Chaos and Civility II pre-setup discussions

[Capsavian Hopewell]

Well folks, Chaos and Civility I is wrapping up, with Levgree earning a Space Race victory in 1710 AD.  Well played! 

This was an awesome group of players, with great roleplayers and strategists aplenty.  I for one am going to miss this planet we have built up for so long!  Almost TEN MONTHS if I am not mistaken, and with minimal turnover.  Incredible.

The good news is, this opens up the door for us to set up Chaos and Civility II.  Before we do though, it would be good for us to have an open discussion:

1) Please post if you are interested in signing on for C&C2, and if you have any friends who are interested, have them sign up on the forums at www.chaosciv.com and post in this thread so we can get a head count.  Original C&C1 players get first dibs, but we should likely have open slots regardless.

2) Please post your feedback on this past game--should any rules be clarified or changed at all?  For example, I am hoping C&C2 will be even more roleplaying, with less concern over "winning" per se, even though C&C1 had some great RPing.

3) A mod exists which would allow for up to 40 players (instead of the standard 18).  I've tested this mod out, and it seems to be stable, and seems to provide for enough space that each civ has room for 5 or so cities before bumping into one another (I'm not sure, but I think the mod increases the map size and/or land area to accommodate, as I always had such room, whether with 28 or 35 or 40, at least in my single player testing). 

I would very much like to see us use this mod, perhaps for 28 players, to add for even more trade, politics, and overall RPing goodness.

I enthusiastically look forward to hearing from you!

--Frank, your Game Servant

[karayanev]

If there is a place for me I would love to join CC II.

[bjarkekr]

Im in

[namliaM]

Sure sign me up

[Viktor Ahriman]

You know I am in.  I would say 25 players would be a good start.  That gives us another 7 players.  As far as the rules go, the only thing that I would like to see changed is the miss turn policy.  Especially since we are going to see more players.  This will be very important in the beginning of the game when nothing really happens for a long time.  I would say that if you miss your turn 2 times in a row without saying anything as to why, you are done and switched to AI.  I feel that when you sign up to play a game, you are joining a world and making a commitment to play.  It would be like if we were all in one room playing the game and somebody left causing us to all sit and wait for him to return.  I feel that the timer set is plenty of time to get your turn done.  Most everybody has done it.  But we had a few players that did abuse the timer and not make there turn.  Even saying they had more important things to do than make there turn.  As a gamer, I feel this is unaccetable.  As a person, I understand, but at the same time if you dont have the time to play, THEN DONT PLAY!  This is my opinion. 

I would assume Capsavian that we would start the timer out at say 10 hours or less for the beginning?  Then slowly increase it as the world gets bigger and more complicating?

VIktor

[Carolus Maltman]

You know I am in.  I would say 25 players would be a good start.  That gives us another 7 players.  As far as the rules go, the only thing that I would like to see changed is the miss turn policy.  Especially since we are going to see more players.  This will be very important in the beginning of the game when nothing really happens for a long time.  I would say that if you miss your turn 2 times in a row without saying anything as to why, you are done and switched to AI.  I feel that when you sign up to play a game, you are joining a world and making a commitment to play.  It would be like if we were all in one room playing the game and somebody left causing us to all sit and wait for him to return.  I feel that the timer set is plenty of time to get your turn done.  Most everybody has done it.  But we had a few players that did abuse the timer and not make there turn.  Even saying they had more important things to do than make there turn.  As a gamer, I feel this is unaccetable.  As a person, I understand, but at the same time if you dont have the time to play, THEN DONT PLAY!  This is my opinion. 

I would assume Capsavian that we would start the timer out at say 10 hours or less for the beginning?  Then slowly increase it as the world gets bigger and more complicating?

VIktor

I would like to be in as well, but I think we're going to have to clarify something - who are you targeting this game to?

I play PTBS games for 2 reasons:

1) I like to play against humans
2) I lead a very busy life - with a full time job, and a growing side business, and other interests as well. I love to play this game, but can only find the 10-45 mins per day for this game (and the other 2 I'm in).

