1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Ruleset Discussion

Discussion in 'Civ4 -ISDG 2012' started by Lord Parkin, Jun 1, 2012.

  1. 2metraninja

    2metraninja Defender of Nabaxica

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,663
    Location:
    Plovdiv, BG
    Truth be told, I've never played in a sequential pitboss. However I do believe exactly this is the case. In online games with sequential turns production/science/growth, etc happens for all the players at the same time when the turn switches, just like this is the case with simultaneous pitbosses, so I believe this will be the case with sequential pitboss too. Maybe someone with experience can correct me if I am wrong.

    But even this does not cover all the advantages/disadvantages of being first/second mover. The one who is moving first will still be able to promote and attack before the second mover can do anything in this regard.

    This link shows a hypothetical way of dealing with some of the advantages/disadvantages of being first/second mover, but it does not list those. I though if we have something like complete list of advantages/disadvantages of being first/second mover we can see if those can be compared in strength and if found somewhat equal, then we can just leave it unregulated as we all agreed that rules about this can be very hard to create/control/enforce.
     
  2. ruff_hi

    ruff_hi Live 4ever! Or die trying

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    9,086
    Location:
    an Aussie in Boston
    Agreed. Would you like to start such a list? Or anyone? I would, but as has been pointed out above, I miss items.
     
  3. ruff_hi

    ruff_hi Live 4ever! Or die trying

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    9,086
    Location:
    an Aussie in Boston
    Or here is a thought ... what about if the person declaring war always takes the first half. I have seen comments about how the first have has the momentum and that is certainly true with the person declaring ... how does that sound?
    Spoiler My nic is Ruff and I endorse this message :
    Please Note: This post is posted while wearing my official 'RB Rule Discussion' hat. The views, opinions and comments expressed in this post represent my views while wearing said hat. I am not authorized to bind RB to any decision, conclusion, concession or agreement that I might endorse while acting in this particular role. I am authorized to push forward the rule discussion.
     
  4. talonschild

    talonschild Drive-By NESer

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Messages:
    1,954
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Better than assigned sequential. Since the build phase never happens until the turn roll, that just sets in stone an advantage for one team above all others in the game setup. If we leave it so people can choose where they want to be in the turn order (by whatever means we deem suitable), it levels the field - which is something we all want.

    Personally, I like the method posted above where the team that moved first one turn could elect to allow (actually, it may be more correct to say force) their enemy to doublemove so they could get the second half of the next turn. But any sort of way for teams to decide when they move is preferable.
     
  5. tobiasn

    tobiasn Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Norway
    I like that "elected opponent double move for the guys in first turn" or what you call it as well. It was proposed by mzprox here, and no-one really took notice.

    He did however say "if we didn't use the spanish mod" - but maybe Manolo or Magno could answer if such a switch of turn order is possible?

    In that case nothing is set in stone, and turn order is "in play" as a strategic tool.
     
  6. ruff_hi

    ruff_hi Live 4ever! Or die trying

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    9,086
    Location:
    an Aussie in Boston
    This is a very good point. I don't really think that any of the English speaking teams should be driving / deciding this point as it is to their advantage. Any of the non-English speaking teams got any comments on if this should be included or not?

    Should we include some commentary about this when we get a stable rule set that all teams vote on?
    Spoiler My nic is Ruff and I endorse this message :
    Please Note: This post is posted while wearing my official 'RB Rule Discussion' hat. The views, opinions and comments expressed in this post represent my views while wearing said hat. I am not authorized to bind RB to any decision, conclusion, concession or agreement that I might endorse while acting in this particular role. I am authorized to push forward the rule discussion.
     
  7. SevenSpirits

    SevenSpirits Immortal?

