PB30 Setup Thread

[Old Harry]

What would work is if any particular lurker will just take everything about a starting location into account when choosing how to rank it. You can't really vote for people to ignore or undervalue some aspect, nor can you make a lurker understand how to properly value say, "space" by voting to have this as a necessary part of the rating. Whatever the vote, each lurker will, in practice, rank the starts in accordance with his competence and understanding of the game, it's best to leave it at that. Forcing any more formal requirements on how lurkers should rank the starts will likely just cause bizarre outcomes.

For example, rather than ranking the starts the lurkers could rank each aspect of a start ("lushness", "space", ...) 1 to 10, and these scores would then be aggregated into the start's score, and then ranking of all starts will be done by their average scores, but most likely the resulting ranking will be worse than if players just rank the starts holistically -- if only because the relative importance of factors varies greatly, and they all interact with each other in non-obvious ways.

I don't think we disagree, I was just trying to be sure everyone knows what the scope of lurker evaluation/interference is. As long as you have a really good argument about it in the map making thread then I think we'll all be happy .

Hmm. I'm rather confused - are we just ranking the starts and players and assigning #1 to Person #9, or do you also want lurkers to adjust the terrain per "Lurkers buff and nerf the starts appropriately for each player", or add other factors like "Krill gets no happiness whatsoever, Fintourist and I get landlocked and surrounded by civs who start with extra great artists)"

Well if you end up thinking two players are equally good, but their two natural starts are different quality then I'd want you to buff/nerf them so they're the same. And if you think the gap in quality between the best and worst isn't big enough then ditto in reverse.

No-one seems to have gone for the joke evaluations, so perhaps just do the serious version .

Also, do picks come before or after you see your starts? Can we say 'oh, Harry chose Agri/Wheel, let's make sure he's got a Fish start'?

I think you guys put the start and choice of combo in each thread at the same time. Remember how much more painful early tech is in BTS than RTR/TOW... Also try not to have repeating traits as there will be some that people just don't want to play. Edit: Or if snake pick wins then that's after we see the starts.

[Dantski]

Also, do picks come before or after you see your starts? Can we say 'oh, Harry chose Agri/Wheel, let's make sure he's got a Fish start'?

Sounds like PB3, "oh Dantski/Mukha chose Portugal lets make it an all land map"

[Bacchus]

Well if you end up thinking two players are equally good, but their two natural starts are different quality then I'd want you to buff/nerf them so they're the same. And if you think the gap in quality between the best and worst isn't big enough then ditto in reverse.

This has been my thinking for the electoral design too, we first tier the players, then tier the starts, then make sure that there are equal numbers in each tier. Albeit there will be further difficulties, as assigning some players will have an effect on tiering the starts they neighbour. It's a really fun mechanism design problem

[v8mark]

Just a heads-up for the lurkers, I'm likely to be ded-lurking Dantski if he'll still have me. Since I'm about as good as he is it shouldn't change much other than meaning two heads rather than one for some decisions.

[Dantski]

Just a heads-up for the lurkers, I'm likely to be ded-lurking Dantski if he'll still have me. Since I'm about as good as he is it shouldn't change much other than meaning two heads rather than one for some decisions.

MOAR STONEHENGES!!!

[2metraninja]

I would like to sign up if you are still accepting participants, guys.

[ReallyEvilMuffin]

Don't worry, I'll just chuck a hopeful proposition out for iron and get given it for F all!

Is there any particular reason to go for 9 players over 8?

I'm thinking I might stay in the wings in case someone drops out during setup--BTS makes it a little less appetizing, and I still don't know if I want a second game at this point.

The more players the harder it is for lurkers to do the ranking . Anyway thanks for helping get this going CH!

I mainly vote to give lurkers extended powers.
So votes are similar to Old H. Only difference is except picks - I'd like to have a choice of 2 picks from lurkers. They can then have fun by giving a good choice and a not-so-good choice to a weak player, and see if he grabs the 'right' one.
This is not a dealbreaker as I will be outvoted and will becore snake pick, but that is my preference, at least.

I find it important that all the b1 - b4 should be 'yes'. If not this is not the game I had in mind and will bow out.

Did you miss corps? They should be off, perhaps? And navel blockades? I have little experience with these on in MP civ, but notice they tend to be off.

Looks like I'm the one getting outvoted on the snake pick :P

And looks like everyone agrees with you on b so far.

Those are all under k, so should be banned (although it might be close for corps - I'm not that fussed about those actually.)

