Is this type of server possible?

[Koshling]

Well, 12padams, looks like your dream can become a reality. Congratulations.

A concern that was brought up a couple times does indeed worry me.

...how on earth are we going to agree on game settings? Seems like a nightmare...

lol yes. Especially REV and city limits. Possibly also map type.

 

[JosEPh_II]

So what would happen with updates? Would we be stuck in a specific version of C2C for the entire multi-player game?

EDIT: If we did have forum people I would very much like to play against JosEPh_II.

I just bet you would!

Of course an might feel like But I bet you'd really play the to do it.

Normal speed on a C2C Island or Archipelago Map, No Rev and No City Limits.

JosEPh

 

[Thunderbrd]

For this game, I'd play what everyone else wants to play (but would humbly request, as the designer of the option, Divine Prophets be in use.)

I wouldn't mind being out of my 'comfort zone'.

Still... an island map would not be conducive for a good multi-play imo. Best map would be PerfectMongoose with plenty of rivers and (I like plenty of resources as well but since I know others would disagree, normal resources would be acceptable (but few would not be good as it could lead to unfair disadvantages and that should be minimized with every effort in a multi-play.))

Otherwise... let me think... I would NOT like to play with realistic corporations since I believe it breaks corporations to have them founded in random cities.

Don't care bout rev or city limits much but would prefer them off. Ruthless AI would be a bad choice imo.

We'd certainly NEED multiple production/research, useable mountains. Great Commanders I believe would be preferred by all no? On barbs, don't care except to keep No Barbarians out of contention since that's just not good for C2C.

Tech Diffusion should be on I think but I'd work with it either way. Tech trading? Don't care. Could make diplomacy more interesting.

I could work with Normal speed but I don't think it'd be best... as stated, one level slower I think would be optimal. But then again, it could move the game fast enough to be good for a first try at a multi-play.

And yeah, I'd love to play against/with all of you! Every one here in fact!

 

[JosEPh_II]

I chose Arch or Island on purpose, everyone would not be on the same land mass and Navies would be a Must. Otherwise I agree with most of what you've posted.

I also don't know if using Start as Minors would be a good idea either.

Would need a Gigantic map or at least a Giant map or else Subdued animals would only be of use for a Very short time. Barb World would be interesting in that it would place a Barb City for every player in the game.

And Random Leader traits, otherwise everyone would be picking their favorite one.

JosEPh

 

[Koshling]

I would certainly want REV, and ideally city limits (especially since the bad-for-AI arguments don't really apply to an 8-way multi-player game). Also great commanders and surround&destroy. Don't care much about other options.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I just bet you would!

Of course an might feel like But I bet you'd really play the to do it.

Normal speed on a C2C Island or Archipelago Map, No Rev and No City Limits.

JosEPh

How about a comprise? Perfect Mongoose (picked by Thunderbrd), No Rev (picked by you) and City Limits (picked by me). I would also like Minor Civs and Terrain Damage too.

I also don't know if using Start as Minors would be a good idea either.

Well you can't say its imbalanced from the AI since in this game we would have no AI players. I think Minor civs are a must in this type of game.

Would need a Gigantic map or at least a Giant map or else Subdued animals would only be of use for a Very short time. Barb World would be interesting in that it would place a Barb City for every player in the game.

My computer cannot handle a Giant Map. Even with view ports I crash when trying to load anything beyond Large.

So yeah my requests if we play are ...

- Minor Civs
- City Limits
- Terrain Damage
- Large Map Size (since my computer cannot deal with any bigger).

 

[Thunderbrd]

I chose Arch or Island on purpose, everyone would not be on the same land mass and Navies would be a Must.

I get the point and do enjoy such games but I'd like to see how stealth units play out when humans are at the helm of all major civs and this would deny that kind of interaction much.

I also don't know if using Start as Minors would be a good idea either.

Apathetic towards this option. Either way meh.

Would need a Gigantic map or at least a Giant map or else Subdued animals would only be of use for a Very short time.

Giant would be too big for a multiplayer game one turn at a time and definately too big for any gamespeed even close to normal. I'd think Large (Huge at MOST) would be optimal so we're at least close enough to begin interacting in the Prehistoric era.

Barb World would be interesting in that it would place a Barb City for every player in the game.

I've never played with it cuz I think its nicer to have more room for hunting and the barb cities start popping up pretty early as it is. I also think, in multi-play, that we should focus more on each other rather than AIs while allowing emerging barbarian civilizations seems appropriate so we CAN fight without having to fight each other necessarily.