I'd imagine there's more than a few of you in the same position as myself, and in normal life, even with the best of intentions sometimes you can't get home in time for the turn timer. And yes, its possible it might happen twice (though that was very rare for me without giving notice).

So given that I'm quite often out of my house for more than 13 hours straight on a given day, the 10 hour rule really doesn't work for me.

If this game is meant for "serious gamers" who want something just one step up from playing live then maybe this game isn't for me. But since there's a heavy focus on roleplaying, and I know more than a few of you have regular working lives, then I don't tihnk that's the aim here.

So there's my opinion.

To me, if you feel like there's not enough going on in a given day - join more games.


One caveat on crowded worlds - advanced start can get really messy. A regular start puts you further apart, but if people build capitals on the edge of your advanced start area, you can end up with the fat crosses touching another person's initial city. Some people will die VERY quickly in that case.

Overall I think this game was great, and a lot of fun, and hope that I can get the other games to upgrade soon.

[Viktor Ahriman]

Hey Maltmann,

I am not targeting anyone.  The question is are you keeping up in the other two games that you are in as well?  Maybe with your busy schedule you should narrow it down to 1.  I am not saying that we keep the timer at 10 hours, I am just saying for the start of the game since nothing happens, the timer could be less as many players will only be logging in for a few minutes.  We could easily put the timer at 20 hours when we start getting things going.

I am busy as well Maltmann.  I work an average of 60+ hours in a week.  Plus keeping up with family life.  But I always make a point to log in just to make my turn even if it is just for 5 minutes.  When I say miss two turns then you are switched to AI, I am saying that is ONLY if you make no attempt to alert anyone of your intentions.  If you post in the forum that you may miss your turn due to certain circumstances, that will be OK.  I was just saying that in this game we had people missing their turn for 2 or more times in a row, then they would make there turn, then miss again for two more turns.  If we would post in the forum that we maybe gone, then a replacement should take place or post in the forum if it would OK if you miss a couple of turns due to real life events.

I enjoy the game as well Maltman and it should be open to everyone.  Die hard gamers and gamers like ourselves.  I just want there to be commication.  Honestly in this game there were a few times when somebody almost missed 3 turns in a row without saying anything.  At the same time everybody else, all 10 players had made there move within 6 hours of the timer turning over all three days.  So we all waited a total of 40 + hours waiting and they never did do there turn.  To me this is not fair.  We could keep the missed turns at 3 if you would like Maltman.  But it has to be known that if somebody missed 3 without saying anything, they are done.  Per the rules say they get switched to AI for the rest of the game.  If you know you are going to be tied down for a few days, get a replacement or state in the forum that you may be gone and can not make your move.  I would be OK about it.  Does this sound fair Maltman. 

You were a good player and role player Maltman.  I cannot wait to meet up with you in CC II.

VIktor

[DribNairb]

Count me in!

As for rules:

I agree it would be nice to have a 10 hour turn timer, and it's annoying when one person holds up the game until the timer expires. However, reality dictates that with 20-30 people it is highly likely that at least one person won't play a turn in a given 24 hour period and I think we need to realise that turns are unlikely to regularly complete before the timer expires. If someone is saying it's because they couldn't be bothered or they had better things to do then yes - they shouldn't be playing. But anyone who works an 8 hour day is going to find it difficult to complete turns in 10 hours. And in particular when you are at war, you may only have a 12 hour time period which makes it harder.
Therefore my vote is to keep the 20 game-hour timer (corresponding to about 24 real hours).

As for advanced start - I definitely think that is the way to go. I played a couple of other PTBS games before this one which all died within about 30 turns. Possibly because players found it boring to get going. With roleplaying this one might work out better, but you'll notice there were only a small number of core players who did any serious roleplaying (at least that I noticed). However, there are a couple of possible ways this could be modified:
 a) Use the 'traditional' advanced start - where all players must be only at the beginning of the game when we'll play, say, 50 turns in a few hours. This is great in theory but I think it's unlikely we'll get a full quota of players
 b) Limit the advanced start to a small-ish number of points (Reduces some of the initial boredom but doesn't solve the problem completely)
 c) Put some rules onto the advanced start to get everyone up and running and reduce boredom, but restrict what advances can be applied (eg. no buying techs. You must build 5 warriors. something like that)
 d) Go ahead with a normal advanced start anyway and trust the larger mapsize will work.

