EitB v12 Wishlist/Progress

[Dreylin]

Starting pbems in a mod without a version number is inherently stupid. No one should do it, no one does do it. I don't see the issue.

...huh?

But if you don't include a version number, where does it come from? I can't just rename v11.1 as v13 and expect it to work, can I?

My understanding is that as long as everyone takes the same version of the download and renames the folder to the identical name, then there shouldn't be any problems.

e.g. download v12, which installs in "Erebus in the Balance" directory. Duplicate the directory and rename it to "Mardoc", and as long as everyone else in the PBEM renames the directory the same way, there will be no problem.

[Dreylin]

On a different note entirely, I have been meaning to post a suggestion for a while (since our duel ended) and I kept forgetting.

Late Era starts should not include the Religious techs. It's the best way I can think of for addressing the inherent problem of the "Religion Lottery" (it doesn't matter if the religions are still parceled out on a particular turn if you can still get the starting priest for researching the tech). It's meaningless in base civ as the Religions are all functionally identical, but in FFH it could be crippling to be completely locked out of a particular religion.

There's not a great solution short of being guaranteed a disciple in x turns. I'd say there's a lottery to found a religion, but not to gain a disciple to spread it.

Leaving the tech open to being researched allows you to get the tier 1 priest in exactly the same way as if you're second to the Religion. IMO, that's the simplest way. (which is why I suggested it)

[Kragroth]

On a different note entirely, I have been meaning to post a suggestion for a while (since our duel ended) and I kept forgetting.

Late Era starts should not include the Religious techs. It's the best way I can think of for addressing the inherent problem of the "Religion Lottery" (it doesn't matter if the religions are still parceled out on a particular turn if you can still get the starting priest for researching the tech). It's meaningless in base civ as the Religions are all functionally identical, but in FFH it could be crippling to be completely locked out of a particular religion.

There's not a great solution short of being guaranteed a disciple in x turns. I'd say there's a lottery to found a religion, but not to gain a disciple to spread it.

Leaving the tech open to being researched allows you to get the tier 1 priest in exactly the same way as if you're second to the Religion. IMO, that's the simplest way. (which is why I suggested it)

Yeah but if you playes the game from an earlier era you'd be able to get these religious techs. The nice thing about mastery is thatyou're supposed to have researched nearly everything.

[Dreylin]

On a different note entirely, I have been meaning to post a suggestion for a while (since our duel ended) and I kept forgetting.

Late Era starts should not include the Religious techs. It's the best way I can think of for addressing the inherent problem of the "Religion Lottery" (it doesn't matter if the religions are still parceled out on a particular turn if you can still get the starting priest for researching the tech). It's meaningless in base civ as the Religions are all functionally identical, but in FFH it could be crippling to be completely locked out of a particular religion.

There's not a great solution short of being guaranteed a disciple in x turns. I'd say there's a lottery to found a religion, but not to gain a disciple to spread it.

Leaving the tech open to being researched allows you to get the tier 1 priest in exactly the same way as if you're second to the Religion. IMO, that's the simplest way. (which is why I suggested it)

Yeah but if you playes the game from an earlier era you'd be able to get these religious techs. The nice thing about mastery is thatyou're supposed to have researched nearly everything.

I didn't say that my suggestion should apply just to Mastery Era, you just drew that conclusion because I mentioned my duel with Q.

[Kragroth]

Starting pbems in a mod without a version number is inherently stupid. No one should do it, no one does do it. I don't see the issue.

...huh?

But if you don't include a version number, where does it come from? I can't just rename v11.1 as v13 and expect it to work, can I?

My understanding is that as long as everyone takes the same version of the download and renames the folder to the identical name, then there shouldn't be any problems.

e.g. download v12, which installs in "Erebus in the Balance" directory. Duplicate the directory and rename it to "Mardoc", and as long as everyone else in the PBEM renames the directory the same way, there will be no problem.

