New PBEM - 8 players!
- Thread starter Genghis_Kai
- Start date
Adhesive86
Warlord
Regarding the xls region file,
Firstly I would like to say that I respect where Kai is coming from in that he has taken on board alot of work, which no one else is doing and there's no question of any accusations of deliberate unfairness. I also respect that Kai's proposed solution is a good effort to try and limit anyone taking too much advantage of a contrived diplomatic/ team situation.
However, this region file does seem to severley limit all civs apart from the European colonial powers who are more or less free to trade all their cities.
What, for instance, is to stop Holland trading all Indonesian cities to France on the first turn, before (if) Amsterdam falls?
Meanwhile, I for instance control 5 relatively minor civs and cannot swap any cities. Notable problems with this, especially since there is no team researching, is that France in this situation has the ability to take advantage of the rules to research quicker with one civ, where I do not.
I therefore propose a solution, whereby if we are not to scrap the region file (I can see good logic and principal for its existance, but in practice it is unfair), that we ban ANY trade of starting cities WITHIN teams. e.g. Canada to U.S.A, Netherlands to France.
This will keep the region file for its intended purpose and reduce the scope for certain teams to take advantage.
Firstly I would like to say that I respect where Kai is coming from in that he has taken on board alot of work, which no one else is doing and there's no question of any accusations of deliberate unfairness. I also respect that Kai's proposed solution is a good effort to try and limit anyone taking too much advantage of a contrived diplomatic/ team situation.
However, this region file does seem to severley limit all civs apart from the European colonial powers who are more or less free to trade all their cities.
What, for instance, is to stop Holland trading all Indonesian cities to France on the first turn, before (if) Amsterdam falls?
Meanwhile, I for instance control 5 relatively minor civs and cannot swap any cities. Notable problems with this, especially since there is no team researching, is that France in this situation has the ability to take advantage of the rules to research quicker with one civ, where I do not.
I therefore propose a solution, whereby if we are not to scrap the region file (I can see good logic and principal for its existance, but in practice it is unfair), that we ban ANY trade of starting cities WITHIN teams. e.g. Canada to U.S.A, Netherlands to France.
This will keep the region file for its intended purpose and reduce the scope for certain teams to take advantage.
Bastian-Bux
King
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2006
- Messages
- 788
Downside: it still allows the major colonial power to gift almost unhindered, in Africa frex, while limiting all others.
Bastian-Bux
King
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2006
- Messages
- 788
Wait a moment ... borgg, Fanda ... you are playing in the german pbem, and iirc there city trading is completely free right? Does it cause any problems?
It's not free there. The rule there was: cities may be traded, if the traded city is (after the trade) closer to its new capital that it was to the old one.
E.g. all british cities could be handed over to Indian civ, since Indian capital was closer to them than. This can be simply solved by counting tildes.
Rebuilding the capital we never discussed.
E.g. all british cities could be handed over to Indian civ, since Indian capital was closer to them than. This can be simply solved by counting tildes.
Rebuilding the capital we never discussed.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
Let me explain a bit more about the reasoning behind the regions.xls file.
In the last PBEM game we had, we used the rule of no city trading within teams. That rule works to some extend. However, one can work around the rule by trading cities across teams and then buy them back. You might then say, hey that's obviously abusing the rule and lets not allowing it. But one can then further delay the buy back action and it would be too complicated to avoid abusive actions (just have a think about all the possibilities).
I also thought of the distance from capital rule. But it is too inaccurate to use. Some examples: LA is closer to Mexico City than Washington, so it means LA can be traded away to Mexico; Ahvaz (Iran) can be traded to Iraq because it is closer to Baghdad than to Tehran. The fundamental problem of this rule is that, the rule doesn't care about the historical ownership of a city.
So I came up with the idea of using the regions.xls file. It embedded with historical ownership of cities as well as a rule that is relatively easy to follow.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
Moreover, probably the more important reason for reviewing the "no city trading within team" rule used in the last game, was that the rule was actually quite harsh for the British and French team. It is quite natural to passing a lot of cities to the local civ. E.g. I was going to hand a lot of Africa cities to S. Africa, pacific islands to NZ and Indian cities to Nepal. It significantly reduce the maintenance burden of UK.
