A Diplomatic Story Telling FFA.

[Kyp Durron]

I want to try something new. And to start discussion of the idea with those interested.

The Idea:

A highly diplomacy based free for all multiplayer game. At a slow playing speed, probably epic. The main idea behind the game, is to create stories and tales about your civilization and the other civilizations, barbarians, city states, whatever that you and your civ runs into during the game. Every unit could be its own story even, your first warrior the great William Wallace, or whatever fictional idea you would like to invoke.

Now I believe their should be rules in place for this game to flourish. Every player would play to keep the game somewhat balanced. No wars of annihilation, but rather wars for certain cities, locations, resources, proxy wars, etc. If you try and run away with the game by killing off another player, the other civs would respond by attacking you back.

Now, thoughts on if this would be best played as a PBEM or a Multi Session MP experience? If its MP we are limited to 6 players. With 8 and CS and Barbs on lag will be redic.

If its PBEM I would say we limit at 8. But to start the game we would play out the first 100 turns online.

There would be a separate thread for the stories of this game and all players would be required to write fun interesting stories. It would be located in the storys and tales forum.


So to start I guess: Rule suggestions for the balance of the game?


And sign ups for those interested:
1. Kyp Durron
2. Wapamingo
3. Tabernak
4. Turjo
5. D!ck VII
6. HarryLime
?
?

 

[wapamingo]

I am interested in trying this out.

However, play times are limited so PBEM is preferable (never played PBEM so guidence when we get there, assuming I am in, and its PBEM).

Cheers.

 

[Kyp Durron]

To be honest I've haven't tried it either so far. But I'm confidant we can figure it out. Still, the first 100 turns would need to be played online, as to start those quick fast early turns on pbem would not be very fun.

 

[Tabarnak]

I'm in!

PBEM is like playing non simultaneous turns?

 

[Turjo]

I think this is a great idea and am very interested in participating. I think that PBEM is the best choice for such a long-term game as it would be difficult to continually bring together different players consistently.

Would all victory conditions still be enabled? If it is a PBEM, then the game speed is already going to considerable slower. That will be doubly enhanced on epic or marathon speed. I'm ok with such a pace, but I just wanted to point out that a 8 player PBEM will already be very slow. I like the idea of playing out the first 100 or so turns in one setting just to get the game quickly established. I don't know if it is possible to turn a multiplayer game into a hotseat mid game though. hmmmm. If we do play it on a slower speed, would we still start off in the ancient era?

I really like this idea and have already started a similar thread documenting my games here. Unfortunately, the quick speed of the game didn't allow me to delve as deep as I wanted into the smaller decisions that shaped the overall outcome. A PBEM game would help document and analyze decisions in more detail and provide a good entertaining story, I think.

 

[D!CK_VII]

i'll sign up.

 

[HarryLime]

I would love to be involved in this. I've definitely followed some of the Civ 4 diplogames and they're fantastic.

Count me in. PBEM is also preferable for me.

 

[Kyp Durron]

I think this is a great idea and am very interested in participating. I think that PBEM is the best choice for such a long-term game as it would be difficult to continually bring together different players consistently.

Would all victory conditions still be enabled? If it is a PBEM, then the game speed is already going to considerable slower. That will be doubly enhanced on epic or marathon speed. I'm ok with such a pace, but I just wanted to point out that a 8 player PBEM will already be very slow. I like the idea of playing out the first 100 or so turns in one setting just to get the game quickly established. I don't know if it is possible to turn a multiplayer game into a hotseat mid game though. hmmmm. If we do play it on a slower speed, would we still start off in the ancient era?

I really like this idea and have already started a similar thread documenting my games here. Unfortunately, the quick speed of the game didn't allow me to delve as deep as I wanted into the smaller decisions that shaped the overall outcome. A PBEM game would help document and analyze decisions in more detail and provide a good entertaining story, I think.

Very nice, thats almost exactly what I am looking for. Actually you might have a point about the MP to PBEM game saving issues. Ill check on that soon.

If thats the case, we would play this as a straight up PBEM game. And yeah, the pace would be slow.... But interesting

 

[Turjo]

One thing that we might consider implementing to help keep the game balanced is a Civ IV-style UN.

