Pitboss 4 Signup

[regoarrarr]

A 10+ team game, with pauses allowed, is just a recipe for the game to never finish. I think we tried that already in PB3.

While I understand that I'm not a guaranteed signup so perhaps my opinions are not worth that much, there you go.

And no offense to Locke, and I do feel it's important to encourage new members, I would strongly encourage any newer members to sign up with a teammate.

And as for the fantasy auction, I like it too, but I think that you'd want to have something more valuable than $100 as an alternative

[athlete4life10]

And as for the fantasy auction, I like it too, but I think that you'd want to have something more valuable than $100 as an alternative

I would actually encourage a smaller amount like $50 especially if you give left over money to the player in game. You only need to buy 2 things, just prioritze it the way you want it. With a larger amount there's more money left for the player to start off teching longer. Of course I'm not playing in this so feel free to ignore me if you want .

[plako]

~10 Teams/Individuals might be pretty good number. Maybe that could be decided so that Regoarrarr could join . Would it be alright, if max would be 12?

Concerning the auction. Here is my suggestion:
* Everyone has 150 gold to buy both leader and civ
* Leaders and civs are under auction separately so that everyone will 1st get leader
* Leaders are somehow arranged and put under auction one by one. It might be best to somehow limit the leader list to those that players found most potential so that there isn't too many unnescessary auctions
* One can buy more than 1 leader, but naturally one must pay for all the ones won and select then one of them to the game
* Minimum payment 5 gold. Min raise 5 gold.
* After everyone has bought a leader or leaders auction for nations would be arranged similarily
* All the money saved will be given to player in the beginning of the game. In best case scenario it is 140 gold
* Auction order is randomized for every auction. Auction is done sequntially. Team can either bid or pass. If they pass they are dropped out from the ongoing auction. If they bid they, can bid again after others have done their bidding

[DaveV]

A timesaving suggestion for the auction: blind auction. Each player, in his spoiler thread, posts bids for his top 5 leaders. Bids are compared, highest bid wins. For example, player A posts a $50 bid for Isabella as his #1 leader, player B posts a $30 bid for Isabella as his #3 leader (#1 and #2 sold to other players already), player C posts $25 for Isabella as #1 leader. No other bids for Isabella. Player A wins Isabella, player B moves on to #4 leader, player C moves on to #2 leader.

[regoarrarr]

So, we dont' have to do it like this, but in fantasy football drafts, anyone can put anyone up for auction. Might not work quite as well, because there are less people to pick than in football.

That adds strategy like if I know that India is very useful, but I don't personally want them, I can throw them up for auction first, to get other people to "waste" their money.

[plako]

One more thing. To make things more intresting we could let someone hand pick 15 nations and leaders so that they include both the best and worst alternatives + some medium stregnth ones. Alternatively there could be exactly same number od leaders and civs as players.

[SevenSpirits]

A timesaving suggestion for the auction: blind auction. Each player, in his spoiler thread, posts bids for his top 5 leaders. Bids are compared, highest bid wins. For example, player A posts a $50 bid for Isabella as his #1 leader, player B posts a $30 bid for Isabella as his #3 leader (#1 and #2 sold to other players already), player C posts $25 for Isabella as #1 leader. No other bids for Isabella. Player A wins Isabella, player B moves on to #4 leader, player C moves on to #2 leader.

Simultaneous auctions are fundamentally different from sequential ones in that there's a big risk of overpaying. For example, you may end up bidding $50 on a leader no one else bid on at all. If it was a sequential auction instead, you would have payed only $1.

Conversely, it's impossible to bid somebody up in a simultaneous auction. Say I know that you want Elizabeth, and I don't want her. In a sequential auction I could bid you up to a conservatively reasonable price for her, and force you to pay it. On the other hand, in a simultaneous auction, I can't influence your bid at all! The only thing I can do that affects you is outright win the auction for her, which in this hypothetical situation is actually bad for me! For these two reasons, simultaneous auctions are a lot less efficient and more random than sequential auctions.

There's a third option (well, there are plenty more types of auctions, but one is particularly relevant here), which is a simultaneous second-price auction. It's like a normal simultaneous auction except that people don't necessarily pay what they bid. Instead they pay the second-highest bid on that item plus one. This basically simulates a sequential option where people stop bidding at the point that they specify. So it has the advantage of saving time without screwing up the bidding nearly as much.


Some other comments:

- For this to work well you want the number of available civs/leaders to be the same as the number of players, or only a little bit higher.
- I'm not sure if $100 is enough.
- DaveV's suggestion of ranked choices doesn't entirely work. For example, I might have the highest bid for my 2nd through last choice leaders, but those auctions happen first so I don't win them. Then the auction for my first choice leader happens and I lose.

This is not a signup.

[Locke]

A 10+ team game, with pauses allowed, is just a recipe for the game to never finish. I think we tried that already in PB3.

While I understand that I'm not a guaranteed signup so perhaps my opinions are not worth that much, there you go.

And no offense to Locke, and I do feel it's important to encourage new members, I would strongly encourage any newer members to sign up with a teammate.

And as for the fantasy auction, I like it too, but I think that you'd want to have something more valuable than $100 as an alternative

OK I will try to find someone to help. I have some friends who play Civ. Auction thing sounds very confusing. Simple is better I think. Don't like peolpe starting with 100 gold inside game that would be unfair.

[Gaspar]

As far as doing it live vs. sequential, I think doing it live is the most fun for the participants, and allows for the greatest strategy to be in play. Doing it sequential makes it a greater lurker popcorn show though. I'd suspect the logistics of doing it one leader/civ at a time would make the whole thing take entirely too long however.

[plako]

To make sequential faster there could be e.g. 2-3 leaders that under auction simultaneously using same bidding order. If we start after the holidays we've quite some time to get this done soon enough.