Pitboss Leaders

You can do that afterwards. I need someone to send (PM) me exactly the settings I will put it. We can do it so the PTBS randomly makes the map and we play or someone can review it or I can review it. Just let me know.
 
Size: Huge
Speed: Normal
Map: Big and Small
Additional Map Options: Islands enabled (normal size), Islands mixed in, temperate climate, medium sea level
Everything else left as defaults (huts on, barbarians on, tech trading on, random events on, vassalizing on but only allowed via direct warfare and if it is very obvious who the winner is)
Civs/Leaders: See hell_hounds list
 
Also remember to check Take Over AI and Simultaneous Turns in the multiplayer settings. (Though I'm sure you wouldn't forget anyway.) ;)

12 players in total:
Lord Parkin - Willem
DMOC - Huayna Capac
Plako - Mehmed
Joshua - Ramesses II
Dux_ - Ragnar
Scuum - Willem
hell_hound - Willem
Toch - Willem
Elucidus - Charlemagne
Amethyst - Catherine
Clamburger - Ragnar
Hercules - Elizabeth

I guess you'll also need to be very clear when posting that the game is up about WHO is WHICH Willem, so we don't get people logging into the wrong civs. Although actually, I guess it doesn't matter - all the Willems will be equally likely to have decent starting locations and the like, so it doesn't really matter which one each person picks. Just as long as people REMEMBER which one they logged into, so they don't log into TWO DIFFERENT Willems by mistake. Then we'd probably have to restart the game, which wouldn't be nice. ;)
 
I usually prefer the financial trait, even better with the organized trait, but I wanted to try something different and differ my play style.

EDIT: That's one reason I asked to be put on the less-experienced list, that and lack of multiplayer Civing.
Charlemagne is actually not too bad a leader. He's a slow starter, but once you get to Code of Laws and start building the Rathaus in all your cities, he becomes a beast. This guy was made for colossal empires. ;)

Not sure, I just don't consider myself an experienced player, I don't typically play single player, and play only a bit of multiplayer.

I imagine your propensity for making mistakes would be where the tag would apply.
Yeah, I'd agree with that. :)

Do we all need to decide our nation's names and passwords and stuff or is that done after it's set up?
You set a password when you first log into the game, and you can change your nation's name when you first log in as well. No need to do that beforehand. :)
 
Why don't we just name the civs, i'll be the vegetable empire :D
I'll be the Parkinstani empire, but as I said, we can do that when we each log into the game (just press "Esc" and go to the "Your Details" menu). ;)
 
Also don't forget Monarch difficulty for tech rate, barb activity and such. (unless that isn't important for some reason?)


On the game side, I kind of like being the only Spiritual leader. Choke on your anarchy, suckers!! Disappointed that Charismatic gets completely ignored yet again though... it's a good trait!
 
If we did it before hand we would know which willem to log into, and the same would apply for the 2 ragnars
 
Nice.:goodjob:

So a 23 hour turn timer to start with?

PS: Maybe we should have a new thread with all the rules and stuff and news about the game?
23 hours sounds good. Also, a thread where everything is in the same place in the first post would be good. :)

Also don't forget Monarch difficulty for tech rate, barb activity and such. (unless that isn't important for some reason?)
Nope, that's important - thanks, I almost forgot that. Every player should be set to Monarch. :)

If we did it before hand we would know which willem to log into, and the same would apply for the 2 ragnars
True. Might be good for Luc to post a list of which players are which then.
 
Sounds good, looking forward to it. :)
 
Normal continents
Time victory OFF (it's unlikely we'll ever get to that point, but if we do, I'd like to have the game continue if no one has won a victory condition yet)

I don't know about requiring complete kills. Any other opinions? Personally, I would like to have that option not ticked (the defalt setting). If there's anyone who's lost a city, there's no way they'll win. EDIT: See post #58.
 
I've seen an army large enough to take a city in the field, when a civ has fallen, and that army took another city a few turns later. An extreme example maybe, but I have seen it. This would be for those extreme examples or anyone that wants to watch the game with their last horse archer or worker running around seeing how their allies fair or learning from their neighbors. That is why I asked.

Other opinions?
 
I've seen an army large enough to take a city in the field, when a civ has fallen, and that army took another city a few turns later. An extreme example maybe, but I have seen it. This would be for those extreme examples or anyone that wants to watch the game with their last horse archer or worker running around seeing how their allies fair or learning from their neighbors. That is why I asked.
Hmm, alright, but we'll need to agree on a rule that players "just hanging on" (eg they only have a Spy or a Caravel or a Warrior or two left, and no cities/settlers) must remove the useless units from the game if requested. We can always post screenshot updates here in the forum so that anyone eliminated can watch things going on there. But players sticking in the game "just because" with only one or two useless units has the potential for extreme abuse (war weariness and motherland unhappiness never going away is the main thing I'm thinking of).

Personally, I would probably have suggested having Require Complete Kills off, but I guess it's okay if we have it on as long as we're all fair and reasonable around it. (Sticking around with a decent army is fine, sticking around with a couple of obsolete and useless units is not.)

As for the other stuff - Time Victory off, Normal Continents. Can't think of anything else right now. :)
 
Top Bottom