[Immersioneers] 'A New Frontier': sign-up thread for the second Immersioneer game!

The lobby's up and I'm trying to invite people... Aren't you able to join for some reason?

EDIT: I can invite people now it seems, but not a lot of folks are online as of yet. No biggie; we can always wait a while after the 'official' time to start the game (not too long though).
 
Last edited:
Sorry about departing early, but my dog's don't walk themselves.

I thought the game was way too slow and needed Teamspeak to speed up chat.

Have fun fighting over my empire!
 
Well, the game's over now (after 9 hours :eek:); here are some observations:

- We played on a Standard size Pangaea with a Low sea level. The map had way too much space for some civs, yet it crammed others in a small corner. Clearly the spawn algorithm is wonky, and/or designed for single player. The best way to solve this issue would be to use a pre-made map: that way we can know exactly how large it is and where everyone spawns (ideally, where it's *possible* to spawn, not the actual places, before exploring them). Supposedly the 'Fruitymod' has some good mp maps available; I will check them out in the coming week and post my thoughts about them.

- The game was fun and fluid until we got to the Medieval age and started amassing too many units, cities, policy cards, trade routes, etc -- making each turn take longer and longer as 'stuff' accumulates. I'm not sure how to solve this tbh, other than using a smaller map. But the issue then becomes that it will be a serious setback to lose even one city, meaning that wars will involve potentially much more drama. This ties in with my next point:

- The 'polite' rule-set that we have in place makes going to war feel like a douchebag move and severely discourages warfare. I guess it's a logical outcome, but I would wish for some more wars in these games. I did start one with Brazil (after centuries of putinesque trash-talk :p), but we were too tired after 9 hours of micromanagement at that point and it was looking like it might be a stalemate, so we barely got to unsheathe our sabers (so to speak).

- Warfare with the Dynamic Turns setting was a total disaster. I'm still not sure exactly how it works, but it's clear that it slows the game something fierce; we will use Simultaneous Turns in all future games.

- After two long games, I concede that krasny is right and Teamspeak (or some soft like Discord perhaps) is the better option for communication, as it frees up the hands from typing messages and so greatly speeds up the game. I will swallow my intense dislike of voice communication, and agree to use some form of voice comm in the next game.

- An issue that I hadn't anticipated is that turn-time processing is affected by the host's computer performance; as my comp is sub-par at best, someone else should host the games. Thankfully we had Chrizzly Bear with his beastly machine to carry us through this particular game. :goodjob:

- Although it requires everyone to install it (as a 'DLC', not a mod), we should look into using the so-called 'Fruitymod'. It's aimed as the replacement of the famed 'NQmod' as a multiplayer staple in Civ VI; right now it has relatively few features, but those few would already be very useful. It disables tech and civic popups, and nerfs chops outside a Civ's own borders. It also includes some maps (or map scripts perhaps) that should work well in multiplayer.

Those are my observations for now. Overall it was a fun game, but there are lots of improvements that can be made. Hopefully Firaxis will roll out the first patch soon, to address some of the bugs (I was 'forced' to exploiting the overflow bug simply because I wanted to build some damn horses! :rolleyes:) and oversights of the interface in particular.
 
yeah the game was very long, and really felt so much longer because of the turns. I agree dynamic turn mode is horrible. also though honestly 530sec turn timer is too long, especially in the beginning. I agree that there arises a point where we will need close to or that much time but it wont or shouldn't be in the beginning. dynamic turn timer is probably best. it does kind of push you in the beginning but it is worth it. I imagine we could save quite abit of time, especially early game with dynamic. teamspeak would be cool, I have it on both my comp and phone. I disagree on all fronts about anything relating to a smaller map. I feel some of our issues steamed from only having 7 players ( 6 by half). also there are a few mod's out there that change the spawn distance between civs, that might help in regards to some being clustered and some being alone. so when and where will we discuss the next game ?
 
We may discuss things here, for now. I'll make a new thread for the next game, but it can wait, as I can't play on the next weekend.

