Tinkerbell
Prince
The is something I'm still not understanding. When I browse the multiplayer opties, I don't see a PitBoss option. So how is the game hosted? Or is just a always running direct IP game?
F.a.q.
- Thread starter General_W
- Start date
Krill
Deity
Basically the latter, you use direct ip to connect to the host PC that is running the game.
Tinkerbell
Prince
And how do I know when it's my turn? Do I get an email or some warning? Or do I need to check the server on a daily basis?
Krill
Deity
Maybe we'll just have a turn thread in the public forum that each team posts in when they have finished their turn so the next team know they can then play.
I suggest both civstats and a turn thread. When I tested sequential turns with civstats, it only sent an email when the entire turn finished, not to the team next to play. It shows the team which is playing now without an '*', and the other ones with '*' (despite later ones in the order having not actually played yet).
Tinkerbell
Prince
Uhh, what is civstats?
It is a program which keeps track of a pitboss game's status and uploads it to a web site. It shows the date, turn timer, scores, and summary of previous player actions. It also sends emails to players who register themselves to the game. And there is a diplomacy function like PMs, though that's not used very much.
Krill
Deity
Just wondering, but what were the arguments against simul turns again?
Joe Harker
1st in the Premiership!
yeah, but the expoilts associated with simulatanious turns arn't worth it
The exploits are easily dealt with through rules and reloads... I've played double digit pitbosses and never had a problem that wasn't possible to solve by rules or just reloading... If we do go simultanious turns the rules should be modified accordingly of course...
Tinkerbell
Prince
Thanks for the explanation, Dave.
I had severe misgivings about simultaneous turns, but after seeing the rules enforced in other places e.g. http://www.chaosciv.com/index.php/topic,255.0.html I'm no longer opposed to using it. It certainly would speed up the game.
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
come on people! Let's not rehash things that are already settled.A turn tracker thread worked great for PBEM - there's no reason it can't work great for PitBoss also.
Going from PBEM to sequential turns PitBoss is already going to be quite a move, and I think it'll be a bit shocking to PBEM veterans about how much it speeds things up and clamps down on discussion and diplomacy.
Going from PBEM all the way to simultaneous turns could quite possibly send me into MTDG conniptions!
The main argument (in my opinion) against simultaneous is turns is that SPEED is not the primary goal of an MTDG. Massive interactive diplomacy and thoughtful team-based strategy combined with the opportunity for role play is the reason we're even bothering with the MTDG format.
Speed is not helpful for that - in fact it hurts all those main reasons for having an MTDG.
If your main objective is to finish a Civ game in one month - there are much better options than this MTDG. If the speed is too fast, only a very select few will even be able to keep up with what's going on, and it'll eventually turn into just a 5 player game, not a 5 team game.
If this second Civ4 MTDG is decided to have been too slow after the fact, there's no reason the 3rd MTDG couldn't try out simultaneous turns... but in my view, this would be a profound mistake that strikes at the core of what makes an MTDG a different and therefore fun experience.
GeneralSimultanious turns is not mainly to speed up the game! It gives more time to each team(while also taking less time sure). With a timer of 120 hours, some of the turns will go a lot faster, however each time also got more time to discuss their actual situation for their turn, instead of just the situation before and/or after their turn... It also gives more time to fit into people's schedules and less possiblity of missed turns.
Lord Parkin
aka emperor
I presume you meant 120 hours.
But yes, I agree. A turn timer of 120 hours on a simultaneous pitboss would mean the same maximum turnaround time (5 days), but in the earlier stages of the game it would allow the less interesting turns to pass quicker if all teams have decided what they want to do within the first day or so of each turn. I'm in support of this option.
Krill
Deity
Speaking from the experience of the Apolyton BtSDG, so long as you define a double move effectively (which shouldn't be that hard, just say that you can't move a unit until 12 hours after you first moved it, with game admins discretion so that we could, say, blast through the first 20 turns quite quickly if we wanted to), then simul turns is perfectly OK. And the 72 turn time is fine for every team to play in even if the turnplayer is busy, and makes it easier for other people to log in and offer their views on a changing situation compared to a 24 hour turn timer in sequential which will make the game take longer.
Similar threads