- b. Then it's how the lurkers set the handicaps:
- b1. Lushness of capital (yes/no)
- b2. Nearby luxuries (yes/no)
- b3. Space (yes/no)
- b4. Neighbours (yes/no)

Can you explain a little bit more of what you're thinking here? My understanding was that the idea for the map was that someone was going to roll something random, maybe do some very very light balancing on it to get rid of absurd extremities of the map generator (e.g. triple-wet-corn-quad-grass-gems capitals on the one side and plains-cow-only-food capitals on the other side), and then the lurkers would rank each position and each player. Player Rank 1 would then get Start Rank 8, Player 2 gets Start 7, etc. Are b1-b4 supposed to be factors the lurkers should consider for each start?

Yeah, those were all the things I could think of map-related that lurkers could take into account when rating and adjusting starts for players. If you've got more we can add them to the list. I was hoping the rebalancing would be fairly light, but you never know...

Yeah, the proposed player input on how the lurkers are meant to rank the starts, what they are and aren't meant to take into account doesn't really work.

What would work better?

Will lurk and join in the ranking of players, much controversy awaits

If you guys will have me I would like to join too, unsure what number you are at but keen for another game while I have time for them.

Excellent, back up to nine! (Lurkers bear in mind that REM should on no account have iron )

[ReallyEvilMuffin]

Can you explain a little bit more of what you're thinking here? My understanding was that the idea for the map was that someone was going to roll something random, maybe do some very very light balancing on it to get rid of absurd extremities of the map generator (e.g. triple-wet-corn-quad-grass-gems capitals on the one side and plains-cow-only-food capitals on the other side), and then the lurkers would rank each position and each player. Player Rank 1 would then get Start Rank 8, Player 2 gets Start 7, etc. Are b1-b4 supposed to be factors the lurkers should consider for each start?

Yeah, those were all the things I could think of map-related that lurkers could take into account when rating and adjusting starts for players. If you've got more we can add them to the list. I was hoping the rebalancing would be fairly light, but you never know...

Hmm. I'm rather confused - are we just ranking the starts and players and assigning #1 to Person #9, or do you also want lurkers to adjust the terrain per "Lurkers buff and nerf the starts appropriately for each player", or add other factors like "Krill gets no happiness whatsoever, Fintourist and I get landlocked and surrounded by civs who start with extra great artists)"

Also, do picks come before or after you see your starts? Can we say 'oh, Harry chose Agri/Wheel, let's make sure he's got a Fish start'?

I think we are also forgetting the huge variable of your neighbours skill/aggression!

[ReallyEvilMuffin]

Lurkers pick all!
A lurkers
B1234 yes
events off
huts off
speed normal
difficulty mapmaker
barbs off
don't see starts
BTS
Scout start
No bans, I'm happy/easy with it all
Mapmaker decides re GLH
Full esp, (prefer missions available except civic switch but hey ho)

Those votes

- a. leader/civ pick style Snake 2 (OH, Dantski) Lurkers select 3 4 (Molach, Gavagai, Alhazard, Ipecac)
- b1. Lushness of capital (yes/no) Yes 6
- b2. Nearby luxuries (yes/no) Yes 6
- b3. Space (yes/no) Yes 6
- b4. Neighbours (yes/no) Yes 6
- c. Events (off/on) Off 4 on 1 (Gavagai)
- d. Huts (off/on) Off 4 on 1 (Gavagai)
- e. Speed (normal/fast) Normal 2 (OH, Gavagai), quick 1 (Alhazard)
- f. Difficulty (mapmaker's decision/prince/monarch/emperor) Mapmaker 4
- g. Barbs (off/on/raging) On 2 (OH, Gavagai), off 2 (Alhazard, Ipecac)
- h. See starts before picking (yes/no) Yes 3 (OH, Gavagai, Alhazard), no 2 (Dantski, Ipecac)
- i. Version (BTS/RTR 2.7.x/RTR 3.0.x/TOW) BTS wins for compatibility. BTS 4
- j. Scout start (yes/no) Yes 4
- k. Bans: Nukes, War Elephants (except Khmer), Corps, SoZ, Blockades, Diplo Victory (accept/reject) corps banned 2 (Dantski, Ipecac), corps not banned 2 (Gavagai, Alhazard) SoZ banned 3 (OH, Gavagai, Ipecac) SoZ unbanned 1 (Alhazard) all other bans 4
- l. Great Lighthouse (mapmaker's decision/on/off) Mapmaker 2 (OH, Alhazard), NO! DEFY RESOLUTION! 1 (Ipecac)
- m. Espionage (off/on but no spies - settle or start golden age with a Great Spy if you get one/on but no missions/on) on but no spies 4 (OH, Dantski, Alhazard, Ipecac), Full 1 (Gavagai)

I'm happy to change my Lighthouse vote to no so that Ipecac doesn't get a 3 happy penalty in all his cities...

[GermanJoey]

By the way, am I correct in assuming that the players don't get to know what the pre-game tier-list looks like before the end of the game?