Anybody Game For a New Epic Game?

[Bowsling]

The title is kinda self-explanatory. Would anybody want to play a standard-sized epic PBEM? There seems to be a bit if a shortage of them.

I am also working on a detailed ruleset of banned exploits and things like that, so we won't have the same rules issues of previous games.

 

[Elephantium]

What I wrote in the Wars of Italy thread applies to this game, too -- I'm interested in playing another, but I'm not interested in another game that languishes for weeks at a time while players neglect the save.

 

[Calis]

The title is kinda self-explanatory. Would anybody want to play a standard-sized epic PBEM? There seems to be a bit if a shortage of them.

I am also working on a detailed ruleset of banned exploits and things like that, so we won't have the same rules issues of previous games.

Frankly speaking Bowsling. Why are you interested in starting another PBEM game right now? You are rather slow in the ones that you are participating in now.

I know that currently I am not the fastest, too, but that will change again.

So in my opinion you should only start one if you have the time to play it quickly. (Basically what Elephantium said). If you promise to improve your pace, I will be in, too.

And please no accellerated production. It's horrible.

 

[RickFGS]

I´d play too, that is, if it´s ok with everyone that is...

 

[Bowsling]

Frankly speaking Bowsling. Why are you interested in starting another PBEM game right now? You are rather slow in the ones that you are participating in now.

I know that currently I am not the fastest, too, but that will change again.

So in my opinion you should only start one if you have the time to play it quickly. (Basically what Elephantium said). If you promise to improve your pace, I will be in, too.

And please no accellerated production. It's horrible.

Yes. The summer was busy, I admit. And I just got a new laptop, which has created some delays in the last week. (As a side note, does anybody know of a way to keep the disc data in the computer so that I don't have to insert the disc every time I play?).

I hope to get back into playing regularly in the next weeks. I have also (for the most part) given up on SGs, so that should give me some more time for PBEMs.

And yes, I agree about accelerated production.

What kinf of map would we want? A random one, or one created by a non-player?

 

[RickFGS]

Do you want to try my map? check my sig for the clean version, it´s 362x362, so it´s ok for an epic...

 

[Bowsling]

I want to get around to trying it... but not in PBEM with a maximum of eight players.

If there was a smaller version, then it would be tempting.

 

[Calis]

I want to get around to trying it... but not in PBEM with a maximum of eight players.

If there was a smaller version, then it would be tempting.

I sincerely aree. We should not have more than 4 players in a PBEM. And such a huge map, well...

 

[RickFGS]

I have a sugestion, how about a 4 player PBEM with 8 human players? how? 4 teams with 2 players each, within each team the two players would rotate their play turns (say each other turn), this would allow for more players to participate in a single PBEM game, create more discussion within each team, and prevent long absent times (because there is always a replacement per civ).

 

[I. Larkin]

I have a sugestion, how about a 4 player PBEM with 8 human players? how? 4 teams with 2 players each, within each team the two players would rotate their play turns (say each other turn), this would allow for more players to participate in a single PBEM game, create more discussion within each team, and prevent long absent times (because there is always a replacement for a civ, having two players per civ).

good idea, but, probably 3 teams better for faster rotation? and 6 civs, two for each team?

 

[Calis]

I fear that a team of players might be slower than a single player.

I prefer to play on my own.

 

[I. Larkin]

You may play your own for 2 civ and have a friend who can substitute you just in case.

 

[Glasnost]

To get best of both worlds, could it be like 6 players with 3 locked alliances? That way everyone can build their own empire the way they wish but in cases of absence the allied player will be always available for sub.

 

[Bowsling]

We tried that in ToW, but it didn't end up working out. If we have locked alliances, he map might be even more unfair, with a team starting close to each other having a considerable advantage over any team with a Civ on each continent. Although this could be mitigated with a custom map made by a non-player.

 

[Lanzelot]

(As a side note, does anybody know of a way to keep the disc data in the computer so that I don't have to insert the disc every time I play?).

Use the patch in post #1 of this discussion: http://www.civforum.de/showthread.php?t=29799

It's an official No-CD patch from Fireaxis, which they had to release in Germany, because some of the distributed CDs stopped working after installing 1.22...
Works for the English version of C3C as well.

 

[Glasnost]

For my part I just mainly want to be part of any game since I am not part of anything at the moment. Don't care that much if it's custom made map, epic map or scenario.

And I agree with Calis on the single player part. I'd prefer much more to be able to decide things on my own and wouldn't to be a burden to someone way more experienced than me.

Maybe we could have a some kind of poll about the prefered map, scenario or something? We seem to have about 5-6 players who are willing to take part in atleast one new PBEM.

 

[Bowsling]

Use the patch in post #1 of this discussion: http://www.civforum.de/showthread.php?t=29799

It's an official No-CD patch from Fireaxis, which they had to release in Germany, because some of the distributed CDs stopped working after installing 1.22...
Works for the English version of C3C as well.

Awesome, thanks!