Planning cIV BTS MTDG III

[Kloreep]

Good point, I don't think any mods that would affect leader choice are under consideration. Let's go ahead and start tomorrow then.

 

[Manolo65]

Do you really think it'll be that much an issue to vote for civs/leaders starting from tomorrow? As civ/leader votes are completely unrelated to whether we play a modded or unmodded game, I just don't see the logic in not getting started on what's likely to be a slow process ASAP. Would be nice to be starting this game by mid-June.

 

[tobiasn]

In theory, mods should not be platform-specific. In a perfect world there would be the same number of mods for Mac as for Windows, and you wouldn't have to ask your question. In practice, every mod has to be tested with the Mac versions of Civ4 because they are often incompatible. The incompatibilities are typically:

[...]

- Use of the SDK to create a custom CvGameCoreDLL.dll file that alters game rules. The CvGameCoreDLL code is integrated into the Mac versions, so they simply don't work with a custom dll ... yet. Aspyr are said to be working on this.

From here

AFAIK, nothing has happened on this front. I'd talk to AlanH or Xyth over in the Mac forums for more info on this (Xyth has made a srsly huge mod that's compatible for Mac, and is bound to know a lot about this).

What's more: If what your mod does is taking information on what happens in-game with war/peace, and sending that to an external server -- that's totally feasible to do in Python only. AFAIK it could even be done as a CustomAsset... removing the whole issue, but then again you'd have no way forcing people to use it would you..

 

[nabaxo]

A word of friendly advice to the host: Do a "versioning" back-up of the save folder. It has happened before and often that a player tries to log in and the save gets corrupted and then keep trying to log in and corrupts all the previous saves for that particular user. And then when he reports this, it prompts all the other turn-players to log in a bunch of times corrupting their saves. All this does is making it really hard to reload to a save that's not too many turns back, inconveniencing everyone.

 

[ruff_hi]

AFAIK it could even be done as a CustomAsset... removing the whole issue, but then again you'd have no way forcing people to use it would you..

It cannot not be done via customassets - pitboss games will ignore any local customasset code when loading. Some graphical items (eg blue marble) are not ignored and do get loaded.

 

[Manolo65]

Sorry for Mac users but my mod is based on the dll and I can not change that now

 

[tobiasn]

It cannot not be done via customassets - pitboss games will ignore any local customasset code when loading. Some graphical items (eg blue marble) are not ignored and do get loaded.

Ah ok.. So that's why BUG was included in the mod, I guess?

Sorry for Mac users but my mod is based on the dll and I can not change that now

That's too bad really... I'm sure there's some kind of work-around for this. Almost want to prod the code a bit myself.

It kinda sucks for the game though. Seemed like a sweet mod to run with. But seeing as it's Mod or Macs, it might be a tad excluding for a game like this.

 

[Caledorn]

A word of friendly advice to the host: Do a "versioning" back-up of the save folder. It has happened before and often that a player tries to log in and the save gets corrupted and then keep trying to log in and corrupts all the previous saves for that particular user. And then when he reports this, it prompts all the other turn-players to log in a bunch of times corrupting their saves. All this does is making it really hard to reload to a save that's not too many turns back, inconveniencing everyone.

Thank you

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[Lord Parkin]

Here are the current votes as of 4 June 2012. (See the updated excel sheet for the breakdown.)

House Rules
Nukes - BANNED (5 agree, 2 unsure, 2 disagree)
Spies - ON but civic/religion missions BANNED (5 agree, 1 unsure, 3 disagree)
Corporations - ON (7 agree, 2 disagree)
City Gifting - BANNED (5 agree, 2 unsure, 1 disagrees)

Game Options
Game Speed - NORMAL (8 agree, no votes against)
Huts - OFF (5 agree, 1 unsure, 3 disagree)
Events - OFF (4 agree, 2 unsure, 3 disagree)
Always War - OFF (7 agree, 2 disagree)
Tech Trading - OFF (unanimous)
Vassal States - OFF (6 agree, 1 disagrees)
Unrestricted Leaders - ON (7 agree, 2 disagree)
Permanent Alliances - OFF (no votes for them)
New random seed on reload - Note that this setting is irrelevant for a simultaneous turns game (it is always on anyway)

Mods Required (if any)
Known tech bonus - DEFAULT (6 agree, 1 doesn't care, 1 wants 50%, 1 wants 100%)
Bug mod - OFF (5 agree, 2 unsure, 1 has reservations, 1 disagrees)
No score mod - OFF (4 agree, 1 unsure, 2 disagree)

Map Options
Map - MAPMAKER'S CHOICE, something random/special, decent amount of land, not archipelago
Wrap - TOROIDAL (3 agree, 2 mapmaker's choice, 1 unsure, 1 flat, 2 cylindrical)
Mirrored starts - NO (8 agree, 1 disagree)
Fair/balanced starts - YES (5 agree, 1 tweaks only, 1 disagrees)
Engineered starts - NO (8 agree, no disagreement)

Choosing Leaders
Multiple or exclusive leaders - EXCLUSIVE (8 agree, 1 unsure)
Civ/leader selection - SNAKE PICK with UNRESTRICTED leaders (5 agree, 1 unsure, 1 random, 2 disagree)

 

[ruff_hi]

Ah ok.. So that's why BUG was included in the mod, I guess?