Next up - mods. I'd like to play a game with the extended epic mod (called NextWar as part of the BTS expansion). However, if it's a choice between that and playing with more players I'd go for more players instead. Which mod are you using to get the extra players?

Other rules - I think it might be best if you draw up a new post of all the rules (including the extra's we made up as we went along - like the vassal states and the one reload per player) and number each one (rather than just linking to rules by the oob). It's easier to then discuss individual points if someone can think of a clarification or variation.

[Sonnybonds]

Sorry but i m not gonna join. It takes to much time for me.

It was fun playing and i hope you guys injoy C&C II. I do have 1 suggestion for the RPG part in your next game.
same of the leaders didnt do much RPG and that really too bad. This game is really good for RPG.
So for more RPG i think it would be nice if you have some kind of UN from the start.
You can make a special forum for it and discus international proposals. You must have some kind of leader selected and this leader can be replaced by another civ in 10 turns or so.

Its just an advice.

Sonnybonds of France.

[Viktor Ahriman]

I do think for this next game, it should be a requirement that we have all players role playing.  However, as we did in this game, the players chatting with each other should only be done if they met the other nation.  Otherwise it would unrealistic to work on diplomacy issues when two nations have not met.  But as far as the speakeasy and the unwashed masses, its fine to discuss with each other.  I dont agree with a UN in the beginning of the game for the reasons mentioned above.

Drib, awesome that you are going to rejoin us.  Look forward to meeting you in the next game!


To insure roleplaying, I dont know what the penalty should be if you dont.

Verywell on the timer, I will bow to 20 hour limit and a 24 if the world is at war.  I am glad to see that Drib agrees with me on the issue of players missing there turn.  I also realize with that many players that it may happen that the timer will expire, but if its a different person and not the same 'ones' and if there is good reason and they let us know that their turns will expire then its OK.   Its only like I said, when its the same person and it happens turn after turn with no reason.

Viktor

[Capsavian Hopewell]

Sonny, sorry to hear you won't be joining us.   You were a great RPer.  If you reconsider, let us know.

Glad to see, however, that several others have voiced their intention to join!  We should hopefully have no trouble collecting a good crew.

True, not everyone will be an RPer, but this game's main focus is RPing, so I sincerely hope we can encourage even more of that.  This game was quite decent, but there's always a desire for more RP, I think.   There are a ton of non-RP Civ games available, so that's what really sets this one apart from the bulk.

Turn timer -- I cannot see how anything fewer than 20 hours would possibly work, to be honest.  As Jamie said, some of us have other obligations which preclude us from signing in frequently.  Not only that, but with 28 players (if we opt for that), there will be times where you CANNOT log in, due to latency issues (i.e. three people trying to log in simultaneously, Out-Of-Sync errors, etc.).  Generally, the turns ended well before 20 hours, I found.  I really think 20 hours is a good balance, with the option to extend if we have three or more parties at war (to facilitate their turn sequences).

Regarding boredom and slow turns, especially early on--this is where you have a chance to shine with your RP!  Write some stories, talk about your politics or customs, design your nation's currency and flag, or interact with one of the many neighbors you will have. And if you aren't up for that, then as was suggested, you can certainly find other Civ games to join if you have the time.  For me, I barely have enough time for one game though. 

Drib, you have some great suggestions.  Option A is not feasible, as you noted (plus, pitboss server and my 'net connection would probably choke with 28 connections simultaneously!).  Option B might be good; we did 1500 points for C&C1, so we could reduce that to 1000 points, for example. Or, yes, say "no tech buying," that could be an option too.

Regardless, there will likely be instances of civs starting on top of one another.  In my tests of the mod in single player, world builder (to view the map after all civs have placed their cities) there seemed to be only a few cases where two civs were TOO close.  Even in C&C1 though, I ended up right next to Darius Silva, some of you might recall.  That's just a risk one has to take, and adapt accordingly.

