What do you want in a Pitboss Game?

Different kinds of multiplayer options in Civ IV can lend themselves to different kinds of games since they'll tend to draw a different sort of player temperment. The Small Pangea, Quick, Blazing Turns Gamespy game with 3 players is going to be a very different beast than the Huge Terra, Normal, 9 player PBEM. In the first they players will barely talk to each other, and in the second there might be several pages of diplomatic emails for every turn played.

Where does Pitboss fit in? Are the players who sign up for one of these looking for a game to win at all costs like so much MP? A role playing game to influence, like may happen in the Diplo Games over at 'Poly? Something in the middle? Do these players tend to want balanced starts with access to all the metals for everyone? Enough Oil to ensure everybody has some, or maps that offer the possiblity for monopolies or duopolies for a few key resources? Would playing an Island Civ until Astronomy comes along, and seeing how things develop from that point be something that a Pitboss player is possibly going to enjoy? What if you have a neighbor in a continent like Australia, with no contact till the Middle Ages, but it's a 12 player game? Or should every player have a few neighbors at first? Or should we always have pangeas?

How do these things change if the game is advertised as having a few joint playing sessions, or as being nothing more than the storage for the save, to be played no more than once a day?

I'm interested in hearing about the kind of gaming experience that people want to get from Pitboss games, and about the experiences people in pitboss games have already had. I'll weigh in myself later on, but for now this post is long enough and has enough questions floating around for people to play with, I think.

-Fosse

Fosse said:

I'm interested in hearing about the kind of gaming experience that people want to get from Pitboss games, and about the experiences people in pitboss games have already had. I'll weigh in myself later on, but for now this post is long enough and has enough questions floating around for people to play with, I think.

Click to expand...

My experiences so far have shown me two basic categories of players. You have those who are the "power gamers" who are on a drive to win and see little point in playing if they perceive themselves as losing. Diplomacy is usually limited. Then there are those who I will call the "role-playing" type who are interested in playing a nation and see where it takes them regardless of whether they win or not.

Now obviously that's a generalization and people may even be some combination of the two. However, what I would like to play in is a "role-playing" type game where there is lots of diplomacy going on and where it feels as much as possible as if we were in an actual world. Each nation making its own goals and then trying to achieve them...etc, etc. I like the 1 turn a day philosophy so PitBoss with a 24 hr timer with perhaps 1 real time session with all players to speed things along at game start. No special management of resources since life isn't always fair and some nations are naturally going to start off in a better position than others. "Normal" speed seems to work well for this type of scenario although I see the value of a slower game so each era of military units is not obsoleted so quickly. I have yet to play a Pangea map in MP but I did play the Archipelago and found it rather limiting as far as development and access to other nations. For this reason, I think I still prefer the variety offered by the normal Terra type.

I am hosting 1 PitBoss game right now in fact which is close to the above but which really only has 2 roleplayers in it. I think for my next one I'd like to try to fill it with as many as possible.

Bernout

I'm currently running a 16-player pitboss game, 24hr turns. I've learned a couple things so far, and we've just barely gotten to tech-trading:

- have people test out the connection prior to actually launching the game, it saves on frustration, enables you to tech support the folks who initially don't configure their firewalls correctly, and seems to weed out the annoyingly impatient folks.

- get everyone's email address via pm, people seem to commit a little better; anyone can post "I'm in" in a thread but once they've emailed you they remember better.

- if you're going to have a "hurry session" at the start of a 24hr turn yearlong game, consider scheduling it when you first announce the game. CFC being a very multinational place, you'll have a single Australian or Indian or whatever (someone on a very different timezone than most others) that won't ordinarily be able to make a hurry session, and you'll either not have a session or leave one or two hanging.

- accept alternates. You'll almost certainly have openings after the first few turns or the hurry session.

Bernout, I feel a lot like you do. I think I fit into the "roleplay-light" category. I want the game to feel like a group of nations working for their own good, but also with a sort of "real world" set of thoughts behind them, even though I conduct most of my emails casually and only make my big "proclamations" in a way that seems "in character." One thing I've considered to make these games play out that way is having Space Race victory disabled, since once people can build Apollo the game degenerates into a race which can be fun against the AI, but I imagine would be pretty obnoxious in a multi-player pitboss game at the pace of one turn per day.