Bastian-Bux
King
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2006
- Messages
- 788
Kai, thats very understandable. But do you understand my anger about this as well? You can reduce your maintainance this way, as can France. Your two nations can make the best out of it... But we others are still ...
Actually in the last few days I'm asking myself if we really need any rules about this at all.
Lets imagine the worst case scenario: the north american team reduced to USA and Mexico-Ciudad + Ottawa. So what? The maintenance would make me pay out of my nose for that stunt.
Or the other extreme: Russia gifts half of Siberia to Mongols. So what? He will not be able to build advanced units there.
The game itself is balancing against such extremes. Having the freedom to decide what to do is IMO more valuable to sticking to "historicty" which we already kicked out the window by making it FFA.
Actually in the last few days I'm asking myself if we really need any rules about this at all.
Lets imagine the worst case scenario: the north american team reduced to USA and Mexico-Ciudad + Ottawa. So what? The maintenance would make me pay out of my nose for that stunt.
Or the other extreme: Russia gifts half of Siberia to Mongols. So what? He will not be able to build advanced units there.
The game itself is balancing against such extremes. Having the freedom to decide what to do is IMO more valuable to sticking to "historicty" which we already kicked out the window by making it FFA.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
Bastian, how many times I have to say this, the rules are there long before we choose which team we want to play. Until the very last day before the teams are settled, I was still thinking I am going to play the Germany team, the team that would suffer most from the rule (because the rule benefit his enemies the most). It is not appropriate to discuss or change the rules after all the players are set and all the pre-game diplomacy has nearly done. If we don't respect this rule of thumb, I can imagine you to call for changing the rules again in the middle of the game and how unfair is that and how disrupting can it be?
After all, we are only playing a game. Most of us don't even care to be disadvantaged by choosing the minor teams, why should you think so much for just a rule?
After all, we are only playing a game. Most of us don't even care to be disadvantaged by choosing the minor teams, why should you think so much for just a rule?
Bastian-Bux
King
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2006
- Messages
- 788
Because I just realized the last few days how unfair that rule is? You see, sometimes you'll need time to understand the implications of something.
I agreed to that rule assuming we would talk about regions, regions meaning comparable numbers of cities. But thats just not true as I know since 2 days. The regions in your file range from 1 city up to 30. Those countriues that have their capitals in one of the 30ish regions are screwed.
The regions in your original files are much more evenly distributed, and I did base my decision about this rule on such an even distribution. The new players didn't even have a word concerning that rule.
You know, some people say: "the americans brought democracy to Germany" ... some less polite will add "and forgot it there". Democracy and fairness is very important to some people over here ... including me.
I agreed to that rule assuming we would talk about regions, regions meaning comparable numbers of cities. But thats just not true as I know since 2 days. The regions in your file range from 1 city up to 30. Those countriues that have their capitals in one of the 30ish regions are screwed.
The regions in your original files are much more evenly distributed, and I did base my decision about this rule on such an even distribution. The new players didn't even have a word concerning that rule.
You know, some people say: "the americans brought democracy to Germany" ... some less polite will add "and forgot it there". Democracy and fairness is very important to some people over here ... including me.
Adhesive86
Warlord
Any chance of leaving this argument?
I'm sure Bastian has a point regarding the file and the perceived unfairness in the way it is implemented, and I've already had my say on it as to an extent I share this opinion, but I really do think we're bothering a bit too much.
My vote is to keep the xls file as is, but use the no team transfer rule. This is more 'fair', and whilst I agree that this prevents some logical and historical moves, it also prevents some very ahistorical and advantage taking moves. I disagree to not have a rule just because there may be ways around it.
But honestly, let's not get too wound up by it. This is the 2nd PBEM and it's a learning process.
I'm sure Bastian has a point regarding the file and the perceived unfairness in the way it is implemented, and I've already had my say on it as to an extent I share this opinion, but I really do think we're bothering a bit too much.
My vote is to keep the xls file as is, but use the no team transfer rule. This is more 'fair', and whilst I agree that this prevents some logical and historical moves, it also prevents some very ahistorical and advantage taking moves. I disagree to not have a rule just because there may be ways around it.
