Due to a very large amount of interest in a new PBEM, we will be running two games! If we can get two different maps made, they will not be parallel, but that remains to be seen... Either way, this is "Pool B" that will be playing in this game, consisting of:

Pool B:
Dazed
Scooter
Serdoa
SleepingMoogle
Twinkletoes

---------------------------------------------
Things we have decided on:
1. No huts
2. No events
3. No ivory
4. Passive Espionage only

***Please speak up if any of the above are false assumptions!


Alright things that we have to determine:

1. Leader choices:
1a. Do we want to ban Fin and Phi leaders? Or we can do as Bobchillingworth suggested - if you pick Fin or Phi, you have to pair it with something weaker... Protective and Charismatic would probably be the choices..? We can debate that here. Another option is to have the mapmaker assign our civ/leader.
1b. Restricted or Unrestricted?
1c. Allow duplicates?
1d. Snake pick? Send top 3 to a neutral observer? Other ideas?

2. Map Trading
-Banned until Paper? No restrictions? Other propositions?

3. Out of game contact
Here are the options:
3a. Unlimited contact (starting at T0)
3b. Restrcited contact (only once you've met in-game)
3c. Variation idea - the rule used in PBEM3. If civ A has met both B and C, he has the (optional) ability to grant civ C permission to contact civ B if the two haven't already met in-game.
3d. "I have a different idea"

4. Play order
-Try to post your preferred play window here again. Sorry if you've already posted it, there's so many posts in the other thread that I don't want to dig through it.

5. Other notes
-As far as I know, we were planning on leaving everything else up to the map-maker - including map script, size, difficulty, barbarians, etc. Someone mentioned "no higher than Emperor," but I'm pretty sure that's not something a map-maker would do anyways. The idea was to be blind, so we'll leave the rest of the options up to the map-maker
-If you think of something you really think should also be discussed, feel free to bring it up!

I'm posting this as a separate thread because the new PBEM thread is flying very fast, so for someone not involved it's easy to miss stuff. There will be two separate games of 5 players apiece, and we have a full roster for each already (assuming WarriorKnight confirms).

We would like to request a separate map for each, although we realize that may not be totally realistic. If someone is willing to make two maps, awesome! If not, we'll see if a second person is willing to make a map as well... If that fails, we'll just run two parallel games with one map.

The parameters for the map are simple - entirely up to you! All the players have echoed an interest in a totally blind map... Several players (including myself) would like to see a more high-food/lush map (kind of like PB2), but other than that, we'd all like to be surprised. There might be one or two minor requests (like no ivory), but that's under discussion now. So stuff like script, size, difficulty, balancing, etc. would all be up to the map-maker(s). Should give you a lot of flexibility to do something that just looks fun.

So...any volunteers?

Hi guys. I see that a new Fall From Heaven Pitboss game is in the works, making this an opportune time to think about developing an improved ruleset for Pitboss games. We've been making some progress with each new game, but I don't think we're quite there yet. While Pitboss #2's ruleset made some major improvements (establishing that there will always be a wartime clock split, putting measures in place to protect the defender from a double-move), it also led to a lot of rules controversy between the players. Here were the major problems:

- Debating between players over which teams claimed which half of the clock split. There needs to be a clearer way of determining this.

- Confusion over what was allowable and what was not allowable during each team's half of the clock split. This also needs to be cleared up.

- Too many incentives to manipulate the clock timer, both when attacking and defending. Ideally there should never be a benefit from running the clock.

- An excess of rules technicalities which tripped up the teams and created more confusion. The intent was good here, but the execution was a bit muddled.

In short, the real problem with these games nearly always comes from the attacker "sucker punch": the attacker declares war with 1 minute left on the timer, moves in their units, and then the defender can't do any whipping before they get hit on the next turn. The Pitboss #2 ruleset left this move in place, and surrounded it with a dozen different rules to mitigate the effects, like allowing teams to whip cities even when it wasn't "their turn" (and thus creating more incentives for clock manipulation).

That was a good stab at a ruleset, but I think it's a backwards approach. A better solution is to eliminate the whole "sucker punch" attack in the first place, thereby letting us get rid of all those conditions that bog down the ruleset, and removing the incentive to manipulate the clock. This is my best shot at doing that.