If one player starts wiping out another, then in a "Power- gamer" game everyone wants to attack the aggressor from the rear, or attack the defender once his back is broken. If the guy being attacked has been a good trading partner for me then I might seriously consider trying to broker a peace, or sending my own units in to help him secure his resources and fight back, even though those are not in the best interests towards my "winning." So I can choose to be a Peacekeeper -- which is a roleplay decision -- without having to write character stories explaining why I've done it -- which is DiploGame (which I have great respect for, but have to classify as "Roleplay-Ultra-Heavy-Beyond-Human-Endurance" )

I'm trying to generate a list of "house rules" for games that I host to try to make them as much like that as possible without forcing role-play down people's throats.

One thing I'm considering is soliciting someone to build a map that will have interesting features built into it, like resource clusters that can lead to either border skirmishes or trade cartels, natural landscape features that can make logical borders, interesting islands with precious resources. Aside from the fact that it promises nobody starts on an 8 tiles tundra island, it might make some interesting games.

IglooDude, those sound like great suggestions. I won't be ready to start until after I move, since taking the game down for three days in the first two weeks would be obnoxious to the players, but when I do I'll take your advice.

I would just be happy if there where more pitboss games available to play

Sending own units in order to help some one agains agressor you afraid will become to powerfull is often in your own interest.

I've got to agree with portuga. There aren't many people out there with the resources to host pitboss games.

That's a sad truth about the number of available games. However, as I've learned it actually takes very little to host a Pitboss beyond a willingness to leave your computer on all day. I have never been one for administrating anything on a computer, but I'm already hosting one Pitboss and getting ready to start another in about a week (don't want to start it now because I am going to move on the 29th, but keep your eyes open for the sign up thread).

It's really not a resource issue, and you don't need a dedicated computer for the server. I am using the same computer that I use to surf the net all day, work from, play SP Civ, watch movies, run my CAD program, and make my turns on my Pitboss games with. I just make sure to reboot it now and again before I got to bed so it doesn't crash overnight. After each reboot I run Pitboss, then run PBnotify, then forget about it.

The best thing I can say to anyone who wants more Pitboss games is to just start hosting one yourself, and to post on the forums for help and guidance from people who have got them going successfully.



It has also occured to me that if your computer can only be online for, say, 8 hours a day that you could start a Pitboss game with an 8 hour turn timer and just be very clear in the sign up thread that it will only be available from 9-5 every day, or whatever. There will still be one turn per day that way, and it will let people host games who don't want to or can't leave their PC running 24 hours a day for some reason.

I wonder how much of a market there would be in doing commercial pitboss hosting; such that anyone wanting to administer/run a pitboss game could pay (say) $5/month or $10/game (if less than a month) to have it run on a commercial server with dedicated maintenance?

There a few posts about this, I think there'll be a few people interested as that's probably less than the power bill for running a computer full time would come to.

I have been thinking about offering some sort of thing like that, hosting it off of my dedicated server on my fast DSL connection. Perhaps $4 a month or so. It would work well alongside my WebStats Project. But... I don't think I'll end up doing it. The problem is each Pitboss instance takes up a lot of memory and CPU cycles (when it shouldn't) so you'd only be able to run a handful of games off one box.

Fosse said:

If one player starts wiping out another, then in a "Power- gamer" game everyone wants to attack the aggressor from the rear, or attack the defender once his back is broken. If the guy being attacked has been a good trading partner for me then I might seriously consider trying to broker a peace, or sending my own units in to help him secure his resources and fight back, even though those are not in the best interests towards my "winning." So I can choose to be a Peacekeeper -- which is a roleplay decision -- without having to write character stories explaining why I've done it -- which is DiploGame (which I have great respect for, but have to classify as "Roleplay-Ultra-Heavy-Beyond-Human-Endurance" )

Click to expand...