And Random Leader traits, otherwise everyone would be picking their favorite one.

Or perhaps just random Civilizations/Leaders?

I would certainly want REV

True that it wouldn't have the AI's imploding purpose to not have this... It'd certainly make the game as a whole challenging for me since I've never really gotten into this option enough to understand the mechanism. My first try with it I lost my first city to revolt - but then again I was also unable to grow my starting city since it was surrounded by forest on the old ROM maps and had just enough food to stay at 1 until I could achieve bronzeworking... ugh.

And I tried it once in C2C but got nothing but a Python error. I assume that's been resolved somehow.

and ideally city limits

What is this option exactly? Are we talking about the city tile range only being limited to being unlocked by the metro administration (which I don't like as much because it takes away so much of the extended value of culture output imo)
OR
Are we talking about a limit to size based on civics? I'm not familiar with this option because I don't see cause for establishing an arbitrary limit. But if its the most popular choice, I wouldn't argue against it... it'd probably HELP with keeping Rev in check to some degree wouldn't it?

Also great commanders and surround&destroy

YES and YES!

Minor Civs and Terrain Damage

No real preference on Minor Civs. Terrain Damage is OK with me... don't usually use it because I feel too hedged in on the map if I do but I DO like the concept in a more serious game.


Ok, so we're going to keep going back and forth on options until we start really getting them defined here. I say democracy works. There's nothing I'm completely unwilling to work with either. So we should list them off and tally votes shouldn't we? (Do we have a convenient full list of options?) I suppose the first option to 'vote' on would be the map selection itself.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Also great commanders and surround&destroy

Yeah I would not mind those.

I would certainly want REV

I of course would love REV but if Joe is totally against it I could play without it.

Or perhaps just random Civilizations/Leaders?

I like this idea better.

I get the point and do enjoy such games but I'd like to see how stealth units play out when humans are at the helm of all major civs and this would deny that kind of interaction much.

I think islands would keep us too protected. However if we had a map with old wold vs new world that could be interesting either having part of the players on one landmass and part on the other or even a classic game where everything starts in the old world and must rush to claim the new world.

 

[Koshling]

If it came down to it I would prefer to forego city limits rathervthan REV if we have to lose one.

 

[wolfensoul9]

If it came down to it I would prefer to forego city limits rathervthan REV if we have to lose one.

As much as I love both, I'd have to grudgingly agree here.

Personally those are the only two "high controversy" settings I have strong opinions on, though, apologies to thunderbird, I feel divine prophets is broken.

Snail would be too long, but I think normal would be too short. Either epic or marathon. Size of course depends on just how many people we get to do this, but I agree that either large or huge would have to suffice.

Map can really be anything, personally.


Perhaps someone could organize a list of who's actually considering being in this, and start the procedure for settings being chosen? 12padams? Of course, we would still need to figure out what way we can actually do this, first, haha.

 

[JosEPh_II]

No one has mentioned victory conditions, so I'll start with this, No Mastery. This won't be a marathon race anyway but cutthroat as all get out. I'd suggest keeping the conditions down to 3 or 4. Or maybe even 1. Discuss?

I would concede to (god I even hate to say it) playing with REV as long as No City Limits But Multiple Religion is used. (Since I rarely use REV I'm gonna be handicapped with it)

So far major agreements on:
Multiple production
Multiple Research
Usable Mountains (why hasn't this just been made a Default setting by now anyway, everyone Loves)
No Ruthless AI
No Barb World
No Barb Civ
Tech Diffusion (On)
Large Map Size(consideration for older comps)
Random Leaders
GCs
No AIs

This covers about 1/6 of the options available.

We've mentioned:
Start as Minors (needs more input)
Types of Maps (needs further input) not really familiar with PM map. I would guess it's an "Earth" type?
Terrain Damage (Needs more input)

Going to have to make a list of All the Options, number each one. Discuss by number, and then garner inputs and count votes.

JosEPh

 

[wolfensoul9]

I forgot to give my big, fat, bloody NO to tech diffusion. I'd also hate to play with limited religions.

Again, though, shouldn't we figure out how we're actually going to make this possible first?

 

[12padams]

I agree... We need to make a new thread first which selects the players then the settings and when that's done we set up how to play (e.g. Play by email).

