PBEM - From the Ashes of the Mediterranean

[unmerged(6618)]

Yup. 10 + 0 (amount gained or lost during turn = 10 - 10) - 1 = 9

Is everyone ok with this? Like Boehm said, it does change strategy quite a bit - including aggressiveness of AI, and the profitability of pagan wars and colonization...

I suppose it makes a difference for what countries we play... so this should be resolved first...

 

[Wyvern]

Originally posted by Ludovico
Yup. 10 + 0 (amount gained or lost during turn = 10 - 10) - 1 = 9

Is everyone ok with this? Like Boehm said, it does change strategy quite a bit - including aggressiveness of AI, and the profitability of pagan wars and colonization...

I suppose it makes a difference for what countries we play... so this should be resolved first...

I just wonder if it will work out long term. You need to consider that between turns your country could lose a lot of provinces in a war which would normally lower BB. How will you take this into account? If you try to recover them during your turn your BB is then going to be artificially higher than it should normally be.

Also whilst our turns are only going to be around 6 years in length, hence 1 BB lowered if we did nothing, the gap between turns could be many decades where normally BB would be lowered by more than 1 point due to the passage of time.

My preference as I stated previously is to avoid the hassles of BB in a game like this, but I'll of course go along with the majority view if others really want to play on Vhard.

 

[boehm]

it seems to me that this is not really going to move on...why not just skip right ahead to a vote...as I see it there are 3 alternatives

1) Very Hard, with nothing fancy bb-editing stuff

2) Very Hard, with editing of the bb to only count bb gained during own turn....

3) Hard,...otherwise nothing fancy!

I suggest that everybody vote for their #1 (2points) and their #2 (1 point)....and then we just count the total points for each of the alternatives in the end....

ok, my votes are 2pts for 2) and 1pts for 1)

 

[unmerged(9081)]

I'll vote 2 points for #3 and 1 point for #1

 

[unmerged(6618)]

Originally posted by natt och dag
I'll vote 2 points for #3 and 1 point for #1

2 points for # 2 (edit BB)
1 point for #3 (play on hard setting)


I'd also say that I think #1, playing on vhard without bboy editing, is unplayable. The ai just wracks up too much bboy, no matter what aggresiveness you are playing with.

 

[Wyvern]

I'll vote 2 point for #3 (play on hard)
1 point for #1

Looks like Storey gets the desiding vote

 

[Storey]

Originally posted by boehm


well if it was 10 when u started your turn...and it is 10 when u finish your turn...then at the start of your next turn it should be 10-1 = 9

Sorry Boehm but my thumb got in the way. That was suppose to be 20 not 10. Some day I'll learn to type correctly. That's how I came up with 20-6=14. However I understand what you're saying. bb primo - bb ultimo - 1

Joe

 

[Storey]

I have some major reservations with editing the BB points. In the last game I had a few turns where it was 56 years between turns. If my AI becomes a little warmonger during that time it works to my advantage. I set the AI file so that my country attacks whichever country I want and then I get to change the BB points to the lower value when I play. I repeat the process and don't have to suffer the penalties of what the AI does. (I know that’s the point) A sharp editor of the AI file has a big advantage in this type of game. Maybe I'm making too much out of this but I think it could be a problem. So I would go with 2 points for #3 and 1 point for number 1.

I'm still open to editing the BB file but does my concern make sense or am I missing something? I always like to try something new which is why I’m reluctant to not try the BB edit type of game but it seems that it has problems. Boehm, Ludovico any thoughts? I hate to be the one to kill an interesting idea but even the countries we decide to play (major or minor) can effect my vote.

Joe

 

[boehm]

voting results

Originally posted by boehm
it seems to me that this is not really going to move on...why not just skip right ahead to a vote...as I see it there are 3 alternatives

1) Very Hard, with nothing fancy bb-editing stuff

2) Very Hard, with editing of the bb to only count bb gained during own turn....

3) Hard,...otherwise nothing fancy!

I suggest that everybody vote for their #1 (2points) and their #2 (1 point)....and then we just count the total points for each of the alternatives in the end....

here is the total votes:

1) 4pts
2) 4pts
3) 7pts

...it seems we have cleare majority for 3) ...so unless someone has some really new and exiting imput I suggest we just go with that and move on to which countries we should play?!?