Proposed Pitboss Ruleset
Written assuming a 24 hour timer with 12 hour clock splits.

1) Settling Races: When settling in a disputed area, teams must wait 12 hours after moving a settler before the same unit can move again. You cannot move at the end of a turn, and then immediate re-move at the start of the next turn. [1]

2) Declaring War: When initiating a new war, the attacker must declare war during the first 12 hours of the turn. Once 12 hours have passed, no new wars may be initiated by any teams. Because these rules make it impossible to gain the element of surprise - the defender will always have a chance to play the second half of the turn - the attacker should make every reasonable effort to declare war at the very start of the turn, to avoid confusion.

The attacker must also move their units during the first 12 hours on the turn before declaring war, to avoid a double move. [2]

3) Joining an Existing War: Teams joining an existing war on the attacker's side must take the same half of the clock timer, the first 12 hours. Teams joining an existing war on the defender's side must do the same, and take the second 12 hours. Teams must synchronize their turn with their respective side (first half attacker, second half defender) on the turn before declaring war. [3]

4) Turn Actions during War: During their half of the timer split, teams can take all normal civ actions. Once the attacker(s) have all ended their turn, or after 12 hours have passed, their turn is over and the defender(s) turn begins. When it is not their turn in wartime, teams may log into the game, but cannot take any actions whatsoever. This includes moving units, whipping or drafting cities, changing research, changing builds or reassigning tiles in cities, promoting or upgrading units, adjusting espionage or the research/culture sliders, and conducting any diplomacy other than chatting (no gifting or trading units, gold, cities, etc.) Think of it this way: IT IS NOT YOUR TURN. Teams can watch what the other teams are doing, but that is all. [4]

5) Gifting: Teams should act in good faith when gifting units, cities, techs, and/or gold to one another. Gifting and re-gifting back cities (to build a unique building) and units (for Heroic Epic purposes) is strictly prohibited. Gifting cities away as part of a peace treaty is allowable, but gifting cities away to third parties to prevent capture in war is forbidden. [5]

6) Fair Play: Teams should show good sportsmanship and act in good faith. Play to win, play to survive, and avoid moves that artificially unbalance the game. [6]

* * * * * * * * *

Comments:

[1] Pretty standard. I think this has been in place for every other game with minimal fuss.

[2] This is the crux of the ruleset I'm proposing. Yes, it's completely artificial and it makes things slightly tougher for the attacker. But so what - the attacker is the aggressor! If you're attacking, deal with it. The only thing that this ruleset is writing out is the possibility of sucker-punching the defender before they have a chance to whip units on defense, which is something we're better off without anyway.

The gameplay gains should be obvious here. All of the player disputes over who gets what half of the timer splits can be eliminated at one stroke. The attacker no longer has to run down the timer down to 1 minute to get in a more effective first strike. The defender doesn't have to run down the timer to counter the same move. And we can eliminate confusing and disliked rules such as being able to whip when it's not "your turn" (see rule #4).

Problems with this rule: things get really screwed up if the defender moves before the attacker on the turn the war starts (say, immediately at the start of the turn before 12 hours have run their course). This is why the ruleset asks the attacker to declare right at the start of the turn, to avoid confusion. It's also possible for the attacker to double-move the defender, if the defender moves right at the start of the turn before the attack. HOWEVER, with this ruleset, I think that's acceptable. The rules make it very clear: no one can declare war during the final 12 hours. If you are the defender, all you have to do is wait to move your units until the last 12 hours of the turn, at which point in time you are 100%, completely safe from attack until the next turn. The vast majority of the wars in the Pitboss games are expected, and don't come as a surprise. The defender can protect themselves from being double-moved just by waiting to play their turn. If they are dumb and keep moving right at the start of the turn, I would say that's their own fault. Even in this situation, the defender can still whip units as needed.

In a truly confusing/messed-up situation, the halves of the attacker and defender could be reversed, but that's something that would have to be determined on an individual case basis. It should be avoided, not written into the ruleset...

[3] I think this is pretty straightforward.

