09-06-2004 05:27									#31
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by alexman Huge map, decrease OCN to small-map (6 player) levels, and subtract 1 gold for each citizen. Either that, or we find someone to make a map.

to the latter. OTOH - I was OK with the 10 city restriction on a smaller map. I just find huge and large pbem games really monotonous.

Also - any plans on replacing Dom? How about Rommel?

	09-06-2004 10:47									#32
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Beta Also - any plans on replacing Dom? How about Rommel?

Whoever is steady and dedicated enough to play throughout the game.

	09-06-2004 12:48									#33
	Tired of ads?

If no one minds me missing a few weekends here and there over the summer, I'd like to play this one.

I'm a little mentally drained right now, so forgive me if this sounds rediculous, but what about elimination mode? It should slow the REX by making it dangerous and would leave no-man's zones between players, especially if settling on hills is prohibited. If this sounds too extreme, we could try double or triple elimination. Either way, the more cities you settle, the more targets you would give your opponents. Colonies and outposts would have more value. The fringe specialist city would be less attractive.

Reducing the OCN I understand, but with the 1 gold per citizen I'm having trouble picturing all the implications; no fringe specialist cities and slow tech development?

	09-06-2004 18:17									#34
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Rommel2D what about elimination mode? It should slow the REX by making it dangerous and would leave no-man's zones between players, especially if settling on hills is prohibited.

That's a great idea!
However, I have never used elimination mode (not even in the conquests) so I'll leave it to others to say if it's too frustrating to lose a game so abruptly, especially with the time investment of a 6-player PBEM.

quote: no fringe specialist cities and slow tech development?

If you pay 1 gold per citizen, your fringe cities must have a pretty good reason for existing, so we would end up with fewer cities whose sole purpose is to fill up the empty space. A side-effect, welcome in this case, is the slower tech pace. However, it seems that idea is probably too drastic for this game.

Dominae, are you still not playing if we play a standard map without the city limit restrictions? If not, maybe you can make the map for us!

	09-06-2004 19:21									#35
	Tired of ads?

I'm not very fond of elimination. It's a bit of a too "drastic" multiplayer option for my taste, similar to accelerated production. But I wouldn't "veto" it (i.e. leave the game) if the majority agrees. But with the time, it's bound to steadily reduce the number of players, which in my opinion makes the game less interesting. The last two would then fight some kind of "american duel" (lead 2 duelists with rifles in a forest from different sides and see who survives).

How is it possible to pay gold for citizens, alexman? I can't see how it works (I don't have your editor experience), however if it works, it could be a sufficient limitation.

By the way, Aqualung71 has applied to play too, if we can fill a second game. And we shouldn't forget about Gamecube64.

	09-06-2004 19:25									#36
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Just give all citizens (including laborers) minus 1 tax in addition to all their other attributes, and taxmen +1 tax instead of +2. I tested it and it works as expected.

	09-06-2004 19:52									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Excellent.

By the way, Krill just PMd me too, interested in a second game. So we'd have already 3 for a second game, and if Dominae returns even 4.

Krill proposed to soften up the elimination by raising the number of cities being necessary for a civs destruction. If we decide to play elimination, I'm all for increasing this limit to at least 3.

	09-06-2004 21:15									#38
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

That's what I meant by double or triple elimination. I'm not against it, but the more cities needed to lose, the less risky REXing becomes. I'd prefer 2 or 3.

We're experimenting with the elimination mode in the AP/E game right now. The one interesting fact that turned up so far is that volcanos are disabled:

quote: Originally posted by MotownDennis in another thread You cannot abandon cities in elimination mode. The option is removed from the right click menu. Also, volcanos DO erupt in multiplayer games, but NOT if elimination mode is turned on. Thus, you cannot be eliminated by a volcano

This is a bit unfortunate since eruptions would help to hamper transportation networks, especially on a young planet.

	09-06-2004 21:29									#39
	Increase Your PM Length

Since you can't abandon cities, we can't relocate one again?

	09-06-2004 21:34									#40
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I hope you can at least abandon a city by building a settler/worker with no food surplus. Also, if you take your city back in elimination mode, do you get your elimination count back?

So where is everyone else? Let's vote on some of these things and get started.

1. Underpopulation: 3-city elimination mode or 1gpt citizen maintenance?
   
2. Corruption for underpopulated map: reduce distance corruption and OCN or play with standard corruption?
   
3. AU mod or not?
   
4. Forests: Chopping allowed or unchoppable with food bonus?
   
5. Forest planting allowed or not?
   

	09-06-2004 21:37									#41
	Remove this text

quote: I hope you can at least abandon a city by building a settler/worker with no food surplus.

NO idea

quote: Also, if you take your city back in elimination mode, do you get your elimination count back?

No, the defender loses one instead.

