BtS multiplayer in OT

[IglooDame]

All,
As previously noted, next week I'm going to be getting a BtS pitboss game going. I've had a couple ideas, so I'm curious about what folks prefer and whether there will be enough early-BtS adopters to make either one doable.

CivIVor: BtS will be pretty much like its CivIVor: OT and CivIVor: Warlords predecessors - over a dozen players, no AIs, no teams. Unlike previous games I'll be mandating one rule, "doublemoves are allowed unless simultaneous with war declarations" and suggesting "no tech trading" and perhaps even "always war" in light of how the first two games went.

The second idea is a tournament. I should be able to run multiple small pitboss games (same IP, different port numbers) simultaneously on a single PC, so I'm thinking about simultaneous 3/4/5-player games (taking advantage of BtS' accelerated starts) where the winners go on to a (semi)final round. Such tournaments have failed before, but generally because they're PBEM and prone to non-completion. If they're running on pitboss and someone drops out (or just plays intermittently), the game continues and someone still wins.

So what say you?

 

[Whomp]

Tourney rules could be interesting. I like it.

 

[bhsup]

If I would still be welcomed after my abysmal performance in the other two, I'd be happy to. Will have BtS the day it is available. I understand, though, if my performance dictates I not play.

 

[TheBladeRoden]

What's a pitboss? Sounds like a guy who owns an illegal dogfighting ring.

 

[Whomp]

Pitboss is a MP game where you can have up to 18 players. Everyone plays their turn within a 24 hour limit. ID has been nice enough to be our MP host on a number of games.

 

[IglooDame]

What's a pitboss? Sounds like a guy who owns an illegal dogfighting ring.

Pitboss is an application that facilitates multiple human players in a Civ4 game (like GameSpy, except with more controls).

@VRWC: it'll be first come, first serve - but that aside, you lived longer than some other people in both games; your game performance may not have been earth-shaking but it was at least fair to middling.

 

[skadistic]

I up for a go. I've never played a multi player game against people not my girl.

 

[bhsup]

Hey, how about a "no tech trading" game! That's where I suck hind teat.

 

[Urederra]

Is it possible to follow the game if you don't participate?

 

[amaterasu]

I'm game ( gettit?) Will probably get BtS as soon as it's out ><

 

[Perfection]

How about we have like a Civ3 OT game, because OTers like me don't have fancy dancy gaming comps.

 

[Fifty]

Every moment I'm civving is a moment I'm not OTing. Hence, NO CIV FOR FIFTY

 

[Whomp]

How about we have like a Civ3 OT game, because OTers like me don't have fancy dancy gaming comps.

The problem is PBEMs move too slow compared to pitboss. The MTDG kind of covers that type of game too.

 

[Abaddon]

Down with cIV itchforks:

You know how i love the new civ...

 

[ComradeDavo]

Ah crap I only voted for the top option. Sign me up for the civ tournemnent as well!!! In fact just sign me up for every bts pitboss game you start!

I pre-ordered the game earlier today

(btw fellow Brits tis only &#163;14.99 on amazon.co.uk)

One thing though, for the main game I am opposed to 'always war' because it's bad for us players who don't always go for warfare in single player games....no tech trading would be fine with me though.

 

[classical_hero]

I would waist for a the game to start sometime after the first patch arrives. I doubt that I would get it when out, but I should be able to get it in August though.

 

[IglooDame]

How about we have like a Civ3 OT game, because OTers like me don't have fancy dancy gaming comps.

Sure, but as I haven't played Civ3 in a couple years and have no intention of reinstalling it, you're not likely to see me organizing that sort of game.

Ah crap I only voted for the top option. Sign me up for the civ tournemnent as well!!! In fact just sign me up for every bts pitboss game you start!

I pre-ordered the game earlier today

(btw fellow Brits tis only £14.99 on amazon.co.uk)

One thing though, for the main game I am opposed to 'always war' because it's bad for us players who don't always go for warfare in single player games....no tech trading would be fine with me though.

'always war' doesn't necessarily require one to be attacking others, you can still do diplo with them, you just can't trade/gift resources, gp, units, or cities.

I would waist for a the game to start sometime after the first patch arrives. I doubt that I would get it when out, but I should be able to get it in August though.

I'll be carefully checking (and perhaps contributing to) the initial pitboss reviews, if something shows up as seriously broken, I'll put both these games on ice till the patch arrives.

 

[ComradeDavo]

'always war' doesn't necessarily require one to be attacking others, you can still do diplo with them, you just can't trade/gift resources, gp, units, or cities.

It's more that at the start of the game I prefer to have people at peace and for wars to come later when people have been given a chance to establish themselves kinda thing

 

[azzaman333]

I'll have myself BtS within 12 hours if I'm really lucky, and within 24 if EB Australia isn't lying about release date.

Any MP game sonds good to me.

I wouldn't recommend AW and prefer against No Tech Trades, since they take out significant parts of diplomacy and relies a lot more on lucky starts. However I'm not all that picky.

If I would still be welcomed after my abysmal performance in the other two, I'd be happy to. Will have BtS the day it is available. I understand, though, if my performance dictates I not play.

You've survived a lot longer than many other civs in both games. You cant be all that bad.

 

[amaterasu]

"(btw fellow Brits tis only &#163;14.99 on amazon.co.uk)"

*goes to amazon, thanks for the deal! I don't like no tech trading either.