But honestly, let's not get too wound up by it. This is the 2nd PBEM and it's a learning process.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
borgg, have you completed your turn yet? Don't plan too much, you can't capture both Paris and London in your first turn alright? 
iirc I can't even capture one 
.
Pregame diplomatics seems done now. I got all answers i needed today in the morning. Tonight i will make my turn. Sorry for this delay, but especially for germany the opening is crucial.
I spend a lot of time in creating a map of europe where all units are shown and i can observe the strategic situation. Civgame itself cannot provide such. I was surprised when i was searching for french and british fleets in mediterranean. But finally i found them ;-) .....
.Pregame diplomatics seems done now. I got all answers i needed today in the morning. Tonight i will make my turn. Sorry for this delay, but especially for germany the opening is crucial.
I spend a lot of time in creating a map of europe where all units are shown and i can observe the strategic situation. Civgame itself cannot provide such. I was surprised when i was searching for french and british fleets in mediterranean. But finally i found them ;-) .....
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
So the CIV world builder is not good enough for your planning? What kind of map did you make? do you think we can share it?
The Worldbulder is horrible for two reasons:
1) i cannot open it same time, when i wanna make my move
2) very slowly and not practical. Just to see the accumulation of units in one field needs me to pick the field, and to put the dropdown menu. This is annoying.
I build now a map, where i can see the linup of all fields in the same time (number of units and type) using a very simple coding.
e.g. a field with following written inside
1T,1I,
1F,4B
means 1 tank, 1inf, 1 fighter and 4 bombers. Only thing i cant see is the promotion level. But this i might have in mind in average. Further the map has only the very basic infos (streets, plain/hill/Summit/Water, Cities ). I will post a screen tonight when i'm at home.
Without that map it's very hard to prepare a campaign with such amount of units. I need to know the map and the relations as good as you do (due you build this map). Since you are propably the better player i should at least rise my knowledge about the map on the same level to compete with you.
1) i cannot open it same time, when i wanna make my move
2) very slowly and not practical. Just to see the accumulation of units in one field needs me to pick the field, and to put the dropdown menu. This is annoying.
I build now a map, where i can see the linup of all fields in the same time (number of units and type) using a very simple coding.
e.g. a field with following written inside
1T,1I,
1F,4B
means 1 tank, 1inf, 1 fighter and 4 bombers. Only thing i cant see is the promotion level. But this i might have in mind in average. Further the map has only the very basic infos (streets, plain/hill/Summit/Water, Cities ). I will post a screen tonight when i'm at home.
Without that map it's very hard to prepare a campaign with such amount of units. I need to know the map and the relations as good as you do (due you build this map). Since you are propably the better player i should at least rise my knowledge about the map on the same level to compete with you.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
I would love to see that map
I admit I know the map quite well
But no, I am not a better player than you. At the moment, I am quite excited of the challenge, but at same time am also quite afraid of the situation.P = Tank
Inf = infanterie
MG = machine gun
Pk = anti tank
B = bomber
J = Fighter
K = battleship
Z = destroyer
U = sub
F = carrier
Shortcuts are related to german language (sorry)
White Rects are cities.
Red dot in a tilde is an oil field.
Landscape, cities and oil is plotted automatically. (parsing the initial wb-file)
All unit and political border information was set by openoffce-draw.
I did not care for rivers, since most have some roads to pass. Next version will have also information about airports, and docks. MIght be i will be able to get a fully automatically created map wich automatically contains also the units. But its always a little tricky to get all infos in one small window there.
Inf = infanterie
MG = machine gun
Pk = anti tank
B = bomber
J = Fighter
K = battleship
Z = destroyer
U = sub
F = carrier
Shortcuts are related to german language (sorry)
White Rects are cities.
Red dot in a tilde is an oil field.
Landscape, cities and oil is plotted automatically. (parsing the initial wb-file)
All unit and political border information was set by openoffce-draw.
I did not care for rivers, since most have some roads to pass. Next version will have also information about airports, and docks. MIght be i will be able to get a fully automatically created map wich automatically contains also the units. But its always a little tricky to get all infos in one small window there.
