Probably no one had expected for this to last as much as it did.
I am not sure how I feel about this game anymore. I am very interested in the resolution of our conflict, which is still uncertain. However, now I have much less time for the game than I did a year ago. Maybe the pace will pick up, maybe not, I can't say.
If turn times are any indication, I'd say there definitely are at least two eager players, and dropping the game would be unfair to them. If these delay bother you, maybe we should have done team play when one can play for his teammate when the other is not available? It ended in a 2v2 anyway. It's not too late to switch to this model, provided there is a mutual consent.
If they don't, I suggest continuing. Such is the nature of PBEMs, after all.
(SMAC was great in this respect. It allowed to switch between PBEM and TCP/IP modes at a moment's notice. Thus, if all players were available simultanously, it would greatly speed up the game. I do not know if this is possible in Civ IV engine, though).
I am not sure how I feel about this game anymore. I am very interested in the resolution of our conflict, which is still uncertain. However, now I have much less time for the game than I did a year ago. Maybe the pace will pick up, maybe not, I can't say.
If turn times are any indication, I'd say there definitely are at least two eager players, and dropping the game would be unfair to them. If these delay bother you, maybe we should have done team play when one can play for his teammate when the other is not available? It ended in a 2v2 anyway. It's not too late to switch to this model, provided there is a mutual consent.
If they don't, I suggest continuing. Such is the nature of PBEMs, after all.
(SMAC was great in this respect. It allowed to switch between PBEM and TCP/IP modes at a moment's notice. Thus, if all players were available simultanously, it would greatly speed up the game. I do not know if this is possible in Civ IV engine, though).
