Discussion: Game Rules

[Capsavian Hopewell]

Now that the game is finally starting, I think it's time for us to discuss and decide on game rules. 

The Oob wrote up some excellent pitboss game rules at http://theoob.googlepages.com/pitbossrules.html

Of those, I think these are key considerations we may wish to also adapt for Chaos and Civility:

Double Turns

It is possible to take a 'double turn' in the game by being the last to finish for one turn and then the first to finish the one after that. This has a positive effect because it speeds the game up, but the downside is that it can be exploited for military advantage by moving twice before your opponent has a chance to react.

So to keep the upside of double turns while eliminating (or at least minimizing) the downside, the rule is that if you are at war with another player (or are about to go to war with them, eg. sneak attacks) then you mustn't take two turns before they've had a chance to take one, or in other words you cannot go after them in one turn and before them in the next.

You can use the civstats log page for the game, or the RSS feeds from the same page, to tell if the other player has taken their turn (ask me about this if you don't know what I'm talking about).

One exception: you may always take your turn when 12 hours have passed on the turn timer (since the timer seems to run slow this will probably be a bit more than 12 real hours), regardless of whether they have taken their turn or not, otherwise it'd risk you not having a chance to take your turn at all. Ideally though, you should talk to your opponent(s) and come to an arrangement about the order you are going to take your turns in.

I don't want to get overly-complicated here, but I do think we should have a "no double turns when at war" rule.  This includes the turn when war is declared.  This will be tough to enforce, so self-policing and reference to civstats (when the account has been launched) will be needed.

Missed Turns

Anyone who misses 3 consecutive turns (which would entail not taking a turn for at least 72 hours) without notifying me that they are going to be away will be replaced by an AI player immediately and then replaced by a human player as soon as is convenient. Once you have been replaced by a human you will not be able to take your game back.

To notify me of planned absences, you should either send me a PM or an email, and you should also rename yourself in the game to 'on holiday' or something like that, in case I miss your email (it's happened in the past). Note that I must have heard from you in some way, it won't be enough to say that you tried, if you rename yourself in the game there's no plausible way I can miss it.

This sounds reasonable to me; it helps keep the game from getting bogged down.

Vacations

If you're going to be away from your computer for a while and think you'll miss more than a couple of turns, let me know in advance. If it's a short enough time (say, about three turns or less) then just queue up enough actions and we'll let the timer run out, but if it's going to be longer then you'll need to find a temporary replacement or alternatively I can let the AI run it, but I'm not willing to let the timer run out for extended periods of time as it holds up the game.

Other than these points, I don't see any other rules we would need to make, other than possibly some roleplaying guidelines/rules.

What say you?  Do these above rules sound acceptable?  Your feedback is desired.

[Carolus Maltman]

All pretty standard and reasonable to me.

[Capsavian Hopewell]

With the Chaos and Civility game underway, and with ample time allowed for discussion on the rules, it's time to make these official.

I will create a new thread to announce these rules.  They can be amended by a majority vote, but otherwise these three basic points will remain as the rules we will be using.

I am open to any suggestions (or "rules") regarding roleplaying, if such is desired.  Examples may include contact with nations not yet met, trading of information, maps, etc.  Or, we may decide not to have any rules or restrictions on that aspect of the game, as it will be hard to enforce them anyway.

[DribNairb]

I would suggest that no game-related discussions should be allowed between players who have not met in the game. Obviously this cannot be enforced, but I would think it sensible that I cannot suggest another player I haven't even seen should declare war on one of my enemies.
This makes sense from the roleplaying point of view too.

[Carolus Maltman]

I would suggest that no game-related discussions should be allowed between players who have not met in the game. Obviously this cannot be enforced, but I would think it sensible that I cannot suggest another player I haven't even seen should declare war on one of my enemies.
This makes sense from the roleplaying point of view too.

Strongly agree.

Ditto on map sharing, etc. Once you've met someone, and have a way to contact them (ie not completely cut off by neutral parties with no open borders with either of you), then you can share info. But until then, shouldn't happen.

[failedreality]

Not to mention the Meta-gaming aspect on Role Playing..
If you read other civs threads and then act upon something might have slipped out, you should
have the common sense and use your own judgment and not pursue or go after something that has been mentioned
with out doing said role playing first.

[Capsavian Hopewell]

I agree with these ideas--Chaos and Civility is first and foremost meant as a roleplaying platform, after all.

This will be impossible to enforce, of course, although I hope that players can self-regulate themselves and help prevent this game from devolving into "just another civ game".

Items posted in the public embassies, I think should be treated as "rumors" from a roleplaying standpoint.  You may not have met that particular tribe or nation yet, but rumors always find their way around, via long-ranging explorers or migrating hunters, for example.  So, it's OK to maybe make a note of those things mentioned in public, even if you cannot make contact or act upon those rumors directly.

[Carolus Maltman]

I agree with these ideas--Chaos and Civility is first and foremost meant as a roleplaying platform, after all.

This will be impossible to enforce, of course, although I hope that players can self-regulate themselves and help prevent this game from devolving into "just another civ game".

Items posted in the public embassies, I think should be treated as "rumors" from a roleplaying standpoint.  You may not have met that particular tribe or nation yet, but rumors always find their way around, via long-ranging explorers or migrating hunters, for example.  So, it's OK to maybe make a note of those things mentioned in public, even if you cannot make contact or act upon those rumors directly.

And I'll take that as license to play fast and loose with the truth in your embassy's proclamations.... think Iraq.

[Capsavian Hopewell]

The proud and noble Dernish people will speak no tales, only the One Truth, as interpreted by the tribal elders.

Nevermind the substance that the elders insist on smoking at their council meetings in the mead hall.  That's just...tobacco.   

[failedreality]

Items posted in the public embassies, I think should be treated as "rumors" from a roleplaying standpoint.  You may not have met that particular tribe or nation yet, but rumors always find their way around, via long-ranging explorers or migrating hunters, for example.  So, it's OK to maybe make a note of those things mentioned in public, even if you cannot make contact or act upon those rumors directly.

Then pretty much you can only roleplay about your own internal nation and not what they are doing.

It does have to be self-regulated but it's hard to trust someone like that, so I guess my RP will be extremely vague, to the point where I'm sure you didn't want it...