I believe we can only use one mod at a time, unfortunately.  The mod I was looking at is this one: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=234779&page=11 (post #203 is the updated version).

I have attached the mod file to this post, for your download convenience.  Please install and test it out when you get a chance, and let me know what you think.  Set up some single-player games and switch to World Builder so you can view the entire map. 

I'm thinking we should have 28 civs, Huge map, epic speed, three continents, low water level, no tech brokering, no permanent alliance, same settings as C&C1 basically.  That seems to be a good fit, I think?

Let's talk about the rules in this thread; we can post a finalized version once that has been decided. As, yes, we do need to talk about those extra things such as vassalage, RP, chatting with people you haven't met, etc.

[Capsavian Hopewell]

The rules as we had for C&C I:

Any player may propose changes which must be brought to a vote, requiring a simple majority of current players to pass any amendments.

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 to tell if the other player has taken their turn.

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.

Clarifications to the Double Turn/Double Move Rule to reflect double move clarifications first posted here:  http://www.chaosciv.com/index.php/topic,127.0.html

a) Warring nations will not be permitted to log in except for taking their turn.  That means no follow-up logins to observe, counter move, nothing.  Logging in twice during a turn sequence while at war will now be considered a double-move. Use Civstats to determine if it's "safe" to take your turn, rather than logging into the game.

b) Warring nations must observe the turn sequence as per the start of the war. If the attacker was the second in the turn sequence, so he should remain.

c) A warring nation may not swap the turn sequence, except if there are fewer than 12 hours remaining before the end of turn.  In the event the nation is in a position where they must make their turn as described, the sequence has been swapped and must then be followed in that new order.  Never should a nation be making two turns back-to-back, unless there are fewer than 12 hours remaining on the timer with the opponent still not taking his turn.

In short: no double turns when at war.  This especially includes the turn when war is declared.  This will be tough to enforce, so self-policing and reference to civstats 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 consider renaming yourself in the game to 'on holiday' or something like that. 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.

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 (less than three turns) 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.

If you resign (turn control over to AI) without letting me know the reason, I will have to assume that you simply quit the game and I will find a permanent replacement accordingly.

In short:  if you will be unable to take your turn for three or more consecutive days, you must find a replacement player or let me know and we can let the AI run your nation for the duration of your absence.   


Things to do:

--organize rules into a numbered list for easier clarification and amendments as needed.

--clarify rule on vassalage "forced peace bug" (e.g. "A nation currently at war may NOT become a vassal of another nation, unless the master nation precedes the vassalage by declaring war against all entities currently at war with the vassal nation.  This action eliminates the 'forced peace' bug.")

--clarify RP guidelines (such as no communicating with civs who you have not made contact with)

--add rule (proposed text is as follows): "Each civ will be permitted a maximum of ONE reload.  This reload request must be requested publicly via the ChaosCiv.com forums within 12 hours of the turn in question.  The reload will use the most recent autosave for that civ (autosaves occur at the start of each player's turn)."  I think this should eliminate the potential for abuse of the reload option.

--the provided mod is required to play in this game.  (You can load and unload the mod easily though, if you are playing in multiple games).

Any others?

[whiplash]

I'll join.

[IanDC]

I'd be interested in joining.

[Capsavian Hopewell]

Welcome to Chaos and Civility! 

I am hoping we will be able to get our full roster within a week or so, so we can get started.

One thing to remind everyone:  you will need to install the Mod Pack I posted above, in order to join this game (as we cannot host more than 18 civs otherwise). 

If you are unfamiliar with installing Mod Packs, please let me know and I will walk you through it.

[oyzar]

I'll be interested in joining.

I hope there won't be advanced start as i enjoy the early part of the game and advanced start can really skew that... I have never seen a game die in the first 30 turns before and given that there is already completed one game here i doubt that will happen to this one... Only huge map with 28 players will be extremly crowded....

Why do you want no tech brokering instead of no tech trading? It is still possible to do some quite advanced tech trading(especially with alliances) that changes the way the game is played in imo not a good way.

