September 21st, 2011, 11:52
Posts: 4,831
Threads: 12
Joined: Jul 2010
Catwalk Wrote:Btw I'm rather interested in screenshot sharing with Paper only, anyone else willing to go for that? Didn't even think about this option earlier.
We voted for sharing maps after meeting in game, but without paper researched that can only be done thru screenshots... so your suggestion would contradict voted settings.
do you feel strongly about it?
September 21st, 2011, 12:08
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
I'd prefer it, don't feel strongly about it. Just wondering if anyone else was interested in changing their vote on this one. I'm reading up on an old game now, and I find the problem of early information exchange to be intriguing. Makes it much harder to coordinate joint military action against a common enemy, for example.
September 21st, 2011, 12:19
Posts: 4,831
Threads: 12
Joined: Jul 2010
I voted for no map sharing until paper (presumbly incuding screenshots) , so if you get one more person convinced, I guess that would change the results...
September 21st, 2011, 12:27
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Well, "intriguing" would not be the word of my choice for no map trading till Paper data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cea03/cea03f7367eff1fa2741fc17bef993240ab59276" alt="wink wink" I don't want to tell you how to play, but after having played several PBEMs already, I think I feel safe to say that most of the times it is plain annoying. Not because of joint military action (often that is no issue anyway for the starting phases of the game) but because of how hard it gets to even discuss how to divide a border region.
And honestly, if really necessary, players will start to write it out instead of making a screenshot. It is not a problem to write down every tile - you can even use a nice excel-table for that. But it is a tedious work.
Btw: By chance, is the old PBEM you are reading PBEM16?
September 21st, 2011, 12:37
Posts: 18,045
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
Oh, by the way, speaking as someone who did the view-first map thing myself, it will be a help for Seven if everyone kicks off their spoiler thread in the apropos forum. Nobody can beat Plako's reference, of course, but still...
September 21st, 2011, 12:43
Posts: 488
Threads: 10
Joined: Oct 2009
Catwalk Wrote:A few newbie questions:
What are the standards we're going by as far as kingmaking goes? I'm looking through an old game where a losing player (being invaded) gifted away his stuff to an ally before quitting.
Furthermore, are we playing with treaties that can be broken at a whim? If that hasn't been decided yet, I'd like to vote for binding treaties (within the agreed on time limits, of course).
Seems like we're ready to go, what's next? Wait for the map, then snake picks?
I think gifting is frowned upon and anyways, if you had allies, they should be sending troops through your land to help defend :minfac:
Catwalk Wrote:Btw I'm rather interested in screenshot sharing with Paper only, anyone else willing to go for that? Didn't even think about this option earlier.
It's a nice idea but I think Sedoa's comments are valid and more than realistic to how things would turn out. For me it stays as when meet in game
We are waiting for the map before deciding who we pick right?
That doesn't stop us from determining the snake pick order though. Perhaps one of the vets can determine an order for the greens and vice versa?
Also, whilst I think about it. For turn order, I am GMT and can play evenings midweek (give or take a few pub Fridays data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ccef7/ccef742388ceb430f3de2362d72393a300e431ac" alt="toast toast" ). Weekends can be hit and miss with regards to times.
Saves should go to pegasusrb @ gmail [dot] com
Is it worth bringing up tracker setup at this point?
September 21st, 2011, 12:48
(This post was last modified: September 21st, 2011, 13:31 by Serdoa.)
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Well, I think first thing is, now that the settings are pretty much agreed upon for both games, that we create two new threads for tech-stuff, with the first post containing the players, the settings, email-adresses, tracker-adress (when setup) and so on for the specific game.
Reason is that I think it will be easier to keep track of the technical stuff for both games if it does not get mixed up that much that some might overlook important requests. Maybe you can do that for the "greens" game Pegasus? I will take care of that for the vets as soon as I have a little bit time.
Edit: Created the thread for the vets directly in the subforum.
September 21st, 2011, 13:56
Posts: 488
Threads: 10
Joined: Oct 2009
Serdoa Wrote:Edit: Created the thread for the vets directly in the subforum.
And likewise for the Greens in our subforum
September 21st, 2011, 14:53
Posts: 4,272
Threads: 38
Joined: Jun 2011
I'm sorry to bring this back up, but I'm a little confused. Are we allowed to lurk the greens game? (and vice versa?) Or since it's the same map do we need to remain unspoiled for the duration of the game? Are the green and vet teams from the same starting position supposed to work together?
September 21st, 2011, 15:01
Posts: 18,045
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
oledavy Wrote:I'm sorry to bring this back up, but I'm a little confused. Are we allowed to lurk the greens game? (and vice versa?) Or since it's the same map do we need to remain unspoiled for the duration of the game? Are the green and vet teams from the same starting position supposed to work together?
That'd be pretty abusive, IMO, if you could double your map knowledge, etc, from your shadow game. No contact between shadow positions seemed to be the PBEM 4 and 18 rule, and that worked pretty well. Ignore my presence in the vets forum right now, I'm cheerfully reading the pregame speculation but once Seven posts the start position shots it's dedicated lurking time.
|