What sort of CIV games do you prefer to play?

[Sullla]

I'm not sure if it's the format, or the people who prefer it, but PBEMs are much more forgiving of occasional gaps in play. I can plan a vacation, or say yes when invited out to dinner with my coworkers, or go to bed early with a headache, and not worry about missing my PBEM turn. Obviously it's not something you want to make a habit of, but it's nice to have that insurance that the turn will wait. And it's nice to have the default of wait, rather than having to find time exactly when I'm busy to post and ask for a pause.

This is a huge strike against the PBEM format in my eyes. Without the clock, there's no incentive for people to play their turns. We have innumerable examples here at Realms Beyond of the old "who has the save?" dilemma. Someone falls behind, loses interest, and stops playing the turns. The number of abandoned PBEM games here is quite high, at least a third of the games RB has staged simply dying due to lack of interest. That's a direct consequence of the PBEM format because it's so forgiving with regards to playing turns. If you don't put people on a clock and force them to take action, there's a strong tendency to do nothing.

Add in the fact that staging a game with more than five people is virtually impossible with PBEM, and I prefer the Pitboss format all the way. Double move rules work just fine when people aren't being jerks about the process, and it's a minor price to pay for a better game format. If you can't play one turn per day, don't sign up for the game. Pitboss simply makes sure that people will take action.

[Mardoc]

If you can't play one turn per day, don't sign up for the game.

Well...yes. That's why I don't sign up for Pitbosses.

Don't know why you're preaching to me about it, I know my limitations and I play where people don't mind them.

[darrelljs]

I can't recall a single PBEM that ended due to pace, although I'm sure its happened.

My life is quite hectic and I travel frequently for work...a nice relaxed PBEM with understanding people is just my cup of tea .

Darrell

[Cyneheard]

This is a huge strike against the PBEM format in my eyes. Without the clock, there's no incentive for people to play their turns. We have innumerable examples here at Realms Beyond of the old "who has the save?" dilemma. Someone falls behind, loses interest, and stops playing the turns. The number of abandoned PBEM games here is quite high, at least a third of the games RB has staged simply dying due to lack of interest. That's a direct consequence of the PBEM format because it's so forgiving with regards to playing turns. If you don't put people on a clock and force them to take action, there's a strong tendency to do nothing.

But our Pitbosses don't have a great track record:
- PB1 was played to completion, but with a LOT of subs
- PB2 was conceded
- PB3 died a terrible, terrible death. This game was too big.
- PB4 was conceded
- PB5 was conceded (heavily due to lack of interest; Krill's position wasn't nearly as dominant as PB2 or PB4)
- PB6 was played to completion
- PB7 died an equally terrible death. There was a ton of bad blood.

So we've had 2 unsuccessful Pitbosses, and a 3rd that was borderline out of 7.

[T-hawk]

A drum I keep beating: Pitboss Sequential Turns. Has the best advantages of both worlds. No chasing a missing save. No double moves. No exposure to reload cheating. Always online to look at the game or see Civstats. Teams of 2-3 players or dedlurkers can easily share. Easier than PBEM to swap in a substitute player. Keeps the clock in play as Sullla describes to force PYFT (though it might as well be played clockless since we always reload on a missed turn anyway.) No incentive to delay ending turns as simultaneous Pitboss sometimes induces.

Pitboss 6 was this and was probably our most successful game so far. Democracy Game 1 has its problems, but they're not due to the technical format.

If the choice were only between sequential PBEM or simultaneous Pitboss, I'd prefer the latter if I ever played myself, for basically the same reasons Sullla enumerates.

[scooter]

I'd love to see the 5 player PBEMs be played as Pitboss Sequential. Bigger games, no thanks. The key to making Pitboss Sequential work is lining up timezones like you do in PBEM.

One drawback is it's just much faster to open a PBEM save than log into a Pitboss.