So I'll make a new thread in 3 hours set up to perfectly define what going on. I'll keep editing the first post to choose our game settings then when we start playing I will copy the first post and start yet another new topic. So keep posting here if you wanna talk about the server/gameplay or the version to use e.g. V27. But for settings and players and other stuff wait for the new thread I will soon make

I'll call the new thread "C2C Community Game Setup" unless someone can think of another better name within the next 3 hours...

 

[Hydromancerx]

No one has mentioned victory conditions, so I'll start with this, No Mastery. This won't be a marathon race anyway but cutthroat as all get out. I'd suggest keeping the conditions down to 3 or 4. Or maybe even 1. Discuss?

What's wrong with Mastery? Personally I think Culture Victory is cheap since its too easy to get. And I don't really like Domination Victory either.

I would concede to (god I even hate to say it) playing with REV as long as No City Limits But Multiple Religion is used. (Since I rarely use REV I'm gonna be handicapped with it)

LOL! Well I am strongly voting for City Limits. Rev I could live without as long as we have City Limits.

Start as Minors (needs more input)

Since DH's new diplomacy system is not in place yet the closet thing to that is minor civs to simulate the inability to communicate in the prehistoric era. I think this is a must for our game.

Types of Maps (needs further input) not really familiar with PM map. I would guess it's an "Earth" type?

I always like PW2 but Perfect Mongoose is fine too if we have to. Islands I think would keep us too isolated.

Terrain Damage (Needs more input)

Well I think this is a good balancing factor and gives natural barriers on the map. Both to keep other civs from attacking but from over expansion. With all real players I can only imagine the land grab race that will go on.

I forgot to give my big, fat, bloody NO to tech diffusion. I'd also hate to play with limited religions.

1. Yeah good idea about no tech defusion. What about tech brokering?

2. Yeah I don't think we should have any of those religious options on. No Divine Prophets, or Limited Religion. I suppose Religious decay would be fine.

I also think we should not have No "Unlimited National Units" and "Unlimited Wonders". This will make it a lot more competitive if you cannot just build every wonder in one city.

On a side note I think Assimilation should be on. Since that's a cool setting.

 

[wolfensoul9]

Why no unlimited wonders? What on earth would possibly prevent a city from building twenty wonders if it so pleases? Is there some force that stays the aspiring builders' hands emanating from all the wonders they've already built? Talk about arbitrary. In short, I, for one, wouldn't like it.

I'd prefer both rev and city limits, but if I had to pick one, I'd go for rev.

I despise tech brokering almost as much as tech diffusion. But, that's just me.

I've also heard from shen that religion decay is too aggressive. I haven't had any first hand knowledge of it, but my vote is no. Anyways, the proper thread for all this should be coming up shortly...

 

[Thunderbrd]

I feel divine prophets is broken

What do you feel is 'broken' about it? Its frickin' annoying having your religions go into random cities!!! I'd be perfectly happy to play without Choose Religions though and I'd be adamantly against Limited Religions.

I'd also prefer Unlimited National, Infinite XP, and Unlimited Wonders. I really don't feel the game benefits from the arbitrary limitations not having those options on provides. Might make it more competitive... also makes it a giant pain in the arse (especially not having Unlimited Wonders!!! And imo, there's nothing about the real world that gives any rationale for this limitation.) But again... I'm willing to play far outside of my comfort zone.


When we get them all listed out, I suggest we rate our votes on a scale of -2 to 2, rating how against (negative) or how for (positive) we are. From there I suggest we all just buck up and accept what democracy has delivered us no matter how much we may be against or for a particular option. This pre-vote time has been ways to voice and argue and reason with each other so we can persuade to our preferences but when we vote, lets just keep it to the numbers, k?

Also... and I must remind myself of this... if (which is really more of a 'when') ANY of us gets trounced, no hard feelings MUST be the primary rule! If we can't agree to that, we shouldn't play at all.

 

[wolfensoul9]

What do you feel is 'broken' about it? Its frickin' annoying having your religions go into random cities!!! I'd be perfectly happy to play without Choose Religions though and I'd be adamantly against Limited Religions.

I'd also prefer Unlimited National, Infinite XP, and Unlimited Wonders. I really don't feel the game benefits from the arbitrary limitations not having those options on provides. Might make it more competitive... also makes it a giant pain in the arse (especially not having Unlimited Wonders!!! And imo, there's nothing about the real world that gives any rationale for this limitation.) But again... I'm willing to play far outside of my comfort zone.