Which still unnecessarily involves copying and pasting which risks the introduction of errors and requires extra collaboration. If I say we're starting a V12 pbem, I shouldn't have to tell everyone to copy and paste and rename the folder to something else. If the install gives us what we want to begin with, we avoid these unnecessary risks and hassles.

Removing version labels is not a desired feature from the users.

[Dreylin]

Starting pbems in a mod without a version number is inherently stupid. No one should do it, no one does do it. I don't see the issue.

...huh?

But if you don't include a version number, where does it come from? I can't just rename v11.1 as v13 and expect it to work, can I?

My understanding is that as long as everyone takes the same version of the download and renames the folder to the identical name, then there shouldn't be any problems.

e.g. download v12, which installs in "Erebus in the Balance" directory. Duplicate the directory and rename it to "Mardoc", and as long as everyone else in the PBEM renames the directory the same way, there will be no problem.

Which still unnecessarily involves copying and pasting which risks the introduction of errors and requires extra collaboration. If I say we're starting a V12 pbem, I shouldn't have to tell everyone to copy and paste and rename the folder to something else. If the install gives us what we want to begin with, we avoid these unnecessary risks and hassles.

Removing version labels not a desired feature from the users.

I know what your point is, whether or not I agree with it (and I can see reasons for both ways). I was just trying to explain in more detail to help resolve the disconnect between Mardoc and Qgqqqqq.

[Mardoc]

Oh. Well, if you're right, Dreylin, my first reaction is why didn't anyone realize that back when Sareln was in charge?!

But also I now understand where Q is coming from on this. Yeah, objectively it would still be better for it to Just Work, but the cost benefit analysis is much less on Kragroth's side when each player only has to rename once. In an ideal world where Q was paid to work on this and we had infinite budget, it'd still be on the list, but here and now I'll stop pushing for it.

I'm tempted to write up a 'so you want to play a PBEM' guide to sticky here. Cover this, the replay bug, timezones, standard settings, etc and so on. The main trick will be editing it down to the point where new players are willing to read it .

[BRickAstley]

e.g. download v12, which installs in "Erebus in the Balance" directory. Duplicate the directory and rename it to "Mardoc", and as long as everyone else in the PBEM renames the directory the same way, there will be no problem.

This is the first time that I understood what anyone was saying in this latest message string.

I'm tempted to write up a 'so you want to play a PBEM' guide to sticky here. Cover this, the replay bug, timezones, standard settings, etc and so on. The main trick will be editing it down to the point where new players are willing to read it .

That would be a superb idea.

[Qgqqqqq]

I think Dreylin has said what I have been trying to get across. So, um, thanks!


That being said, Mardoc, if you think it is easy/possible to disentangle it from the folder name entirely, then I would be more than happy to see you or anyone else do it. I'm not sure it's even possible, though.


Kragroth, the version label only matters once you start a PBEM. There are plenty of people who don't want to start a PBEM, or who want to test out some changes, or who want to look at some bugs, or what have you. You don't come across these people, sure. But I do. And IMO the priority is on them, because people on the forum a) only have to do it once per version (and versions come out roughly every 6 months to a year), and b) have a support structure automatically in place to tell them what to do.

You're weighing the 1-2 days it takes to fix a players issues (though, tbh, that's an issue on our parts in the setup process not bringing it up) but I'm weighing those people who will (and are currently) never download it if it comes with a disclaimer and instructions. To my mind, that's the group to cater strongly to.


I'll quickly read the religious dispute and respond.

[Qgqqqqq]

Oh. Well, if you're right, Dreylin, my first reaction is why didn't anyone realize that back when Sareln was in charge?!

I find this vaguely hilarious, because I never realised there was a problem under Sareln. I just presumed you'd been doing it that way all along - that's one of the reasons we got so badly burnt on the version name thing, because I had just presumed that was how he ran it.

I'm tempted to write up a 'so you want to play a PBEM' guide to sticky here. Cover this, the replay bug, timezones, standard settings, etc and so on. The main trick will be editing it down to the point where new players are willing to read it .

That would be more than useful. Split it into BTS, normal mods, and FFH, and we can even put it in the main forum.