In my experience, the dynamic turn timer is fine in the beginning, but gets pretty hectic later on. If you engage in any wars, you can forget about adjusting your tile assignments, thinking about builder decisions, etc. The best option would be if one could set a custom *progression* for the timer, rather than just a static time. Afaik, this isn't possible... Someone did suggest saving the game, reloading and altering the timer in the lobby. I'm not sure if it's actually possible, but if it is, then we could start with two minutes and double the time after a while, etc. Although it might be better to do this just once, as the game seems pretty fond of kicking people out in the 'join' phase.

I agree that small maps are a bad solution, but the problem is pretty bad as well. I'll check out the Fruitymod's maps soon; hopefully they'll solve this conundrum for us.

Players leaving in the middle of the game was a severe problem, yes (I forgot to mention it). The solution of leaving their empires in the hands of Settler AIs only works as a stop-gap measure, as the AI will then block your way with units and hamper your expansion. Imo, their limited conquest may have to be allowed in this situation. Razing their cities should keep the attacking player from benefiting too much; the capital could be captured by the one who gets there first, to add a little excitement. ;)

Alternatively, we might make the AIs Immortal or Deity level ones, and allow their cities to be kept upon capture. I'd prefer Immortal if we do this, as a Deity AI will simply spam too many units. :crazyeye:

I haven't heard of a mod that alters spawn distance; mind linking it? If the Fruitymod doesn't deliver, we might want to use that one.
 
The lack of barbs did speed up the game, though. I'd prefer it in any future games tbh; I play without barbs now in sp, because they're such a headache (and also slow down the AIs even more than me). On a smaller map, there's not too much room for them to spawn, though, so it's not too huge of an issue if people want to keep them on.
 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SSTwo-Fp9I60xAeA9yYrEKImi_RCMCRZccaO6ysxpEo/edit

its a pack. I think its the hb map one that does it, it also adds some cool maps, but the part I'm talking about under rules.
I'm a bit confused... I agree with literally *every* other change in those mods, but this one totally ruins the HB Balance mod for me:
Cost increase on settlers now tripled (v1 of mod had them doubled)
Why would they do this, when the cost already escalates far too fast to make marginal settles worth it after the mid-game? I guess we must disable the Balance mod (I'd really rather not, it's perfect otherwise! :mad:), and just use all the other mods in the package. Anyway, thanks for the link, I might even use this package in sp, if I can find the right file to disable the Settler cost increase.

This also clears up how mods work in multiplayer. Everyone will need to have them downloaded, it seems, but the host's configuration (i.e. which ones are enabled and disabled) will be automatically applied to everyone else. Not as good as it might've been, but I guess this is the best that is possible atm. Still pretty awesome. :goodjob:
 
just realized the rule set I was talking about if from notyetanothermapack .
 
I've been really busy with schoolwork, and the weekend was filled up with family obligations... Tbh, at this particular juncture these games are a bit too much of a 'social duty' for me (despite their casual nature). I require the weekends to be a time of total isolation, as I must already do a lot of teamwork at school (it's not in my nature and drains my energies tremendously).

So, I regret it, but for the moment I must withdraw from organizing or playing in these games. If the nature or the pace of my studies changes come next year, I might well reconsider. And I do have a month-long Christmas holiday coming up (starting on the 15th of December), so I might play a game or two during that. In the meantime, you're welcome to develop the concept without me; the group is well-established now, with about 30 members, and the spirit of the rules is clear enough, even if some of the details have yet to fall in place. Rest assured I will keep an eye on any thread with an Immersioneer tag, and might even post in them, but for the moment that will be the extent of my participation. Hope y'all can understand and wish you all good games ofc. :goodjob:
 
This style of Multi player sounds like just what I have been looking for. I have never played multi player before but really want to give it a try.
 
my steam name is lytaren. :)
I invited you. Welcome to the group! :)

Although it may take some time, I will still reply to friend requests and update the Steam name list with all the new people we're getting. I'm not abandoning the group by any means, just taking a minor hiatus due to all the social shenanigans that I'm facing irl atm. Looking forward to the Christmas holidays! ;)
 
Top Bottom