The Great Game 1

[TheJopa]

After playing few multiplayer games I came to an idea to make one large multiplayer champaign. I see that there are players who are interested so here are the basic rules:

1. I envision a game with at least 8 players. If there will be more interested we can play with more. Map size will be scaled accordingly.

2. Since we wont be able to finish it in one sitting, we will play in sessions. Time at which sessions will be played will be known in advance.
At this point correct time is to be determined.
Proposed time: Once a week, Sundays, 19:00 - 22:00 GMT
http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/
3. If you can't play next session, you are supposed to find your replacement for next session. It should be someone in who you have your confidence (At least concerning playing skills ). In all fairness replacement should follow main players instructions on how to play, which goals to pursue etc. After you arrange your replacement name it here, in this thread.
If you can't find replacement you should then state whether you would prefer your civ to be AI'ed or played by anyone who might apply for session.

4. Sessions will be played in predetermined length (3 hours?) So we can plan our time and to avoid cases where some players want to drop and some to keep on playing. If you need to leave, it's ok, but your civ will either be AI-played until end of session or you need to find substitution to jump in.

5. We should role play at least a little bit. So good players should help other good players instead of killing them off at first sign of weakness. Players should help 'their brothers and sisters in faith' and be ready to help them in war, at least economicaly. Roleplaying isn't strictly enforced but I think it would make game much more fun and allow few interesting turnovers in a game. If one player starts mindlessly taking cities from other players other players then he should face serious gang-up. Also evil-vs-good battles are encouraged! Isn't that what we all want to see in our SP games?

6. You need Hamachi, that's how we will organize ourselves.

7. Since AI isn't best, especially in battle, you MUSTN'T declare war to AI'ed civ. If you are forced to do so for some reason you should ask other players for quick vote. If AI attacks you you can defend but you can't take much (just enough so that you don't end up economically defeated), terms of peace deal must be approved by other players quick vote.



Enlist here, if you are interested. All problems will be easily solved as long as we remember it is all for fun. Also name your civ and leader and state what time would be fine for you, as arranging time is hardest part of this all





PLAYERS:
TheJopa - Flauros - Calabim
Claire - Balseraph - Prepentach
Black Whole - Luchuirp - Garrim Gyr
TheGreenLink - Ljosalfar - Arendel
Much2Much - Doviello - Mahala
Brainpan - Grigori - Cassiel
Jono - Hippus - Tasunke

 

[Chandrasekhar]

I'm interested... but I'd rather have just human players instead of including AI.

 

[wilboman]

I think the AI would just step in if someone drops out. So it would be temporary. Le sigh. This would be fun (I'd get my butt handed to me in short order, but still fun) if I had the time (read: a life outside work).

 

[vorshlumpf]

I'm very interested. My schedule opens up quite a bit after this weekend. However, most weekday nights I'm not available, as that's when I teach. I'll understand if I simply cannot be a part of this...

Thoughts:

- I'm indifferent to the inclusion of AI. Personally, I feel that "the more, the merrier", however I can see how the AI may be exploited in MP.
- "We should role play at least a little bit." Yes!
- I think I'd be interested in playing Kandros Fir since the dwarves need some love.

 

[TheJopa]

I'm glad you have positive comments. Wilboman is right, AI would be just temporary, in case someone drops out and there is no replacement available. Vorshlump- AI may be exploited pretty badly especially latter in game when spells come, that is why I put the rule about not attacking AI'd civ. Putting AI is only a last resort, if some player cant play session.

 

[.SinClaire.]

i want in! Unless i'm hindered by other affairs.

So can this be like, Vatican themed? I mean we each have our own civ, and we are all obligied to one civ and civ leader, and if anyone breaks and attacks a fellow civ the "Pope" leader can call on all loyal nations and inact a justifiable war against the so-n-so civ/civs?

of course we have to hack n slash our way to that position of power. To see who amongst us is the true leader of ffh'ers. Not killing each other off, just like...'own' 'em. Kinda like prison rape.

