Return to 2 Civs ...

[Dazz_G]

This will be a Civ4 VANILLA PBEM with each player taking control of 2 teamed civs.

Players :

1. Dazz_G GMT
2. Mitchum GMT-8
3. jbieksha GMT -5
4. Moens
5. Ruff Hi GMT -5

 

[ruff_hi]

Dazz - Tim Ford discussed a PBEM team game with 2v2v2 or 3v3 - I'd be interested in that sort of game. Vanilla or BtS - don't matter to me - probably Vanilla by a slight margin but happy either way.

 

[Dazz_G]

Personally I'd rather have a 2 civs per player game, especially as there is already a team game running.

 

[jbieksha]

I'm interested. But won't be back until the 30th. If you can wait.. Otherwise I'll catch the next bus..

No preference on the version.

 

[Dazz_G]

@ Joe ... I'm happy to wait for you. Its unlikely the game would be running before you return anyway.

@ Ruff ... After reading Mitch's comments over on 2 Civs, I realised I may have misunderstood you. When you say 2x2x2x2 are you refering to each team being two players with one civ each or do you mean four players each with two civs teamed together ? If you mean the latter then I would be in favour of this.

 

[ruff_hi]

@Dazz - I was hoping for a game where I am teamed with another human v other human teams. But happy to play either way. Mitch got someone to check their map for them - we should settle on general map conditions and ask someone to set us up appropriate. One item that I would like (re maps) is no uranium. I'm playing a PBEM game where I am getting nuked to death by a technologically superior opponent and I am hating it. If they had put those hammers into tanks and gunships and rolled over my civ - I wouldn't like it, but it would be so much better than nukes.

 

[Dazz_G]

I greatly prefer playing two civs ... the original 2 Civs and NITF were both great fun. It also allows 8 - 10 human civs with 4 - 5 players meaning quick turnaround. The current 4 teams game i'm in is pretty slow turnaround and nowhere near as much fun.

Any ideas who could set up the map for us ? We could just as easily make a house rule banning nuclear weapons ... i'm no great fan of them either.

 

[Dazz_G]

We are still looking for 2 - 3 players to get this show on the road ... any takers ?

 

[Mitchum]

Hi,

In my opinion, if you get more than 4 or 5 humans in a game, the chance of completing it in less than 2 years is very small. Just 1 inconsistent player (i.e. someone who doesn't play their turn within 12 hours) can easily add a year or more to a game.

I'm in the same 2v2v2v2 game as Dazz. With 8 humans, we play less than 1 turn a week. It's very hard to get into a flow in a game like this.

Like Ruff, I enjoy playing with another human. In these games, you can strategize and learn from each other.

I would be interested in this game if we have 4 (or 5 or 6?) consistent players with either:

1. 4 or 5 players controlling 2 teamed civs each
2. 2 humans vs. 2 humans vs. (2 humans?) vs. 2 AI vs. 2 AI vs. ...

If the game gets more humans than that, it just takes too long, in my opinion.

I was able to get Ainwood to generate a map for our PBEM game with four players in the format of option 1 above. Each team has it's own continent (4 continents total) on a large map. As far as I know, since it's not possible / easy to enter World Builder in PBEM (thank God), we had Ainwood go in and do a few things:

• 
  Remove all huts since they add a huge element of chance to a game. One player may get Bronze Working while another gets barbs.

• 
  Ensure that each continent is a single solid land mass. I've seen continent games where one player is on a large land mass and his teammate is on a 4 or 5 tile island just off the coast. This wouldn't be fair.

• 
  Ensure that every player had a fair and approximately equal starting location. I generated a test map once and 1 civ had 3 golds, 6 flood plains, corn and a lot of trees. This player would get off to a very early lead and it would be hard to catch up.

By the way, I only have Vanilla, so if you guys decide to go with BtS, I'm out. I'm fine with whatever you guys decide to do. If you want to take this game a different direction with a lot of humans, I'll probably bow out.

