PBEM3 - Email and Technical Issues

[Kyan]

Not a problem. Was worth a shot.

Best of luck to you all, i'll be taking a peek into map creation to try my best to help ensure it's balanced.

[Sandover]

PM sent to Darrell.

[darrelljs]

I have all the picks. Unfortunately for my financial situation, there was no overlap .

Can I get one last update to post #46? I'll start on the map tonight if I do .

Darrell

[darrelljs]

Oh, and I have no plans to post the leader list. That would mean when you meet a civ in game, you don't necessarily know the person in control. Up to you guys if you want to share that info .

Darrell

[Twinkletoes89]

OK, so that means everyone has their 1st choice pick?

[scooter]

Okay I went ahead and sent Darrell the final settings, with Noble as difficulty because I didn't see anyone opposing that. So we're just about ready to go

Two things:

1. Are we wanting to admit which civs we are? I really would be fine with just using our names, but if we all want to do the hide identity thing, we need to know that before creating our spoiler thread (to keep the civ name out of the thread title)

2. We need to clarify one part of the civ contact rule that timmy pointed out. Civ A meets Civ B, and Civ B meets Civ C. We can do it one of two ways:

2a. B must let A know that he may now contact C
2b. B does not have to inform A that he may contact C. In other words, you don't automatically get contact, rather you are "granted" contact.

2b might be more fun as it adds another aspect to early-game diplomacy (helps to fill the void created by no tech trading), but it might also be irrelevant as there's not a ton of reason to not grant contact. Any preferences? This doesn't have to be decided ASAP, because it'll be a couple weeks til we have in-game contact...

[SleepingMoogle]

Sharing civ picks is fine with me. I didn't get the impression we were going for a cloak & dagger style of hiding away in private threads.

[Twinkletoes89]

1) If we are keeping anonymous we need to also set up anonymous email accounts - i.e WillemPBEM3 @ gmail . com and tell darrell so he publishes the list and we don't! Spoiler threads shouldn't be an issue - we just put our usernames as the title.

2) I prefer b, just so that there is flexibility and that there is still an emphasis for scouting. I mean with a, one team could meet one person and let them do all the scouting and just talk to them through the other team.

I would also like to ask how we are to deal with intermidiaries. Are we going to just allow one?

What I mean is this: Say Civ A has only met Civ B. Civ B has met A and C, Civ C has met B and D. Can Civ A contact Civ D using both B and C as intermediaries, or not? I hope not as it will just get stupid.

[scooter]

Personally I don't see much need to go anonymous with this kind of game, so I'd almost rather not unless someone really wants to.

For the intermediaries thing - I was thinking keeping it to just one level would be best, as like you said that'd be a little silly, especially with only 6 players.

[Bobchillingworth]

I'll tell you guys who I picked if you do the same



Regarding contacts, I'm okay with whatever. With 6 players we'll probably all get contact with each other reasonably quickly anyway.