If one player starts mindlessly taking cities from other players other players then he should face serious gang-up. Also evil-vs-good battles are encouraged! Isn't that what we all want to see in our SP games?

yeah, but if someone is an evil civ. they can prove themselves to be the "top dog" then everyone should be considered "evil" and good civ's be punis'shed.

 

[Black Whole]

First, great idea!
I would be interested, but I' ve got some questions/requests:

1. EDIT: I already found the answer for the first question

2. What happens if the AI declares war on me and comes with a hero? Am I forced to let him alive?

3. If we roleplay, I think that we should totally roleplay! Everyone should have to.

4. Could the length for a session not take more than 3 hours? I've got also some work to do.

5. What kind of game options will we play with?

If I play (it depends on time and length), I wil play as the Luchuirp with Garrim Gyr.

Here are the times (all in MET): Monday: only after six o'clock in the evening
Tuesday: the whole afternoon and evening
Wednesday: no time
Thursday: see Tuesday
Friday: afternoon from 2 o'clock to 6 o'clock
Saturday and Sunday: nearly every hour

 

[Kjaaly]

I think I'd be interrested, but I wont be able to play on tuesdays until 5 pm and same with saturday. All other days I'd be able to play from 2 pm. (All this is GMT)

Just a few questions: How about religions? Of course the Ljosalfar would adobt FotL, but how about civs like the Amurites? It's a bit blurred which religion they'd follow, so can the player decide for themselves there?
And which difficulty are we playing? Same or depending on the player? (I usually play on noble )

If the time's not a too big problem, I'd like to play Dain the Caswallawn. (Or if he's already taken, Tebryn/Cassiel)

 

[Grey Fox]

I'd be interested.

I got all the time in the world (except when I'm sleeping, looking for a job or working on cIVRPG, all of which are not on any scheduled time)

And to Kjaaly, I think you/we should be allowed to play freely with our civs. And roleplay them accordingly. If you want to play as an Evil Elohim, you should be able to.

I think I'd like to play as Amelanchier.

 

[TheJopa]

First the replies:

yeah, but if someone is an evil civ. they can prove themselves to be the "top dog" then everyone should be considered "evil" and good civ's be punis'shed.

Of course, evil civs would roleplay if they attack whenever they get good opportunity. But good civs would roleplay too and try to stop them at doing so.

2. What happens if the AI declares war on me and comes with a hero? Am I forced to let him alive?

No.
That's would be answer from top of my head, since you are defending. But if it comes to that situation, we might see if it is really inevitable and what are other options.
Third option would be using worldbuilder on start of next session and return hero (maybe with less xp?) I don't know if this is doable.

3. If we roleplay, I think that we should totally roleplay! Everyone should have to.

Those who resent roleplaying shouldn't join at all so I doubt it will make a big problem. I do have a set of rules on my mind but lets leave them for game no.2. For start, lets play without strict rules and let our fun factor be a guide.

4. Could the length for a session not take more than 3 hours? I've got also some work to do.

I think it should take exactly 3 hours, no more or less, so that you can plan your work ahead. Of course, this is negotiable, we might play 2 hours only but with more sessions if we all agree to. In any case it should be exactly defined how long to play

5. What kind of game options will we play with?

I personally support random map, tech trading on, map size scaled to # of players (I don't want too small, we need exploration, but even worse is too big as real game begins when borders collide) I think it wont be a problem to agree upon the settings, some standard settings should be fine for everyone. We can also do all random.

Just a few questions: How about religions? Of course the Ljosalfar would adobt FotL, but how about civs like the Amurites? It's a bit blurred which religion they'd follow, so can the player decide for themselves there?
And which difficulty are we playing? Same or depending on the player? (I usually play on noble

You are free to pick any religion. Especially with neutral civs. But what should be punished is frequent religion switches. You can 'fall' with Elohim but you shouldn't be able to come back easily.



Haredst part: Time
Vorshlump, which timezone are you?
I'm CET (GMT+1) I can play 20:00 and latter (up until noon) any day.
Kjalay, Black Whole, Grey Fox (at weekdays) seem fine with this time.