[SevenSpirits]

A drum I keep beating: Pitboss Sequential Turns.

Disadvantages of this format (compared to PBEM with a tracker setup), in my view:

* Misclicks screwing up games. Reluctance to get started on your turn because it's critical to do everything perfectly.
* Inability to open previous saves to take pics, requiring the turn-player to to carefully document the turn as they play it or not document it at all.
* Inability to open old saves to review the game in retrospect.
* Lessened availability of being able to play (sometimes you can't log in, and even if you can it's slower than opening a save). Occasional server crashes.
* Lack of emails prompting people to play.
* Provides advantages to teams willing to track civstats and to log in on other peoples' turns.
* More difficult for team members to play through turns together (i.e. by each having a copy of the save open, with one shadowing the other's moves).

Advantages over PBEM:

* Reduced ability to cheat (by reloading).
* Easier to add new turn-players.

[SevenSpirits]

Regarding the midgame tech pace being too quick (particularly, it is complained about, on quick speed)...

Only a bit of that is game speed! Normal speed (vs Quick) does mean that units can move a bit more per researched tech. But production still falls behind research if you play well. What balances beakers vs hammers out better is playing at a higher "difficulty", and larger world size. But for reasons I don't understand, people gravitate towards the lower "difficulties" (i.e. cheaper techs).

[MJW (ya that one)]

This is a huge strike against the PBEM format in my eyes. Without the clock, there's no incentive for people to play their turns. We have innumerable examples here at Realms Beyond of the old "who has the save?" dilemma. Someone falls behind, loses interest, and stops playing the turns. The number of abandoned PBEM games here is quite high, at least a third of the games RB has staged simply dying due to lack of interest. That's a direct consequence of the PBEM format because it's so forgiving with regards to playing turns. If you don't put people on a clock and force them to take action, there's a strong tendency to do nothing.

But our Pitbosses don't have a great track record:
- PB1 was played to completion, but with a LOT of subs
- PB2 was conceded
- PB3 died a terrible, terrible death. This game was too big.
- PB4 was conceded
- PB5 was conceded (heavily due to lack of interest; Krill's position wasn't nearly as dominant as PB2 or PB4)
- PB6 was played to completion
- PB7 died an equally terrible death. There was a ton of bad blood.

So we've had 2 unsuccessful Pitbosses, and a 3rd that was borderline out of 7.

Some of the games should just be thrown out because they died to bullshit and not the format. I don't think it is even possible to argue PB7. A large random pitboss with Lord Parkin and double moves is bound to fail terribly.

[Thoth]

A drum I keep beating: Pitboss Sequential Turns.

Disadvantages of this format (compared to PBEM with a tracker setup), in my view:

* Misclicks screwing up games. Reluctance to get started on your turn because it's critical to do everything perfectly.
* Inability to open previous saves to take pics, requiring the turn-player to to carefully document the turn as they play it or not document it at all.
* Inability to open old saves to review the game in retrospect.
* Lessened availability of being able to play (sometimes you can't log in, and even if you can it's slower than opening a save). Occasional server crashes.

Agreed 100%


and add:

Turns rolling just after you've gone to bed in a game with a 22h tracker. Good luck playing well with only a few minutes left on the clock.

* Lack of emails prompting people to play.

This is a fixable glitch. I've no idea how it was done (ask the techie type folks ) but EITB PB 1 has email notifications to the players when it is their turn. (which is awesome btw. to whoever it was who figured this arcane stuff out. )

* More difficult for team members to play through turns together (i.e. by each having a copy of the save open, with one shadowing the other's moves).

This I disagree with.

Assuming all the players on the team are roughly in the same timeslot for preferred playtimes, PB lets them log in together and talk over the turn as they play.

I've done the "play through the turn with a teammate with both having a copy of the save open" thing with Mardoc a couple of times in PBEMs. I find that it's a whole lot easier just to chitchat in game in a PB (assuming multiple civ team format).