[4] This is the other controversial part of the ruleset I'm proposing. So much of the arguments from other Pitboss games centered around what teams could and couldn't do during the other half of the timer split. Writing lots of different rules on this just seemed to create more confusion. I really believe that the best solution is to use Occam's razor and cut out the entire problem altogether. Basically, you can do anything during your turn, and when it's not your turn, you can do nothing. IT IS NOT YOUR TURN, as I said above.

Think about that. It... makes everything so much simpler! Sure, changing tile assignments is really benign, and doesn't need to be eliminated, but once you start down that slippery slope you end up with all the disputes. What's allowable, and what's not? Better to remove it all from discussion. Once you end turn, your turn is DONE.

Problems this removes:
- Whipping/drafting during the other side's turn.
- Last second changes of research/slider settings to throw off research visibility from passive espionage.
- Cannot do shady gifting of units/cities/gold/etc. when it's not your turn.
- No advantages gained from running down the clock. The incentive for timer manipulation is removed.

[5] You can make a fair argument that this was acceptable in Pitboss #2, since there was no rule against the practice, but if we're writing a new ruleset, we should want to stamp this out. I would find it hard to believe that anyone really believes gifting away cities to prevent capture is a sporting move, or consistent with the fair play we emphasize at Realms Beyond.

[6] Obviously this is more of a statement of ethos than a firm rule, but it is something to keep in mind.

I didn't write anything about needing to have all of the attacker's units move at once, or prohibiting allies from working together in their half of the turnset (as were included in the Pitboss #2 ruleset). The first part is made obsolete by the new rules on attacking. The second rule, which aroused the most controversy in that game, was a rather silly rule that just added unnecessary complications and rules minutiae. What's the point of writing a rule that tries to prevent allies from working together? It's their half of the turn split, and the opposing side can't take any actions. Let them do what they want. Much simpler.

OK, so what did I miss? Where are the flaws in this ruleset that I haven't seen?

Anyone interested in a PBEM? I've never given it a shot before but would like to if there's anyone else left who isn't already in 13 other active games!

This made me smile:
http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotost...020-8.html


mh

Hi guys,

I just had a quick question about forum posts. It seems that it is possible to use BB code to add in stuff like links, pics, code etc, but I was wondering what the reason for disabling HTML code was?

The game has finished! Thanks to everyone who participated, either playing or reading.

Let's condense the postgame discussion into this thead, instead of splitting it up into all of the various team threads.

Always war!

I've finally gotten my computer back to almost-full functionality, and expect to have the last few programs re-installed soon. My apologies for the delays while I was getting the machine fixed. The plan is currently this:

- Imperium 30 should open on July 19th (NEXT Monday).

- If anyone would like to sponsor an Imperium (including Imperium 30) then please let me know by e-mail (just follow the link on my profile page). "Sponsoring" a game just means coming up with a variant/scenario and a starting save that you think would be fun and challenging. The variant can be entirely based on the save itself if you wish. Playtesting the save to make sure it would make a good Imperium game (at least by playing the first few dozen turns of your own game) is highly encouraged.

- I am currently planning to run Imperium 30 with the original game (Master of Orion version 1.3) as usual. BUT. If there is significant community interest in playing an Imperium under kyrub's embryonic 18 patch, I have an idea for a simple variant that should minimize the impact of the (smallish) AI behavior bug noted here in the patch thread. If you'd like to play an Imperium with the embryonic patch, please state your interest here!

- If you can't wait for the new Imperium, check out kyrub's latest unofficial patch: Version 1.40ii - it can be found here along with the aforementioned "Embryonic 18." Testing Version 1.40ii and reporting any stability issues or other bugs - or the fact that you've played and encountered no such problems - in the current Unofficial Patch Thread would help move the patch that much closer to completion.

Thanks to everyone for your patience!

Hi all,

It's a tournament game, just not a Realms Beyond game. I played a round for the CFC HOF on the current "G-minor" challenge. It's Chieftain difficulty, Epic speed and go for the fastest culture victory. Yeah I really shouldn't be playing on Chieftain, but I gave it a full writeup RB style and readers here seem to like my reports.

http://www.dos486.com/civ4/gminor99/