 

[boehm]

where to play??

As I see it there is 3 main alternatives as to where and which countries to play:

1) European minors

2) European minors/majors/(superpowers?)

3) RotW country...which are pretty much minor by definition except perhaps china?

...personally I just prefer playing in europe...perhaps including the middle east....furthermore I would prefer if we could avoid the real superpowers as I happen to like the fact that there will actually be some ai countries which wont just automatically roll over on their back.....anyway I would like to propose one of the following options:

a) a MED campaign like last time...
b) a Balkan/Mideast campaign...
c) a Baltic/north sea campaign...

additionally I would like if we could somehow agree on some victory conditions which people would actually try to go for....so that we could get a more competitive game with more interplayer rivalry than what seems to be the "normal" in pbem games....thats one reason I kind of like the baltic sea idea since it would be pretty dammed crammed there with very little room to expand without getting into conflict....Alternatively we could try a game of christians vs. muslims with a kind of team victory in addition to solo victory and with rome and byzantium giving extra points for each turn it ends in your possession??

Anyone has any other ideas as to where to play or how to make the game more competitive?...provided ofcause u people want the game to be more competitive??

 

[unmerged(9081)]

boehm, I like this idea of goals and such, and i support them, however, I do not have a clear idea of which idea I support, so keep 'em coming!

I think that a baltic game could get VERY intense, which sounds fun.

 

[Storey]

I agree that just using victory points as the goal is a problem. It forces the player into a colonizing type of game if they want to win. Hmm, some type of team goals? Sounds interesting. I also would like to stay in Europe and/or the Middle East. Very busy at work right now but I’ll try to find time to ponder on this some more.

Joe

 

[Wyvern]

Sounds interesting. I like the idea of setting goals, and perhaps arranging some sort of team game. I'd also like to suggest that we do pick larger countries to start with, I think this would avoid one player getting a good start (or having a lucky AI streak) and then forever dominating the game.

The idea of a human Ottomans attempting to sweep over Europe could be quite interesting. Austria would obviously need to be one of the opposing team. I don't think you could pick another Muslem nation though that would be on an even field with a catholic one, or at least not easily, so I'd like to propose the following if everyone's interested in a team game:

Ottomans & Russia on one side
Vs
Austria and Poland on the other

I just don't know what 5th country to pick or which side to put it on. I guess Ottomans/Russia are the weakest side long term due to tech disadvantage. Perhaps the 5th player could Algeria? If we had 6, the 6th player could then be the Papal States.

 

[Gezeder]

Hiya, again, spectator only input

Just one idea, not sure if you'd be interested but how about this:

Keep track of the BB points your AI generates, then edit out all the DOW's (stupid AI generates these things like crazy), that way, you only get in trouble if your warmonger ai is actually successful!

Another option would be to keep a percentage of the points the ai generates, like, say, 25% round up

Just my 2c - they're a bit complicated to implement but they might give the effect you're after (BB not skyrocketing, AI is accountable for it's successes but not it's stupidity etc)

Looking foward to this one guys

(I'll stop bugging you now!)

Gezeder

 

[boehm]

Originally posted by Wyvern
Sounds interesting. I like the idea of setting goals, and perhaps arranging some sort of team game. I'd also like to suggest that we do pick larger countries to start with, I think this would avoid one player getting a good start (or having a lucky AI streak) and then forever dominating the game.

unless we can crank out some really competitive rules so that players will be eager to keep each other in check I suggest we dont play anything resembling majors...since otherwise europe will be devided by the humans in less than 100 years...

 

[Storey]

Thanks for the input Gezeder.

I like the team play idea but with 5 players I don't know how it would work out. I agree with Boehm that we should stick with minors. With this group they won't stay minor for long.

Joe

 

[unmerged(6618)]

A team game would be rather cool. I would actually like the majors game, if we could come up with rules...

For instance -

Castille/Poland/Muscowy
vs
France/Ottomans

Vienna cannot fall into Ottoman or French hands.
Nor can Vienna fall into Spanish, Polish, or Russian hands, or this alliance loses by forgeit.
If Vienna is lost, France/Ottomans win.

