allowed to use this to explore the whole land. otherwise there is no way to build an army afterwards, without everyone noticing...
maybe a round-limit on the open-borders agreement?

My computer can handle Genghis_Kai's Giant Earth map very nicely which (if I recall correctly) is more than twice the size of a huge map. So I think it can handle a large map. ;) I don't care of the map is large or huge or what sea level -- I just want everyone to have some room for at least 4-6 cities.

Scuum, I'm not sure. In multiplayer I'm sure many players have their own unit "spies" like chariots, scouts, etc that are parked in opponents' cities. To prevent this, you could just close borders, or you could also do it to whoever is doing it to you. ;)

We all know that we'll be creating armies anyway.

plako -- As soon as I am able to get on my other computer with CIV on it, I will try to connect to the game.

If we go with the less experienced no rush option AND the open-borders agreement i'd like some rule that states, that you aren't allowed to use this to explore the whole land. otherwise there is no way to build an army afterwards, without everyone noticing...
maybe a round-limit on the open-borders agreement?

Open borders will let people run around your land, yeah, that's kind of the point. I think the basic idea is you can close your borders, but it drops any sort of "early invincibility" rule. (as in anyone closed off will be able to declare war) Personally I will probably be opening borders with everyone, I got nothing to hide. :p

Also I prefer large/low sea level to huge/normal sea level, I find the larger the map the more tedious distance becomes, expecially considering we'll be on normal speed. Though both me and clamburger will be able to handle maps of any size... we have gaming computers.

Huge no problem for me

huge is not a problem for me

I'm ok with huge maps, even if I still prefer large map with medium sea level.

If we go with the less experienced no rush option AND the open-borders agreement i'd like some rule that states, that you aren't allowed to use this to explore the whole land. otherwise there is no way to build an army afterwards, without everyone noticing...
maybe a round-limit on the open-borders agreement?
The purpose of the agreement would really be more to prevent people getting boxed off. So if you're not boxing anyone off, you don't have to open borders. Anyway, other players exploring your territory is really not a big deal. Like Joshua, I usually open my borders to everyone I meet - if only for the trade route benefit.

If someone parks a unit in your city and won't move, you can always close borders. Although in my experience, this never happens, because it's not actually that useful to see what someone is building (and there are ways of still hiding things anyway). It's far more useful, especially on this map which will have a LOT of land, to just keep exploring into the fog to see what you find rather than parking up in someone's city. ;)

I hope I am not too late to join and that there is an extra slot?

Sure, you can join!

I hope your computer can handle a huge map since we've got 12 players. :goodjob:

PM hell_hound your leader choice.

(Would you like to be in the "experienced" or "less-experienced" category?)

Thanks I think it can handle a high map. I am in the rewriting history MP game and it uses quite a big earth map, I think.

I'll PM hell_hound my choice.

I have put myself in the inexperienced camp.

Okay.

Hopefully we can get the game started!

With 12 players I'd go with a Huge map with Medium sea level.

I've hardware firewall and I did took a look at long stickied pitboss thread and configured "virtual server" that forwards port 2056 to machine in my LAN. Now I would appreciate if you some of you would test if you can contact using following information:

ip-address: 80.223.44.107
game password (given under the ip adress in connect window): rokot.5

There is a game with 10 players that don't have passwords defined. You can do whatever you like, but please inform me if you we're able to connect sucesfully.

I'm not satisfied to the security of my current configuration. I won't keep this long online. I'll let you know, if I take it offline.

Plako-I was unable to connect to your game. I was able to connect to Daveshack's game, though, so something must be wrong.

Okay.

Hopefully we can get the game started!

With 12 players I'd go with a Huge map with Medium sea level.
Indeed, huge with medium sea level works well.

So, with regards to Game Settings, did we reach any conclusions? We seemed to agree on No Vassal States, but aside from that shall we leave the rest as defaults? (This is a fun game as opposed to a highly competitive one, so leaving things like Huts, Events and Barbarians in the game for flavour seems fine to me.) :)

Huge is no problem for Ame and I. The server...well, it is doing nothing but hosting a single PTBS game. It is meant for it 2.66 Dual Core with 2 Gigs of RAM and a crappy onboard video card. :)

I used to serve about 6 or 7 games on my laptop with little problems. I had network issues, but I replaced those parts. My laptop is a four year old 2.0 Gig with at the time 512MB of memory.

