FFH PBEM3?

[WarriorKnight]

There's been some talk about starting up another FFH PBEM game. Would anyone be interested in signing up for one?

[Bobchillingworth]

I'm very interested in playing, provided that the game uses patch N :P


Otherwise I'll probably start FFH PBEM 4 or something once PBEM 1 concludes.

[The Reverend Doctor]

I'm also playing on patch N and am interested!

Any idea how many you'd like to have for this game? I kinda think lower number (5-6) work better for PBEM, maybe split it into 2 if there's a ton of interest....

[WarriorKnight]

The number of people for the game would vary depending on how many people are interested. I think the limit should be around 5-7 people though so we can get 1 turn a day.

I'm on patch N too for the record, but I'm happy to upgrade to O if necessary.

[Sciz]

As I said in another thread, I'm definitely interested, even though i'm playing FFH PBEM2. I'm on patch O though, and people who aren't currently playing a PBEM should definitely get a spot before me

[Mr. Yellow]

I'm very interrested in participating in this as well.
Haven't even tried a CIV4 multi yet though, but i doubt it's gonna be too much hazzle to get used to a PBEM.

[Bobchillingworth]

I was actually chatting with Selrahc a couple days ago about starting another pbem, but decided not to because we assumed that most everyone was on O now. It sounds like including him, there are at least four of us on patch N who are interested, so perhaps there could be two separate PBEMs running, one for each patch.


For settings I recommend that the civ list be restricted to the seven or so which have no been used so far. Some fun options might be No Settlers combined with Barbarian World- lots of wide open spaces for players to explore.


I also strongly encourage starting one era in, to avoid the often painfully slow opening and to give the game a better chance of getting to Tier IV units to show them off. If No Settlers is set, starting with two settlers might be a good idea.

[WarriorKnight]

For settings I recommend that the civ list be restricted to the seven or so which have no been used so far.

What civs haven't been used yet? Let's see:

Amurites
Bannor
Clan
Elohim
Grigori
Sheaim
Sidar

Also the Mercurians and Infernals (but they're not important)

I dunno. Restricting the civ list to 7 takes out 2/3rds of the available civs. I understand that it would be good to cover the remaining civs, but that's very restricted. Perhaps just ban the Calabim since they've been picked twice already? And choosing a civ that hasn't been played yet is encouraged.

Some fun options might be No Settlers combined with Barbarian World- lots of wide open spaces for players to explore.

Dunno about that. Assuming that you can capture barb cities (if you can't then it's OCC? I don't want that) then you'd be relying on the barbs for more cities. That seems a bit too gimmicky for me.

I also strongly encourage starting one era in, to avoid the often painfully slow opening and to give the game a better chance of getting to Tier IV units to show them off. If No Settlers is set, starting with two settlers might be a good idea.

Good idea. Although I've never done a later era start, it would be good to get the early turns out of the way, especially when it's a PBEM.

[Mr. Yellow]

Just restrict it to leaders not used yet. Which amounts to 21 (or 23 with the Decius..es not used with the other 2 factions).


Also, slow start or not. Wouldn't it be better to just let the opening be for now considering if there's a lot of new players participating?

[Bobchillingworth]

The point of restricting the civ choices would be so that the FFH PBEM series has a chance to show off close to all of them. By no means vital, but might be nice for the lurkers. For what it's worth, the seven that are left lend themselves to some very interesting and diverse play-styles, so I think between them there's something for everyone to enjoy, whether you want to mess around with spell casting or religion or whatever.



You can capture and keep barbarian cities with No Settlers. Barbarian world means that the game will start with quite a few cities already founded, and the barbarians are pretty good about settling more whenever they get a chance. There would be a lot of land that would never get settled, but that's kind of the point. I don't have my heart set on this option, but it does lend a nice wide-open fantasy adventure feel to games. It would also allow the game to take place on a larger map than might be used otherwise, since fewer units and cities places less stress on computers.