Spain/Poland/Muscowy cannot hold X amount of Muslim provinces. To be added as an alliance or individually. If they do, France/Ottomans lose.

Since France and Ottomans can do quite well under a human player, this might be a doable solution.


And without an Austria player, it would make it rather interesting to try and prop up an AI Austria and defend Europe from the Ottomans.

Any other ideas?

Sweden/Poland/Ottomans
vs
Muscowy/England

Russia cannot hold more than X amount of German provinces or
England cannot hold Ile de France for more than X amount of years. Either condition will count as an English/Russian victory.

etc.

 

[unmerged(6618)]

Since this seems to be taking a bit, I suggest a vote between the following options -

1. A minors pbem game, in one of the three following regions:

a. Baltic
b. Balkans
c. Middle/Near East

2. A majors game such as I earlier specified.

a. Ottoman Empire/France vs Castille/Poland/Muscowy
b. England/Muscowy vs Sweden or Denmark/Poland/Ottoman Empire
c. Suggest a new majors campaign with specific rules (to make it some sort of challenge)

3. Ludovico's super-fantastic new format pbem. Bear with me, I had a thought on a new way to play (I'll post in a new post so I don't lose all this)

Catholic alliance vs Schismatic Christian/Muslim/Scandinavian-Anglo alliance, with fancy shmancy rules, to be outline below

Please vote on 1, 2, or 3, in order of preference (3 points to #1, 2 points to #2, 1 point to #3). After this, we can then vote on more specific questions (and subletters)

If everyone is ok voting, I vote:
#3
#2
#1

If someone wishes to include an option or dispute the poll or some such thing, feel free of course.

 

[unmerged(6618)]

Super-fanatastic PBEM rules

The pbem would consist of 6 players (I assume we could get another to join - Gezeder?). 3 players in each "alliance", with the turns rotating back and forth between the two alliances. Each player in the alliance chooses the country he will play when his turn comes up, but he is not restricted to a set country throughout the game, only to the countries available in the alliance (thus getting to continually switch between the different countries in the alliance to give help where it is needed, etc) Each country can only be chosen once per Round.
Points will be calculated at the end of the game, based on the following scheme.

Alliance #1 Western Christian Alliance

1. Austria
2. Spain (Castille and Aragon)
3. France
4. Poland
5. Venice
6. Portugal

Alliance #2 Rebel Alliance (for lack of a better term)

1. Ottoman Empire
2. Russia (Novgorod and Muscowy)
3. England
4. Algiers
5. Granada
6. Denmark
7. Bohemia

-------------------------------

Key Cities and Provinces.

X points per province (5?), X (25?) points for converted province to any of the Alliance religions.

Alliance 1

Paris
Vienna
Rome
Lisbon
Veneto
Gibraltar

Alliance 2

Istanbul
London
Moscow
Judea
Egypt
Tangiers

-----------------------------

Alliance #1

1 Point per Anglo-Saxon, Muslim, Russian, and Scandanavian provinces held IN EUROPE

Alliance #2

1 Point per French, Iberian, Italian, Polish, and German Provinces held IN EUROPE

-----------------------------

Key Colonial Holdings

Singapore
Shanghai
Tokyo
Delhi
Tenochitlan
Manhattan

Worth X each (10?)

-----------------------------

Forced Religious Conversion of Spain, France, Ottoman Empire, Russia, or Austria, holding at the end of game, worth X (50?) points.
Elimination of Spain, France, Ottoman Empire, England, Russia, Austria at end of game worth X (100?) points.

-----------------------------

All points are calculated at end of game. Converted countries, converted provinces, Alliance holdings, etc, only count at the END of the game.

Of course, this is simply a rough outline, subject to amendment. Anyone interested? I think with a little refinement, we could do something interesting with it.

 

[Gezeder]

Sure, I'd be up for a team game like that if you wanted another player, sounds interesting!

Though, while I would still be able to play my turns promptly, I doubt I could promise the amount of time i've spent on AAR reports (I'm back at University now......)

I guess I don't get to vote, but if it does end up Ludovico's "super-fantastic new format pbem"

Yep, count me in if u want me!

Gezeder