Minor points on your ettiquette section:
Wholesale changes to build are definitely called for in certain circumstances. Usually however these circumstances are discussed - such as a decision to go to war.
I also think it quite appropriate to switch builds when you have a strong and valid reason to do so. However, then you should supply a good reason for your decision in the log. The player before you may learn something new. (like the time you switched all my library builds to settlers, rushed them and got the domination victory in 1 turn instead of the 5 it would have taken me
)
In other words, build changes are not forbidden, even on a larger scale, however it should be discussed ahead of time if it is a change in emphasis or direction of the game or specific reasons for changing said build should be clearly stated so that players can learn (this will most often occur when a skilled player follows one who is learning the game).
One of the key points of succesion games is that people do have different ways of playing which teaches one different ways of approachign the game.
Another etiquette point: Read any previous discussion and the previous players turn. (hopefully said player summarized very important parts in the final notes). This will avoid having good plans started by one player continuing with the next.
------------------------
One use of govenors: Keeping cities that you are suppressing resistance to rioting seems an exceptable use. They should be turned off at the end of a player turn (so the next player can decide).
I have also seen that empasize X (not govenor -but on same screen - it tells whether to emphasize food or shields) seems allowed.
----------------------------------
I also think there are definitely times when making trades on your last turn is called for. If you feel an attack is a good idea next turn and want to get a tech so the units can be upgraded before the war starts, then by all means trade for that tech.
Also obvious trades might as well be done by the first player. It is only when the trades may be in doubt or the trades determine the direction of the game that it really needs to be discussed/left to the next player. I am sure this varies from player to player.
----------------------------
Another nice ettiquette. Don't leave significant units like leaders fortified. Other problems are things like workers fortified in town, boats fortified, etc.
-------------
Another two:
If something comes up during your turns that is a difficult decision, then it is completely appropriate to stop playing so a discussion can occur on the best path to follow.
Be polite and constructive on you comments on game play. (if your sentence starts: "Who was the goober-nose that ... "; its a bad sign).
--------------------
Anyway good luck to ya all. Unfortunately, my SG schedule is too full to join at the moment.
Wholesale changes to build are definitely called for in certain circumstances. Usually however these circumstances are discussed - such as a decision to go to war.
I also think it quite appropriate to switch builds when you have a strong and valid reason to do so. However, then you should supply a good reason for your decision in the log. The player before you may learn something new. (like the time you switched all my library builds to settlers, rushed them and got the domination victory in 1 turn instead of the 5 it would have taken me
)In other words, build changes are not forbidden, even on a larger scale, however it should be discussed ahead of time if it is a change in emphasis or direction of the game or specific reasons for changing said build should be clearly stated so that players can learn (this will most often occur when a skilled player follows one who is learning the game).
One of the key points of succesion games is that people do have different ways of playing which teaches one different ways of approachign the game.
Another etiquette point: Read any previous discussion and the previous players turn. (hopefully said player summarized very important parts in the final notes). This will avoid having good plans started by one player continuing with the next.
------------------------
One use of govenors: Keeping cities that you are suppressing resistance to rioting seems an exceptable use. They should be turned off at the end of a player turn (so the next player can decide).
I have also seen that empasize X (not govenor -but on same screen - it tells whether to emphasize food or shields) seems allowed.
----------------------------------
I also think there are definitely times when making trades on your last turn is called for. If you feel an attack is a good idea next turn and want to get a tech so the units can be upgraded before the war starts, then by all means trade for that tech.
Also obvious trades might as well be done by the first player. It is only when the trades may be in doubt or the trades determine the direction of the game that it really needs to be discussed/left to the next player. I am sure this varies from player to player.
----------------------------
Another nice ettiquette. Don't leave significant units like leaders fortified. Other problems are things like workers fortified in town, boats fortified, etc.
-------------
Another two:
If something comes up during your turns that is a difficult decision, then it is completely appropriate to stop playing so a discussion can occur on the best path to follow.
Be polite and constructive on you comments on game play. (if your sentence starts: "Who was the goober-nose that ... "; its a bad sign).
--------------------
Anyway good luck to ya all. Unfortunately, my SG schedule is too full to join at the moment.
![[ptw]](/images/smilies/ptw.gif "PTW Icon [ptw]")
1.27f, then that's one excuse I can shoot down. The downloads install as a scenario for 