	09-06-2004 21:44									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

1) 1gpt citizen maint.
2) reduce distance C and reduce OCN.
3) Abstain
4) Abstain. Tough one due to randomness of Map Generator and potential advantage/disadvantage to one player.
5) Either allow with a serious increase in Worker Turn cost or not allowed. Definitely not allowed in its stock form. Make it cost the same as building a fortress, maybe more.

	09-06-2004 21:47									#43
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Forest planting already has a higher cost than fortress building.

	09-06-2004 21:49									#44
	Put an end to popups!

1. 1gpt
2. Modify corruption
3. AU mod
4. Abstain
5. Not allowed (or move it to Ecology )

	09-06-2004 21:56									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Sir Ralph, I was not trying to "veto" any idea by quitting...

I'm open creating the map, but it will have to go to early next week as I do not yet have Civ3 on my new computer.

If there is enough interest for two games, I would propose starting another one more along the lines of what Sir Ralph initially suggested (or what I understood of it):

1. Terrain restrictions for city placement.
2. Terrain restrictions for fastmovers.
3. Everything else standard (maybe play with Chop/Plant Forest).

I'll post a thread once this game gets underway. PM me if you're interested. (I hope I'm not stepping on Sir Ralph's toes here...)

	09-06-2004 22:00									#46
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by alexman I hope you can at least abandon a city by building a settler/worker with no food surplus.

According to Freid-Psitlolen, you can't.

I'll bump the Vesuvius thread and ask if captured cities are all auto-razed or what in multi-city elimination when I get the time. Have you played one of these out Krill?


1- I'd say both- even with the 1gpt tax you would still get a free shield and cultural borders, and elimination only would still allow large empires, just slowly growing, tight-knit ones.
2- Modified corruption to further hamper the second case above
3- I need to recheck governments in the mod...
4- Would it be possible to just double or triple the frequency of game?
5- Not

	09-06-2004 22:01									#47
	Suffering from ads?

quote: If there is enough interest for two games, I would propose starting another one more along the lines of what Sir Ralph initially suggested (or what I understood of it): 1. Terrain restrictions for city placement. 2. Terrain restrictions for fastmovers. 3. Everything else standard (maybe play with Chop/Plant Forest).

I'd be more interested in that game, as well.
Since there are plenty of folks interested in this one, perhaps I should bow out and wait for that one with Dom.

	10-06-2004 05:17									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

1 - both
2 - modify corruption
3 - AU mod is fine
4 - What about allowing neither chopping forest nor clearing jungle, to preserve the natural obstacles? Should also further limit the settlement, nobody would want to put his precious cities even at the border of a jungle.
5 - If 4 is approved, obviously not

	10-06-2004 12:23									#49
	Inflate your Upload Space

On the AU mod, the government improvements look good. Most of the other changes don't bring much to PBEM except confusion to those less familiar with it, though. It won't bother me too much to use it here, but we should do something soon about an AU mod that doesn't concern itself with AI issues...

SR's last suggestion for 4 looks fine to me.

What about choosing/assigning tribes? Keshiks, Chasquis, and Conquistadors might not need their AU buffing, if they are allowed at all...

	10-06-2004 20:28									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

So we have 11 people interested in this type of game so far. I suggest we split these people in two groups right now, and then each group can fine-tune its own rules.

So it seems one group will play a relatively highly-modded game (corruption, citizen maintenance, elimination mode, AU mod), and the other group will stick to stock rules with some terrain restrictions.

Please state your preference. We also need one more player (or one player to play in both groups?). So far we have:

Mod group: Sir Ralph, Rommel2D, Krill, jshelr, Gamecube64, alexman

Stock group: Dominae, ducki, Aqualung71, Beta, snoopy369

Edit: added Krill, jshelr, and Gamecube64 to the mod group after receiving a word from them. jshelr prefers the modded game but would play in either. Also added Aqualung71, who doesn't care, Beta, and snoopy369 to the stock group.

Last edited by alexman on 12-06-2004 at 12:24

	11-06-2004 02:55									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Mods are applied to the map, right? If so sign me up for the modded.

	11-06-2004 07:53									#52
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I don't really mind, so since you're already over on the mod group, put me in the stock group.

	12-06-2004 07:21									#53
	Suffering from ads?

Stock group please.

	12-06-2004 09:55									#54
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

If you need another player, i'd happily play in either group. Both ideas sound interesting.

	12-06-2004 16:30									#55
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Since we seem to be at 5 players for the second game while the first game is full, I've taken the liberty of asking Trip to join, just so my 1% chance of winning reduces to 0%

	12-06-2004 21:05									#56
	Inflate your Upload Space

hey, well, my 0% chance just became -5%, so ...

	13-06-2004 05:57									#57
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Trip can't do it. Anyone else?

	13-06-2004 06:15									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

ChrisiusMaximus had some bad luck and was just eliminated from the Europe in Flames PBEM at around 3000 BC, so he might be looking for another one.

	13-06-2004 06:27									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I presume the "stock" game is not elimination mode?

	13-06-2004 06:29									#60
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

It's up to you guys to decide.