 

[.SinClaire.]

I guess I'm in, for summer time anyway, i'll probably play 8:00pm (CET time)
maybe only for 3 hours or so a day though,

I'll be Perpencrap,

 

[much2much]

I would love to play.

I would like to be Mahala of the Doviello.

I will not declare war on anybody I have the same religion as. I would suggest you are not allowed to declare war on somebody who has the same religion unless there is a semi-legitimate reason (has open borders to your enemy). If you change religions you can't attack previous brothers/sisters for 20 turns (cultural stability and propaganda realignment penalty).

I will honour alliances (I will need them anyway to avoid being dogpiled). I would suggest humans adopt the policy that closing open borders requires a 10 turn period before war can be declared (anymore than this and legitimate issues like culture bombing or city spamming around borders cannot be retaliated for).

Would a scoreboard be worthwhile? 10 points for a game victory, 4 points for surviving to the end of the game, 1 point for participating? That way players won't go for broke for a victory and sacrifice their civs ability to survive, which is very poor roleplaying (unless you are Hitler).

 

[Black Whole]

So, when do we start? 20:00 is fine with me, I just need to know if we start already tomorrow, so I can arrange it.

Btw, it seems that I am the only good civ so far. Can I get a bonus to compensate it ?

 

[vorshlumpf]

I would love to play.

I would like to be Mahala of the Doviello.

I will not declare war on anybody I have the same religion as. I would suggest you are not allowed to declare war on somebody who has the same religion unless there is a semi-legitimate reason (has open borders to your enemy). If you change religions you can't attack previous brothers/sisters for 20 turns (cultural stability and propaganda realignment penalty).

I will honour alliances (I will need them anyway to avoid being dogpiled). I would suggest humans adopt the policy that closing open borders requires a 10 turn period before war can be declared (anymore than this and legitimate issues like culture bombing or city spamming around borders cannot be retaliated for).

Would a scoreboard be worthwhile? 10 points for a game victory, 4 points for surviving to the end of the game, 1 point for participating? That way players won't go for broke for a victory and sacrifice their civs ability to survive, which is very poor roleplaying (unless you are Hitler).

I think these rules are going too far, too soon. As TheJopa said, we can think about such things after the first game. For now, basically play your role selflessly and all will go well.

I like the idea of a scoreboard. However, I would like to see less relative points for victory, and some points added in by vote of players for good role-playing. Something like each player will have 3 points to give to other players (however they please) as role-playing points when the game is over.

Oh, and my time zone?... GMT -7

After this weekend I'm willing to play late in the evenings (for me) on weekdays; and even in the middle of the night, if necessary. I guess that would be GMT 3:00 to 14:00. On weekends I can be much more free - any time of day (negating weekend plans which arise from time-to-time).

 

[vorshlumpf]

By the way, what does random map mean?

 

[vorshlumpf]

One last thing: I don't see anything wrong with justified wars between those of the same faith. Every religion has its different sects, and they don't always agree.

As I said before, if every act is done in the name of role-play as opposed to personal triumph, it will go just fine.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

It'd be fun, but I usually end up with connectivity issues, not sure why. I'll be interested to read about it, though.

 

[TheJopa]

I propose that we play Sundays, CET - 20:00 to 23:00 or 23:00 to 2:00 or anything in between. So far it seems to suit everyone. It is afternoon in USA.
Wars between same religions are fine, like in real world, but should be less likely and who ever declared war might be attacked from other civs who share that religion.

EDIT: So far we have 2 evil, 2 good and 2 neutral civs.

 

[vorshlumpf]

Well, that would be a great time for me.

 

[brainpan]

I would love to be included in the lineup, but I periodically need to leave town for work. Ironically, weekdays would be better for me since I tend to work on weekends...but if there's any possible way for me to swing the schedule I'll let you know.

PS-I would enjoy playing as Grigori since Vorschlump has claimed my favored Khazad.

PPS-I would suggest people use this GMT page for scheduling to avoid errors.