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    512
    Just so you guys don't make any rules based on wrong information, in fact with a sequential game production happens as soon as you end turn. It's just like pbem in that respect. This is one big advantage of sequential turns - everyone plays the same game. Unfortunately sequential turns with 9 teams is a slow motion train wreck waiting to happen. :)

    While I'm here... forcing the declarer to take the worse turn half every time seems like a very bad idea, unless you want a giant peace-fest. :)
     
  8. ruff_hi

    ruff_hi Live 4ever! Or die trying

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    9,086
    Location:
    an Aussie in Boston
    I've also found out that you can swap from sim to seq and back again ...
    Spoiler My nic is Ruff and I endorse this message :
    Please Note: This post is posted while wearing my official 'RB Rule Discussion' hat. The views, opinions and comments expressed in this post represent my views while wearing said hat. I am not authorized to bind RB to any decision, conclusion, concession or agreement that I might endorse while acting in this particular role. I am authorized to push forward the rule discussion.
     
  9. Yuufo

    Yuufo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    54
    I submitted R_rolo1's proposal to my team.
    Though no final vote has been reached yet, the main trend is towards approval.
    However, point 6d sparked criticism (dead team players joining other teams). There are concerns about unfair information spread.
     
  10. 2metraninja

    2metraninja Defender of Nabaxica

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,663
    Location:
    Plovdiv, BG
    No, no - I am not trying to make any rules for this game out of presumptions, we are speaking more of hypothetically discussing what can be if it is sequential turns, where this game will be played with simultaneous turns anyway.

    Just out of curiosity n continuation of discussing possible advantages/disadvantages of being first/second in a sequential turns pitboss, what happens with

    Is this true?
     
  11. 2metraninja

    2metraninja Defender of Nabaxica

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,663
    Location:
    Plovdiv, BG
    I second this elegant approach for handling the highly controversial first/second mover case.
     
  12. tobiasn

    tobiasn Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Norway
    (no official CFC hat on now, just trying to speed things up :) )

    RB/Apolyton: Since you've been the only ones really vocal about this, together with us at CFC, is the mzprox solution something you can accept outright as a compromise to all this controversy?

    And I would really, really like to know if the APT mod could work like this. I'll PM the Spanish kode krew. ;)
     
  13. tobiasn

    tobiasn Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Norway
    Manolo just confirmed that this is indeed possible:

    Sweet. So this is definately a viable option.
     
  14. Lord Parkin

    Lord Parkin aka emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    6,374
    Location:
    New Zealand
    What if the player in the second half refuses to double move in order to maintain the resource denial advantage?
     
  15. tobiasn

    tobiasn Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Norway
    It obviosly needs to be something along these lines:

    - When at war, player having first turn has a right to forfeit his first turn position, thus giving the player in second turn a double move advantage, and putting that player in the first turn position for the subsequent turn.

    It doesn't have to be more complicated than that. It's a right we give to the player that has first turn - who ever that is. So if player #2 is "bumped up" to first turn, he too can choose to give his opponent a double move and "get back in line" the next turn.

    Such a request needs to be done before the new turn begins, obv.

    As I see it, this way of doing it keeps the strategic differences of being first/second intact - but if the situation is intolerable for a team in first position, they can choose to switch - at a cost of an opponent's double move.

    This should address both your concerns of perpetual resource denial, and the expressed concerns from several parties that your initial proposal would nerf specific tactics.

    Again, I'm not on any official CFC business here, but I'd like to see an amicable solution to this, and this is by far the best proposal I've come across.
     
  16. 2metraninja

    2metraninja Defender of Nabaxica

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,663
    Location:
    Plovdiv, BG
    I do like this approach much :thumbsup:
     
  17. Filon

    Filon Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    Messages:
    69
    Location:
    Siberia
    But what if the war involved more than two civilizations?
     
  18. 2metraninja

    2metraninja Defender of Nabaxica

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,663
    Location:
    Plovdiv, BG
    I guess the one wanting to change his position will have to suffer all the nations which are in war with them and want to move after them to double- move them.

    This leaves open the question of maintaining moves in blocks.
     
  19. Magno_uy

    Magno_uy Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Messages:
    273
    spanish team dont care, we are planning to eliminate all of you, so don't care if someone wants to suffer more than once our forces.
     
  20. Magno_uy

    Magno_uy Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Messages:
    273
    Sorry.. At least I am completly lost and awesome on the capacity to spam-on-topic you had...



    :confused:
     

Share This Page