22-03-2005 03:10									#61
	Tired of ads?

Done: Persia. Thus, one team has slowmover UUs, one is mixed, and one has fastmovers.

Regarding the locked alliance versus FFA... I say leave it open to the respective teams. We'll prolly get more participants that way, and as has been pointed out, the very nature of AU DARs will provide for learning, regardless of structure... what Rommel calls the 'AU method'. The most important aspect, I think, is that we get a large number of games played with the same map / scenario, and that participants keep the theme in mind.

Don;t worry about timing Hermann... PBEM games are relatively easy to handle. And, just in case, in this format we should have the option of a team member or the admin filling in if someone can't get a given turn done in a timely fashion.

Map, map, we need a map.

	22-03-2005 03:23									#62
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

But seriously, does anyone know how we contacted Firaxis to participate in the PTW ISDG?

	22-03-2005 03:30									#63
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Soren, IIRC, took an interest and made original contact with us in the PTWDG I. Wanted to watch over the game and see what happened. Then the ISDG discussions started and someone asked them.

Again, strictly from memory as a DG junkie...

Good civ pairings from what I can see.

I'm down for either a FFA or locked alliance game, and civ.. Just pencil me in wherever you need a body.

My play time is 2-4AM Eastern on weekdays. Sporadic on weekends.

	22-03-2005 03:36									#64
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I have Jesse Smith's email addy... when we are ready, I will let Firaxis know.

	22-03-2005 03:55									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

All we need is a catchy name and a logo, and I could ask Markos to set up some actual products for this AU Course in the 'Poly store. It could be quite cool if you ask me.

	22-03-2005 04:04									#66
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I still like the Persia/Ottoman combo. Why not include them with 2 other Ag-charged teams, such as Celts/Scandinavia and one of Iroquois/Sumeria with one of China/Arabia/Japan?

	22-03-2005 06:27									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Jobs
Head Administrator- Lord Nuclear
Manages the overall course. Make sure things move along. Step in to play turns if necessary. Oversee replacement players if necessary. Judge, jury, and executioner if things come up and rulings need to be made. If the Administrator feels the need to choose an assistant to help him manage, he may do so.

Head of Advertising- Open
Makes sure all sites are contacted in an organized and timely fasion. Should try to contact the owners/admin of the sites to advertise this course. Would also be in charge of wording the Apolyton News Item in the best possible manner.

Head of Design- Open
Would design a few logos for the AU course specifically for AU memorabilia, and enlarge the existing AU Civgroup icon. Although not mandatory, it is recommended to develop a "catch phrase" for this course.


I just put a bit of a formal spin on it.

	22-03-2005 06:56									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Aqualung71 I still like the Persia/Ottoman combo. Why not include them with 2 other Ag-charged teams, such as Celts/Scandinavia and one of Iroquois/Sumeria with one of China/Arabia/Japan?

Aqua, I don't understand what you are suggesting.

	22-03-2005 07:20									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I think he means that we should keep the Persia/Ottoman combo, and the other combos would have won Agriculture trait between them.

	22-03-2005 09:31									#70
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Team 1 - Persia/Ottomans

Team 2 - Celts/Scandinavia

Team 3 - Iroquois/China or Sumeria/Japan or Iroquois/Arabia, etc

	22-03-2005 21:31									#71
	Support Apolyton

Sir Ralph has volunteered to do the map.

I'm going to stick with my latest civ picks, and have come to the conclusion that stock is preferable at this time.

Here's what my instructions will be:

Map: Standard, continents, 80% water, normal, temperate, 3B. Designed to provide for three primary continents, one for each team, accessible by Galleys. Not AP. Three native lux per continent, but two lux (ivory and ?) only on islands. Strat resources through saltpeter on each continent... after that? :chuckle:

In order of play:
France
China
Persia
Scandinavia
India
Arabia

Locked alliances: None

Evil surpises: ?
__________________

Any final requests?

	22-03-2005 22:28									#72
	Put an end to popups!

I thought Locked Alliances were being left up to the player?

	22-03-2005 23:19									#73
	Increase Your PM Length

Correct, and that is why they should not be set up within the game.

	23-03-2005 01:32									#74
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Theseus I have Jesse Smith's email addy... when we are ready, I will let Firaxis know.

The thing about this is that it's crunch time at Firaxis for the rest of the year- I doubt anyone will be too eager to take time away from Civ4 development and testing to play Civ3. If no one has had time to work on a Civ3 patch in the last year...

	23-03-2005 01:42									#75
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

True. Sometimes, though, they at least like to watch.

	23-03-2005 01:47									#76
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Theseus, would you mind giving me an estimated number on how many people you think will participate?

	23-03-2005 02:12									#77
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Theseus Any final requests?

How will you be handling the victory conditions? If the conditions were to be something like 75% land and population between any two Civs, domination numbers should be upped to make sure one player doesn't trip it prematurely at 66%. Something similar with Culture.