It should be noted that BUG does have some known issues when it comes to pitboss games.

 

[DaveShack]

Unfortunately those two links only mention problems but don't say what happens.
If the effects are minor and affect all teams equally then I'm unlikely to care about them.
If the effects are significant then we all should care.

 

[Bowsling]

I think we will need votes from the teams that were "unsure" over events. If they both vote for it, it will be 5-4 in favour of events.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Remember that negative events can be canceled out by quitting to desktop. When you log back in the event is gone. This was discovered in BTS MTDG I, and I think that's why some people say Events off.

 

[Bowsling]

I'm not vouching for it at all. I support having events off. I'm just saying that there isn't a clear majority on the matter yet.

 

[Kloreep]

Some people also just don't like Random Event's, well, Random nature.

Quitting to desktop is supposed to be a bad idea with Pitboss, isn't it? But ouch, that's an unfortunate exploit.

BTW, WPC goes back to Undecided on events. And adds a vote for Random Seed on Reload to be ON.

 

[DaveShack]

Quitting to desktop is supposed to be a bad idea with Pitboss, isn't it? But ouch, that's an unfortunate exploit.

Yeah, it can mess up the ports and nobody can connect. But if the host saves and restarts to clean up the ports then the event is gone.

 

[grant2004]

I think we will need votes from the teams that were "unsure" over events. If they both vote for it, it will be 5-4 in favour of events.

I also think events should be off, but it would be good to see teams that are currently undecided on issues without a clear majority holding an internal vote and giving their say on the settings.

I'd especially like to see more votes, including possibly a runoff, on world wrap. Right now toroidal is ahead, but only has 33% of the vote. I'd imagine it would be difficult for the map maker to work on a concept with such a fundamental concept up in the air.

 

[Lord Parkin]

Remember that negative events can be canceled out by quitting to desktop. When you log back in the event is gone. This was discovered in BTS MTDG I, and I think that's why some people say Events off.

Indeed, and if events were on we would need a separate rule to govern them (either everyone ignores all bad events, or everyone takes all events). Problem is, there's absolutely no way to know if someone's skipped a bad event. Better to just leave them off IMHO, too exploitable in a game like this.

I'd especially like to see more votes, including possibly a runoff, on world wrap. Right now toroidal is ahead, but only has 33% of the vote. I'd imagine it would be difficult for the map maker to work on a concept with such a fundamental concept up in the air.

Count the "mapmaker's choice" votes as toroidal votes, and it goes up to 4-5. I believe Plako has already put significant effort into the map (at least based on some of his postings here), and it would be hugely unfair to make him pretty much start over because of a relatively trivial setting, which doesn't even have a plurality vote for change. Can you imagine putting hours and hours into a map and then having folks tell you to scrap it, when there's not even a good reason?

 

[Sommerswerd]

And yet we are telling Manolo...

 

[Lord Parkin]

Okay... as the civ/leader selection process is likely to take 1-2 weeks and potentially up to 18 days, I think it's time we got started.

The civ/leader selection thread is now open for official team votes.

Please can the first team (WePlayCiv) place their official selection for either civ OR leader within the next 24 hours. After they have done so, the next team (Civforum.de) will have 24 hours to place their official selection, and so on down the list.

Here is the full list of the order in which teams will choose, generated by the game admin.

Teams will make their choices in the following order:

(Choose one option out of either civ or leader)
1. Team WePlayCiv
2. Team Civforum.de
3. Team Apolyton
4. Team Spanish Apolyton
5. Team Civfanatics
6. Team CivPlayers
7. Team Realms Beyond
8. Team UniversCivilization
9. Team Civfr
(Choose remaining item out of civ or leader)
10. Team Civfr
11. Team UniversCivilization
12. Team Realms Beyond
13. Team CivPlayers
14. Team Civfanatics
15. Team Spanish Apolyton
16. Team Apolyton
17. Team Civforum.de
18. Team WePlayCiv

Note that the only team which will choose civ and leader simultaneously is Team Civfr. Everyone else must only select one item out of civ OR leader for each official choice.

The full process is explained here.

Snake pick with unrestricted leaders and no duplicate civs/leaders is the preferred option of the majority.

Here is how it works: the first team (WePlayCiv) will have up to 24 hours to make their official choice on either civ OR leader. As soon as they have made their official choice, the next team (Civforum.de) will have up to 24 hours to make their official choice. The process will continue down the list of teams as they make their first choice, then in reverse order as teams choose their other item (out of leader OR civ).

The only limitation is that you are not permitted to choose an item (either civ or leader) which has already been selected by a team before you. For instance, if a team before you has chosen the Aztecs for their civ, you cannot choose the Aztecs. (Note that you may still choose Montezuma - provided that no other team has selected him yet - because the leader is not related to the civ.)

Please note that teams do not have to use the full 24 hours to make their decisions - indeed they are encouraged to choose as quickly as possible. It is advisable to have a prepared list of alternative civs/leaders on your team forum in case someone picks the civ or leader you were hoping to pick, so that you do not need much time to deliberate if your top preference gets taken by someone else.