Pitboss 4 Signup

[sunrise089]

Has anything actually been decided yet?

No, but that's by design. Gold has stepped up to organize the game and he's stated a signup deadline which we've not yet met. All this discussion is just to hash out some preliminaries which we'd probably have to otherwise discuss after the signup period ended. It's more likely than not saving time. Plus there are a few players on the fence, including me. And...

I'd like to snake pick from a list of leaders and civs chosen by lurkers. Sounds fun!

I can't imagine how I'd have a more enjoyable game with a third party telling me what civs I can and cannot have access to. However I'm following this discussion in case someone posts something that changes my mind.

My understanding is that Rego and sunrise are interested, but don't want a huge number of teams.

Sorry, but that's not quite right. I'm all for lots of teams, at least in a vacuum.

Here are my wants:

1) Some sort of double move rule that helps prevent tons of drama during the game. Sullla's rule does that (so would double moves being permitted... )

2) Certain exploits removed.

3) No tech trading.

4) No/extremely limited pauses.

5) No nukes.

Now I don't expect to get all of that, but I'm weighing participating in the game based on the likelihood of the above and then other factors, including but not limited to this method of deciding civs and leaders.

[T-hawk]

4) No/extremely limited pauses.

Everybody keeps saying this, but are you seriously prepared to play the game that way? You will have cities conquered, worker turns lost, and units killed thanks to real-life vacation or sickness or internet provider gremlins. Do we really have the collective balls to say "tough" ?

[sunrise089]

Everybody keeps saying this, but are you seriously prepared to play the game that way? You will have cities conquered, worker turns lost, and units killed thanks to real-life vacation or sickness or internet provider gremlins. Do we really have the collective balls to say "tough" ?

T-Hawk, I don't expect you to read every post I make, but I played in a 6-hour timer pitboss game and it ran just fine.

I'm not saying let's not pause for Christmas. But I'm also not saying give each team 5 pauses. We tried that in RBP3 and it's vastly too many. 50 pauses in a game that lasts a year is one pause a week, which when you're playing feels like way way too many pauses. If we're not going to reduce the cost of lost cities and worker turns (by using a larger map and a slower game speed, which is what we did in my 6-hour timer game) then we must reduce the frequency of lost cities and worker turns through some other mechanic than pauses. And that mechanic isn't mysterious. It's 1) Only commit to playing if you can reliably play. 2) Get a reliable teammate. 3) When the rare occasion when both of you can't play arises then get a sub. 4) If you've not done 1, 2, or 3 then yes, have the balls to miss a turn rather than stop the game in its tracks for everyone else.

[Amelia]

Make sure everyone joins in teams of 3 (or more) so that if someone is sick, someone else can replace him/her then? That seems like the best way.

[T-hawk]

T-Hawk, I don't expect you to read every post I make, but I played in a 6-hour timer pitboss game and it ran just fine. ... 4) If you've not done 1, 2, or 3 then yes, have the balls to miss a turn rather than stop the game in its tracks for everyone else.

I do remember that. How often did 4 happen? And who signed up for this game, was it people with real lives and travel schedules, or just insane gamers who don't mind waking up every 6 hours to go sit in the Starbucks parking lot with a laptop (powerful enough to play Civ, perish the thought of otherwise) to get wireless?

Another thought that came to mind: I have to think that not having a public forum to beg for pauses must surely reduce their incidence.

[Speaker]

T-Hawk, I don't expect you to read every post I make, but I played in a 6-hour timer pitboss game and it ran just fine.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you won the game in a runaway, which makes it likely that other players missed tons of turns. I don't get what's the big deal with pauses. PB2 ran fine with just a few pauses. Turn timer manipulations are another story though.

[ManiaMuse]

I know I was a bit useless in PB3, but I'd be willing to be someone's teammate, #2, official lurker or general unspoiled substitute.

[SleepingMoogle]

Either a snake pick using Tatan's banned list, or a selection made by lurkers, would be fine by me.

As an added suggestion, perhaps all teams could nominate 1 leader and 1 Civ to be included in the snake pick and 1 of both to be excluded? We would need to decide what to do with duplicate choices, but it could add some spice to the snake pick. It might even be combined with the banned list and/or lurker selection.


Preferences for other game settings and rules have been posted here and there. We could summarize what we have so far and see if there's any settings that seem particularly desired.

[Gold Ergo Sum]

Moogle, if you look in the first post of this thread, that has a ton of settings that have already been decided, and what needs to be voted on still.

Here are my wants:

1) Some sort of double move rule that helps prevent tons of drama during the game. Sullla's rule does that (so would double moves being permitted... )

2) Certain exploits removed.

3) No tech trading.

4) No/extremely limited pauses.

5) No nukes.

Now I don't expect to get all of that, but I'm weighing participating in the game based on the likelihood of the above and then other factors, including but not limited to this method of deciding civs and leaders.

If you look back at the first post:

1) Sullla's ruleset will be used.

2) You would have to be more specific.

3) NTT will be on.

4) I think 0-2 pauses is the right way to go.

5) No nukes is the decided pregame setting.

I went through the majority of the games and just pre-accepted most of the settings that I thought would be uncontroversial, like no nukes.

I think accepting pre-selected leaders and civs to snake pick requires a basic degree of faith that the general population around here will leave you with interesting options. The goal would likely aim for a good balance of traits, so not everyone is financial, creative, and expansive. And set it up so that those who do have those traits are not at a huge advantage over those that do not. This option I think is vastly superior to random assignment, because that has too much likelihood of giving one team a windfall and another something worthless. By allowing the selection of leaders and civs, it still allows people to have some control over their own options, while bringing in a degree of freshness to the game by allowing the community to experiment with new leaders, civs, and combinations.

This community has always valued variants. The auction just seems like a bridge too far at this point for this PB game. In the future, that might be a viable option after more discussion takes place. So in the spirit of variants, and variance, I think either selecting pre-chosen leaders and civs, or giving free rein to snake pick using the Tatan ban list is superior to simply snake picking without any restrictions--been there, done Willem and Pacal before.

I do think the modified snake pick, where you have 20 traits and 10 civs and pick in 3 rounds could be plenty interesting. It would just require a delicate balancing of picks that isn't easy to do. Who gets pick 30? No matter who it is, that is the least desirable drafting spot, end of story. Given the limiited selection pool, I am not even sure 1-20 would be better than 10-11 in the proposed setup. I think you would almost have to make the Round 3 picks assigned at random to be fair, because they simply cannot be balanced, unless you want to start fiddling with Round 2 picks as well, so that someone drafts 1-17-30. We could try that, but I am afraid the whinging would be loud.

[Atlas1998]

Make sure everyone joins in teams of 3 (or more) so that if someone is sick, someone else can replace him/her then? That seems like the best way.

I am new to this community and am interested in joining a team. Anyone out there need a third (wheel) for their team?