Yep, this is exactly what I'm talking about. In a game I'm playing right now as the Germans, I helped out the Spanish who were the only ones on my continent who weren't planning on ganging up against me since I got ahead on points (wish there was a way to disable that). Anyhow, the Spanish survived and I'm in a dominant position and have sworn to keep them alive to the end of the game even though I could speed up a domination win greatly by taking them out.

I guess I'm almost looking for the heavy RP game since I enjoy the interaction between nations and the resulting propaganda that takes place.

BTW, forgot to mention a couple of house rules that we use which I'm curious if anyone else bothers with. The first is a no back-to-back turns rule if you are at war with someone. Basically the idea is you give them 12 hours or so in order to get a turn in. This results in a more turn based approach to warfare. The second is we limit out of game coordination to only what you could type in game via the mechanisms there. Anything else needs to be done in game via map trading, alliances, etc.

Bernout

I like the reasonable effort to allow the other warring party to have his turn.

I'm actually in favor of belligerents sort of working out an informal agreement about when they're each most likely to play their turn, and having them work it out from there. That way the guy who logs on eight times a day doesn't get to move twice every turn, while the guy who checks at exactly 7:30 every morning gets routed in every battle.

A house rule I'm thinking of having on my server when it's up is a mandatory Cease Fire agreement for any player who alerts the group ahead of time that he'll be out of town for a few days. Players should have complete freedom to camp in each others' territory and move around behind the already established frontline. So you could send more troops, maneuver, and continue blocking tiles, but no fighting.

Bernout, you might really want to check the Diplogames at Apolyton. They are extreme RP. Also, I think you'll enjoy my play style, so keep your eyes peeled for my recruiting thread (still a ways off... I'm moving next week).

As far as in game information sharing and deals, I would always allow the sharing of any information by any means so long as that information could have been communicated verbally, so long as the game rules do not explicitly deny the sharing of such information.

So discussing technology info before either party has reached Alphabet or map info about unrevealed tiles before one party has researched Paper would be off limits. But emailing a picture of lands that the other player has already uncovered, even before Paper, would be okay because you could have theoretically told him verbally what units and cities were there. Once Paper is reserached I see no reason to not allow the trading of any screenshots whatsoever, as they cannot possibly contain data that could not have been verbally communicated.

I would also never want to prohibit alliances or defensive pacts before the required techs in the tech tree. That would just be silly in an MP environment.

Fosse said:

Once Paper is reserached I see no reason to not allow the trading of any screenshots whatsoever, as they cannot possibly contain data that could not have been verbally communicated.

Click to expand...

I strongly disagree with this one. In the game I'm playing right now, one of the nations has declared war on me and is assaulting my territory, but he seems to be telling the other nations a different story. Without actually having units in our territory, those other nations have no proof who is lying, and I think that's a great element. If I were allowed to just take a screenshot to show that he's in my territory, we would lose that sense of "You can't proove anything in 900 AD."

Just my two cents.

That's a very interesting wrinkle, and something I'll have to consider. It shounds like a lot of fun, too! And the house rule I proposed above would make it unavailable for anyone who isn't a photoshop junkie.

The thing about screenshots that is great is that you can send a great deal of information very easily. Particuarly in an instance of planning a joint war or dividing up an unowned continent for settlement (or an owned one for conquest!).

Perhaps a workable compromise would be that sharing screen shots of known territory in Bare Map mode should be allowed up until the Industrial Age. That means you can draw on the map and say things like, "Seriously, these are where his armies are," and he can still deny it plausibly. Once a particular tech is reached (perhaps Radio) then the sharing of any screenshots could be allowed.

Fosse said:

A house rule I'm thinking of having on my server when it's up is a mandatory Cease Fire agreement for any player who alerts the group ahead of time that he'll be out of town for a few days. Players should have complete freedom to camp in each others' territory and move around behind the already established frontline. So you could send more troops, maneuver, and continue blocking tiles, but no fighting.

Click to expand...