As far as Emperor's offer for me to look at the map, I understand if you guys feel funny about it as he is the only one that really knows me (been 7 years now I think or will be soon). I have done it a lot, and if it helps I am still on some pain meds from the neck surgery so I probably wouldn't remember anyway.

Plako I cannot connect to a game at that IP, can't ping it or anything either. There is a firewall blocking it somewhere, make sure you aren't using windows firewall, or it has an exception if you are. It is on by default and but civ should put an exception as well, though not sure if it will for PTBS. Also if you plan to do more than one game plan on doing more than one Port.

Hi Everyone.

Indeed, huge with medium sea level works well.

So, with regards to Game Settings, did we reach any conclusions? We seemed to agree on No Vassal States, but aside from that shall we leave the rest as defaults? (This is a fun game as opposed to a highly competitive one, so leaving things like Huts, Events and Barbarians in the game for flavour seems fine to me.) :)

Agreed. :)

I would prefer if no one looked at the map. It's a fun game, should be fun to let the random generator give us res, etc, without any change. Plus, with big & small & medium sea level, I don't think anyone will end up isolated.

As far as Emperor's offer for me to look at the map, I understand if you guys feel funny about it as he is the only one that really knows me (been 7 years now I think or will be soon). I have done it a lot, and if it helps I am still on some pain meds from the neck surgery so I probably wouldn't remember anyway.
Yeah, I originally joined CDG (his forum, for those who don't know) on the 6th of January 2002, so it'd be over 7 years now that I've known you. Quite a large proportion of my life, as I was only 14 at the time... wow, sounds like ages. (I guess it is, relatively speaking. :lol: ;) )

I would prefer if no one looked at the map. It's a fun game, should be fun to let the random generator give us res, etc, without any change. Plus, with big & small & medium sea level, I don't think anyone will end up isolated.
Big_and_Small occasionally hands out isolated (or tundra) starts. It's not a huge chance, but it'll always be there unless someone checks the map. (Doesn't necessarily have to be someone playing in the game, although that makes it simpler.) Tundra starts are easy to spot from the outset, but isolated starts are sometimes not obvious until many turns into the game. Thus you could play 50 turns into a game only to find that you are on your own.

Personally, I don't mind a huge amount if I happen to be isolated. It's just more fun when there are people to interact with. Also, since tech trading will be on, isolated starts are kind of a death sentence. You can have fun in the early game building all the wonders, but after that you're a bit screwed. ;)

We're around the same age, I'm still 20, but only for a couple of more months.

Well, if it must happen, then have someone check the map.

Since the opening part of the game can take months, it'd be nice to know you won't play through all that just to find that you're isolated. :lol:

Plako-I was unable to connect to your game. I was able to connect to Daveshack's game, though, so something must be wrong.

Thank you DMOC and Elucidus for your efforts. I've couple of ideas what to try next and I'm pretty confident now that I can get things working. However because there is no urgent need to get this runnin so I'll close the firewall now and come to this when I really want to setup a pitboss server.

Elucidus: I think my firewall doesn't allow ping, so you can't do that.

Never even made it close to your firewall. :)

Edit: Crap, this is Elucidus, on Amethyst's computer. Sorry, I will try and avoid that in the future. I forget sometimes.

COnsidering this game is for fun (and learning for me) if someone does wipe me out(highly likely) would it be possible that I could be left with just one city, more so I can look in on the rest of the game rather than anything else?

Probably. :)

Will be pernament aliance alowed ?

Definitely not. It unbalances the game too much.

COnsidering this game is for fun (and learning for me) if someone does wipe me out(highly likely) would it be possible that I could be left with just one city, more so I can look in on the rest of the game rather than anything else?

Maybe we should have vassals in but under a capitulation-only basis, and you can only use it to "surrender" to another guy clobbering you. Peaceful vassalizing allows too many exploits but perhaps allowing capitulation could work?

Maybe we should have vassals in but under a capitulation-only basis, and you can only use it to "surrender" to another guy clobbering you. Peaceful vassalizing allows too many exploits but perhaps allowing capitulation could work?

Seems good i would rather, serve to some one then to be destroyed.

I'd agree with this.

So can we get this party started? :run::run::run:

Yeah I want the party Now! :cry::cry::cry:

Looks like it won't be long now. :)

Game thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=7677766#post7677766