Casual pitboss?

[Mr. Cairo]

OK, I'm in, for sure. My thoughts on set-up, after having watched what happened with PB 31: FPTP voting is bad, consensus is good.

Better for every player to be at least satisfied with the set-up, than most players happy and a few players unhappy.

[mackoti]

OK, I'm in, for sure. My thoughts on set-up, after having watched what happened with PB 31: FPTP voting is bad, consensus is good.

Better for every player to be at least satisfied with the set-up, than most players happy and a few players unhappy.

very true , very true.

[GermanJoey]

i agree that voting is very very bad, because apparently nobody feels bound by the result and so the vote means nothing. all the compromises that went into making the votes to begin with, those all get thrown out. so, everything gets hammered out by "consensus" anyways, except now its piecemeal in the context that some people will feel obligated to defend the compromise-results of the vote instead of what they actually want, ensuring the final settings will be even further from what would make them happy.

the problem with "consensus" of course is that it never actually means "let's all find a middle ground", or "If I compromise on this one thing, you compromise on another thing," but rather that some people will try insisting so hard, never-give-an-inch, that either the game doesn't happen or everybody gives up from exhaustion. then the game starts and nothing is what you agreed on anyways. invade me blind-sided one thousand times than ever make me live through the setup of pitboss by "consensus" again.

i think the only sane way is to propose settings as one complete package. that way, there is no room for argument. maybe you casual dudes could just agree to copy one existing game's settings verbatim? find a game whose result seemed like a fun, competitive match and then just use those settings.

anyways, good luck.

[Jowy]

luckily this is a casual game for casual players so there shouldn't be much drama, at least the last one didn't

[Dreylin]

Well, I do hope we don't get into competitive ruleset debates as it'd be against the casual spirit. I think we'll manage it.

My original proposal was to duplicate the PB28 settings and mod, but discuss the diplo settings as concerns were expressed about that during the game. I also proposed an alternative pick method.

I don't recall seeing any comments on either, so my conclusion is that everyone agrees with me completely and we're good to go!

I'm on phone at the moment otherwise I'd bring over the settings post for us to discuss...

[Mr. Cairo]

Out of curiosity, what is the argument/motivation for using that particular version of RTR mod (2.0.7.6) over the most recent?

[Ichabod]

There's only one setting I'm strongly against (not to the point of leaving the gam, though), the diplo from PB28 that allowed to list number of turns until something. Personally, I'd go without that sort of non-game diplo at all, but just the fixing number of turns really bothers me (it's an invite to 2-1 a neighbor). But if we go with it, let's make a standard wording that you can use, because in PB28 there were people using formulations that said more than just "declare war on".

And I liked the suggested pick style. I'd go without duplicated leaders/civs, because I like the identity between players, but that's minor.

[Dreylin]

Out of curiosity, what is the argument/motivation for using that particular version of RTR mod (2.0.7.6) over the most recent?

Well familiarity is a big part of it for me, but some of the v3 changes felt a step too far into unfamiliar territory when announced. I admit to (deliberately) not following PB27, which is I think the only game running with it, but unpillagable villages & towns was one I recall being doubtful about.

I'm happy to revert to standard AI-diplo if that's easier.

[AutomatedTeller]

I'm basically fine with any settings.

[Molach]

How about letting all players pick whatever they want after seeing the start? Duplicates allowed. Has this ever been done before?

I can live with Dreylins suggestion, but there are some civs that will clearly be sub-optimal in a given start.

Alternately give all players a leader (or even one trait"You must pick a SPI leadet, which leader & which civ is up to you).

PB28-settings sound fine. Casual diplo.