Hmm...hadn't really considered this one before. Having to go out of town while you are at war is a tricky situation. Most of the people in my current game would just turn it over to the AI or queue up a bunch of orders and let the 24 hr timer expire. The latter of course isn't very good for conducting a war. Personally, I'd find someone who had Civ 4 who wasn't in the game and have them run it for me if at all possible.

What does everyone else currently do on their servers?

Bernout, you might really want to check the Diplogames at Apolyton. They are extreme RP. Also, I think you'll enjoy my play style, so keep your eyes peeled for my recruiting thread (still a ways off... I'm moving next week).

Click to expand...

I'll check both of those out...thanks!

So discussing technology info before either party has reached Alphabet or map info about unrevealed tiles before one party has researched Paper would be off limits. But emailing a picture of lands that the other player has already uncovered, even before Paper, would be okay because you could have theoretically told him verbally what units and cities were there. Once Paper is reserached I see no reason to not allow the trading of any screenshots whatsoever, as they cannot possibly contain data that could not have been verbally communicated.

Click to expand...

Screen shots was the major concern on all the discussions I was involved in. That was what resulted in the "text only" out of game coordination; i.e. no screen shots at all. If you wanted to get across map information you'd need Paper researched and then do it in game.

I would also never want to prohibit alliances or defensive pacts before the required techs in the tech tree. That would just be silly in an MP environment.

Click to expand...

No argument here. I apologize if my comments were misleading in that respect. I only meant you could get the in game benefits after the appropriate techs are available and the agreements are made.

Bernout

Fosse said:

I like the reasonable effort to allow the other warring party to have his turn.

Click to expand...

I am yet to enter into war in a pitboss game, was one of the fixes in the latest patch a way of preventing this.

"randomized processing order when multiple players try to move on the same turn slice"

mickeyj said:

I am yet to enter into war in a pitboss game, was one of the fixes in the latest patch a way of preventing this.

"randomized processing order when multiple players try to move on the same turn slice"

Click to expand...

It's a problem when "simultaneous turns" are set, the pitboss server really doesn't have any shot at imposing a processing order in the following example:

Civ A logs in and does his turn at 3PM

Civ B logs in, declares war on A, and does his turn at 4PM.

Civ C logs in, does his turn at 5PM, and as he's the last one to do his turn, the next turn starts. Civ C does his next turn.

Civ B logs in and does his turn at 6PM.

Civ A logs in at 7PM, and finds that he's at war and B's units are two moves inside his borders.

But, not running simultaneous turns slows down PTBS games down to PBEM speeds.

Our rule is "no double-turning an opponent when it matters." Mostly I'm keeping an eye for someone waiting until the end of the turn to move, initiating the next turn, then immediately moving again if they're starting or already in any kind of war.

And yeah, no maps before Paper (which I define as screenshotting, you can tell someone "hey Tokugawa is a bit south of Saladin"), no tech talk before Alphabet, no outside player-to-player talk before in-game contact is made.

And Bernout, I play the same way - though I don't call it RPing, just playing honorably.

IglooDude said:

But, not running simultaneous turns slows down PTBS games down to PBEM speeds.

Click to expand...

Yes and no. It's true that it slows it down but usually it's only a small # of people who are forced to wait. If you consider 2 people at war, one is going to always be going first and can still do his turn whenever he likes. It's only the person going second after turn start who needs to wait. As is the nature of PTBS with a timer, you are guaranteed to get 1 turn in a day with a 24 hour timer (for example).

The biggest problem we've had with this rule is accidents. Things like queuing up a movement order the previous turn and then logging in "early" to do misc things and having the movement order take place. Or a guy who destroyed some roads because he didn't think any of my units were in the area. Both of these of course are easily preventable and I tell people to just not log in until you are 100% free to do what you want.

And yeah, no maps before Paper (which I define as screenshotting, you can tell someone "hey Tokugawa is a bit south of Saladin"), no tech talk before Alphabet, no outside player-to-player talk before in-game contact is made.

And Bernout, I play the same way - though I don't call it RPing, just playing honorably.

Click to expand...

I need to start making a list.

Bernout