Mitch

 

[Dazz_G]

You have largely hit on the head why I prefer each player to have 2 civs ... I like a lot of human civs and, as you say, 8 humans, wether in teams of 2 or not, still takes forever and basically isn't fun.

We currently have 4 humans ... to team up in pairs basically makes it 'our team against yours' - no real diplo, backstabbing etc.

I have sent a couple of pm's ... i'd like to wait a day or so and see if we can get a fifth player.

Either way, 4 or 5 players, i'd say 2 teamed civs each.

Although i'd have prefered BTS, I'm happy to run with Vanilla.

 

[chasbolt]

Hi all, I replied to the Dazz invite by PM. I'm willing as I was having a good time when I stepped in for the Prophet in Tim's game. If I'm in, what ever y'all decide is fine by me. I can do vanilla, but prefer BtS.
In Delaware, usa (-5).

 

[ruff_hi]

I actually prefer two non-teamed civs similar to prior games. It opens up different options.

 

[Mitchum]

By the way, I'm GMT -8.

Regarding the non-teamed civs, it can lead to some very unfair game setups. It's possible for one player to have both of his civs very close to each other. They will meet very early and be able to trade (resources, techs, units, etc.) or to gang up on other civs. Another player may not be able to have his civs meet until caravels.

If we played the non-teamed civs version, we would definitely need someone to set the game up for us.

 

[Dazz_G]

I have to say I agree with Mitchum on this one ... it happened to me to a certain degree in the other 2 Civ games ... one position getting a backwater start and huge distance away from the other position.

I would much rather have teamed civs and accept the randomness of the map creater, either on continents or, if you are worried about starting on a tiny island, on Pangaea. Anyone else any preference ?

By the way, do you all want to submit civ preference lists or shall we all go random ?

 

[chasbolt]

I see the possibilities of all that you discuss. Eliminate tech trading, that will reduce many of the problems. Eliminate the huts and the luck of that draw. Without teams we have 2 emails to send per person to get through one round. Maybe someone knows how to get around that? I know we could make the turn order such that we follow our other civ, but then we'll probably be next to ourselves. Many, many variables. It's simpler to have a team game and no tech trading with 5 players-10 civs. The next discussion would be the land area. I've had my say. Y'all figure out the rules and I'll play my part. I be random and ready.

 

[ruff_hi]

I'd be happy with random and our civs as teams. That eliminates some options but its still ok. I suggest we ask someone to set us up on a map so that we all get reasonable starting positions. Can we have unrestricted leaders for even more fun?

 

[Dazz_G]

This is where I show how big a noob I am when it comes to creation / customisation ......

If we ask someone to set up a map, do we not need to know what Civs are in play before the map is created ? I'm not sure how that works if we go random.

To sum up ....

We want a huge vanilla map, five continents, no huts and no uranium ?

10 human civs, 5 AI ?

Rules ...

Teamed Civs
No tech trading
No City razing
Random Personalities
Raging Barbs
Agressive AI
All Victories

 

[ruff_hi]

To generate a PBEM map, you start a normal game with the required options, enter WB and check everyone's starting positions, remove huts and other stuff like that then save the file via WB.

Then you go back into Civ4, start your PBEM game and select 'scenario'. The WB save that you just saved is there as a scenario - you select that version and away you go.

The person making the map will either need to select the leaders / civs or just let the system do it (random!).

Rules: I think we should allow tech trading if we are playing as teams. Is this vanilla, Warlords or BtS? If BtS we could go with 'no tech brokering'.

 

[Dazz_G]

Its gonna be Vanilla ... Mitch doesn't have Warlords / BtS.

 

[ruff_hi]

Its gonna be Vanilla ... Mitch doesn't have Warlords / BtS.

Ok, fine. But that rules out tech brokering and (I think) random personalities. There might be a way of doing 'random personalities' but the map editor will have to manually select the civ or the leader.

The WB save is just a text file and you can go in and edit it.