It can be done over email or in a forum. The secretary general can serve a term of 50? turns and introduces measures for everyone to vote on during his term. Measures can pass with either a majority vote or maybe a 60% favorable vote...something like that.

Around turn 40 of every cycle, players can announce they want to run for secretary general, then we can hold a vote at turn 45 and then the new secretary general takes over on turn 50.

I don't think it would give too much power to any secretary general since resolutions will only pass with the votes from the players. I think it would add another level of diplomacy to the game and help organize the world against any one player that tries to run away with it.

 

[wapamingo]

Any thoughts on map config?

I don't have any preferences, but recommend sparse resource setting.

 

[HarryLime]

I would really love to be a part of this if you wouldn't mind putting me on the list. I'm fine with any settings/rules you guys choose.

I do think a terra map or anything with a New World lends a bit of mid game strategy to shake things up. Colonies might allow players who have been stalling to catch upnor gain an advantage.

I like the idea of a UN, but I think it might want to be something we want to organize naturally in game. The process of that alliance is something that might add to the story.

I really think these games will balance themselves out naturally. If someone goes all hitler on someone and starts tryig to wipe people out it's not going to be long before the rest of the world gangs up on them.

 

[rkelle7]

I think we should finish exactly what you are talking about on civfanatics before you start another game...But that's just me!

-AwesoMe

 

[Kyp Durron]

I think we should finish exactly what you are talking about on civfanatics before you start another game...But that's just me!

-AwesoMe

Go away And this is much more in depth that that game will be.

I would really love to be a part of this if you wouldn't mind putting me on the list. I'm fine with any settings/rules you guys choose.

I do think a terra map or anything with a New World lends a bit of mid game strategy to shake things up. Colonies might allow players who have been stalling to catch upnor gain an advantage.

I like the idea of a UN, but I think it might want to be something we want to organize naturally in game. The process of that alliance is something that might add to the story.

I really think these games will balance themselves out naturally. If someone goes all hitler on someone and starts tryig to wipe people out it's not going to be long before the rest of the world gangs up on them.

Oops, thought I added your name to the list

I tend to agree about the UN idea etc.

 

[Kyp Durron]

I have a notion to to figure out if one of the true start location world maps would work for this game. THAT would make this into a great story telling event.

Another idea, is to disable all victory conditions except for time. That way we can play this game to its true nature, not so much to win, but to create a diplogame.

 

[HarryLime]

As stated before, I will, of course, be excited about whatever the rules end up being. Are you talking about a huge earth map, where 8 human players would play along with a bunch of AIs?

I do think playing on an earth map takes a lot of mystery out of the game. I think that early period of exploring is one of the most fun.

I also think victory conditions lend a bit of urgency to the game. If we're playing on Epic speed (or even standard) through PBEM, it seems like this game is going to take like 8 months as it is.

But the real question is: when can we get started?

 

[Tabarnak]

I suggest to wait before starting a game. A future patch is coming, probably before Chrismas.

 

[Kyp Durron]

Yes, probably best to put a hold on this until the new patch pops out... In the meantime we can work on settings, map, etc

 

[Turjo]

I think the real earth map would be good if we can get real start locations, otherwise my preference would be terra or a continent map, standard size.

I'm good with any speed standard or slower.

If we do a slower speed, would anyone want to start a period or two ahead?

 

[D!CK_VII]

here is my only concern being an avid civ4 PBEMer. hotseat for pbem is not user friendly and everyone should run their own test game so they know the mechanics. this is NOT like civ4 where there was an adim password and if a player dropped out he could be replaced. a player drops and the game is over. i can see someone getting jumped early lose their second city get pissing and you nvr here from them again. YOU MUST BE COMMITTED, WIN OR LOSE.

 

[stazba]

hi all.

just a quick question. Any guides for how to do PBEM? My searchfu is weak. I haven't played multiplayer before (my times always tend to conflict as I am on Beijing time + a family man), but the thought a long/drawn out diplo game, that I can come to via mail at certain times appeals greatly.

If anybody can lead me to a guide, and if people don't mind starting till Mid January (on holiday for XMAS) I would like to throw my hat in.