When we get them all listed out, I suggest we rate our votes on a scale of -2 to 2, rating how against (negative) or how for (positive) we are. From there I suggest we all just buck up and accept what democracy has delivered us no matter how much we may be against or for a particular option. This pre-vote time has been ways to voice and argue and reason with each other so we can persuade to our preferences but when we vote, lets just keep it to the numbers, k?

Also... and I must remind myself of this... if (which is really more of a 'when') ANY of us gets trounced, no hard feelings MUST be the primary rule! If we can't agree to that, we shouldn't play at all.

For once, I largely agree with you. I for one will accept whatever the beauties' of democracy shall decide, and promise not to be a sore loser.

Regarding divine prophets, two things. Do you think any of the leaders of Rome could have possibly known that bethlehem would be the birthplace of a man (and some would say, god) whose teachings would come to in time to completely revolutionize their empire, and eventually, the world? No. No leader of any group of people's could be prepared for any of the belief systems' origins and sways they would come to hold. I like the random nature of religion placement, and feel it reflects this nature.

More important to the gameplay, though, and why I say it is broken, is because too often, people will use their great prophets for something else. Each religion-founding tech giving a great prophet?! I was stunned. People abuse this fact to get more (and alot more) golden ages, and priest specialists.

If divine prophets gave a sort of pseudo-Great prophet, that could only found the religion, then I would say it's not broken at all.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Personally if someone beats me me or out plays me then I have larger respect for them.

As SO says "Just Have Fun!"

As for settings I am thing about what will make a more challenging game for everyone. Such as the limited wonders so people will not monopolize on getting all the wonders since it will be very hard to get them all with a limited amount of cities.

As for why no Unlimited National units, its that they can be a game changer. So much so that they are a bit over powered. Limiting the number you have can allow for a weaker player to actually have a chance.

And really don't we want the game to last longer than just an easy steamroll move where one player defeats everyone? The best games are closely matched players in my opinion.

 

[wolfensoul9]

Personally if someone beats me me or out plays me then I have larger respect for them.

As SO says "Just Have Fun!"

As for settings I am thing about what will make a more challenging game for everyone. Such as the limited wonders so people will not monopolize on getting all the wonders since it will be very hard to get them all with a limited amount of cities.

As for why no Unlimited National units, its that they can be a game changer. So much so that they are a bit over powered. Limiting the number you have can allow for a weaker player to actually have a chance.

And really don't we want the game to last longer than just an easy steamroll move where one player defeats everyone? The best games are closely matched players in my opinion.

Personally, I think there's little chance of this dreaded steamroll everyone's talking about of late. I think most of the people involved will be pretty good matches for each other.

 

[JosEPh_II]

One last input about map type before I call it a night.

The reason I suggested Arch or Island and you can included Custom Continents or even Shuffle is that you can have Snake continents in the Arch, decide how many Islands on an Island, same with CC. So with 8 players there will be at Least 2 players on a snakey sometimes 3. If you only chose 4 islands then the odds are that 2 players will be on each island and that would create mini duels before the big clash. Remember I've played a lot of games with only 8 "players". Of course it can happen that you get put on an arch all by yourself to. But with Low Sea Level there will be lots on small island groups to Island hop with.

Shuffle is a random map every time and some are really intriguing, but are a gamble. It could be 1 continent or 2 or 3. Or it could be a mix of several snakey Conts and 1 big continent. It's the Joker Map in the deck.

On an Earth type map of 2 continent you're going to have everybody on top of each other on a large map. That would be alright with AI but with human players it can and will generate dogpile situations.

Another point about maps that have multiple land masses is that I feel Navies are just too important to relegate to the Ren Era when most players will be dead by then. Raft, canoe and Galley invasions would make for some strategy.

There is another Map that would be interesting for 8 Human players and that would Lakes with High Sea Level. The big lakes it creates would create natural choke points. But you would still have to defend from all sides. And it generates a considerable amount on land to use where 8 players would not be "on top" of each other. I really do not want to see any of you for the 1st 40,000 years till at least ancient era/sed life is achieved. Moreso with Start as Minors.

I just find earth maps troublesome because no matter how it's set up you end up with a neighbor only 4 or 5 tiles away almost every time. And in that situation the one with the Best placement with the Best resources is gonna take out the other one.

Now after all this, I'm not saying I'm "locked" into any of this but putting out alternatives to be considered.

JosEPh