	23-03-2005 02:13									#78
	Put an end to popups!

dp

	23-03-2005 02:19									#79
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Rommel2D How will you be handling the victory conditions? If the conditions were to be something like 75% land and population between any two Civs, domination numbers should be upped to make sure one player doesn't trip it prematurely at 66%. Something similar with Culture.

Good question... I hadn't really thought of this issue.

What then consitutes a team win? Why wouldn't we leave it at 66% combined?

And for the FFA games, allow any two players to combine their % scores?

	23-03-2005 02:20									#80
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Lord Nuclear Theseus, would you mind giving me an estimated number on how many people you think will participate?

I have no clue... 50?

I'd like to see a minimum of 36, for six games, if possible, but the more the merrier.

	23-03-2005 04:46									#81
	Suffering from ads?

The Civ3Players Ladder has about a dozen hardcore pbem'ers. I'm sure we could get up a team for each combo.

	23-03-2005 05:48									#82
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

That's sorta what I was figuring on:
'Poly: 20+
CFC: 20+
Ladders: 10+

Plus assorted other players from other sites... heck, we publicize it right, we might break 100.

	23-03-2005 06:47									#83
	Remove this text

Oh, regarding level: Let's go with Monarch, as the happiness issues will be less daunting for newer players (and don't forget, this will be designed to make getting a fullish complement of luxuries somewhat difficult).

And regarding barbs, I do very much like the idea of Archers and than MWs, if people don;t have a real problem with that... puts a bit of emphasis on each team fully exploring their starting continent before two civs hit Medieval, and an extra onus on the FFA gamers to cooperate!

	23-03-2005 07:37									#84
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Rommel2D How will you be handling the victory conditions? If the conditions were to be something like 75% land and population between any two Civs, domination numbers should be upped to make sure one player doesn't trip it prematurely at 66%. Something similar with Culture.

Hmmm... on the other hand, given what we've seen with the major Demogames, perhaps 66% is not enough...

Teams with smaller land areas have been, er, persistent.

75% combined, then?

Thanks again for pointing this out, Rommel.

	23-03-2005 08:25									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

As this is being deisgned as an AU PBEM course, with the pairings being biased towards one experienced player assisting one lesser experienced player, won't the participation of players from other sites with perhaps less interest in AU's ideas detract from the original objective?

	23-03-2005 09:01									#86
	Suffering from ads?

Hmmm... I'd say that this is our house, and anybody coming here must do as we do (more or less).

I don;t mean that in an aggressive or confrontational way, just rather that CFC has the GOTM, and if an Apolytoner goes there and plays then it is by their rules/customs, and the same goes for RBC, the Ladder, etc.

I'm very OK with this aspect of setting up this game/course.

(But keep slingin' out the angles I ain't thinking of!!)

	23-03-2005 11:22									#87
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Don't forget you can (using the map editor) set up versions with and without locked alliances. (Actual locked alliances in-game give the advantages of both preventing several major exploits, like teleporting and free GA triggering, and of giving contact instantly instead of several turns later, allowing Sir Ralph to put the civs a bit further away without slowing contact down.)

Of course I want to play a not locked alliance game ... When do we have a signup list?

Also, definitely consider having a single player victory condition for the non-locked alliance game. Two player, as stated earlier, means that the two teams that end up in the lead in the mid-game will just ally and crush the rest, making for rather boring alliances, rather than the sudden alliance shifting that can happen in a single-winner PBEM game.

I don't think this takes away in the least from the teaching aspect of the game, as you still have a lot of alliance making and shifting. Just less boring = more likely to actually finish.

	23-03-2005 13:04									#88
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by snoopy369 Also, definitely consider having a single player victory condition for the non-locked alliance game. Two player, as stated earlier, means that the two teams that end up in the lead in the mid-game will just ally and crush the rest, making for rather boring alliances, rather than the sudden alliance shifting that can happen in a single-winner PBEM game. I don't think this takes away in the least from the teaching aspect of the game, as you still have a lot of alliance making and shifting. Just less boring = more likely to actually finish.

How would this be any different than a regular PBEM with DARs then? I don't think the map is being designed to display much in and of itself.

There are many mitigating factors that could interfere with the two most powerful civs simply allying and crushing the rest, having four other opponents being the most prominent.

Going from a lesson perspective, it makes sense to me to bisect the PBEM game into two basic parts: forming a winning alliance and dealing with your former ally. By organizing these games around team-oriented victory conditions, we might not end up with a clean-cut, satisfying ending, but we should see nuances exaggerated in parts of the game that will make them clearer than they would be under normal cut-throat rules.

However, if the main point is just to have a big, fun, inter-site extravaganza, I wouldn't mind playing in that either...

	23-03-2005 13:05									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Argh! Can't tell the difference between edit and quote anymore...

	23-03-2005 19:35									#90
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I think stock rules should be used, including Barbs. We'll get more of a showing from the non-AU communities that way.