Also about epic speed, personally i think normally is slow enough and epic speed makes the game last 50% longer(real time). Of course no tech trading at all slows down the game compared to no tech brokering...

[Matriarch]

Count me in, if there is room!  I've been looking for a game like this for a while.  

And please keep the settings as Epic.  The longer the better.

[Capsavian Hopewell]

welcome!

To address a few concerns--and please keep in mind, this discussion is precisely for the game settings, so by all means do not think that I am trying to negate or invalidate your feedback:

Advanced Start -- whether it's 1500 points or 1000 points (or less) Advanced Start has proven helpful in bypassing the early "boring" turns.  Otherwise, starting with just a settler and a lone warrior/scout means 30+ turns with basically nothing to do.  We used 1500 points for the Advanced Start for Chaos and Civility I, and it seemed to work well.

As for the map size, from my single-player tests with the mod pack, it seems there is a reasonable amount of space for each civ, even with 28 civs.  Some had room for as few as three cities, while others had room for as many as 7, before bumping into others.  With Chaos and Civility II, we had 18 civs, and the spacing turned out to be approximately the same.  (So perhaps the mod actually increases the amount of usable land and/or the map size?).

For tech trading, it was determined in Chaos and Civility I, that this feature added another great RP element to the game.

And for game speed, the point of Chaos and Civility is "Epic roleplaying" so in other words, a long-term game with a focus on roleplaying (thus why we have our own forums for that purpose).  With faster speeds, ones' units become obsolete before they have a chance to see action.

Any of the settings could certainly be changed, if the majority of players wish.  Though for the purposes of this game--a long-term Roleplaying game--I do suspect our basic game settings and rules are pretty close to ideal.

[Viktor Ahriman]

Hello new members of Chaos II,

I am Viktor,a returning member.  The settings for this map I believe will stay the same as the last game.  The only change is going to be an increase of members and some possible rules.  Which reminds me, I dont know if you have access, but read the rules before you play with us.  We will be using the advanced start like we did last game and I believe we will have all the same setting as last game.

[Capsavian Hopewell]

Yes, I've posted the rules earlier in this same thread:
http://www.chaosciv.com/index.php/topic,251.msg1417.html#msg1417

[oyzar]

Why are people permited reloads outside of gamerule circumstances? I assume reloads due to breaking of game rules comes in addition. Also there should probably be a general rule about avoiding abuses / exploits of the system as there may be some that are not so easy to cover by the rules. For example it is possible to gift a city to a player who are not at war with the person you are at war with and hence making the person you are at war with unable to take the city. This is not covered by the rules but everyone can see imeadiatly that it is wrong... Personaly i like to chat with everyone in the game despite if i have met them or not... If this is not allowed it should be in the rules(although this is hard to enforce). It is very seldom that i need the actual tech paper to find out where in the world people are(screenshots rocks). To me the early turns is a stage of planing and exploration, removing this phase makes the game quite different. Why not turn of vassal states alltogether? It removes some amount of exploits from the game...

As someone said earlier it is extremly anoying with people who only sometimes take their turns. Because of this i think it should be a strong requirement that people when joining the game should be willing and able to take every turn so the game goes along at a decent pace...

Also i think you should do some more advertising if you want the game to fill up faster.

A live session should be able to do if you schedule it well in advance of starting the game although with 28 players it might be technically impossible to get everyone into the game at the same time...

About civ choices, are they random or do we chose them or what?

Do we have to download the mod to play or could we potentially log onto the pitboss server without the mod?

[DribNairb]

Why are people permited reloads outside of gamerule circumstances?

We added this option in the first game. Each player gets ONE reload (to allow for accidental mistakes). I'd suggest having a few practice starts with the Advanced Start screen (several people messed up last time  ) and learning the rules and changes in the latest patch if you don't already know them.

Also there should probably be a general rule about avoiding abuses / exploits of the system

It's assumed all players will play fair and not deliberately exploit anything not within the spirit of the game. This is a roleplaying game - while winning is obviously nice it is not necessarily the main aim. Anyone with a win-at-all-costs attitude should probably not be playing.

Personaly i like to chat with everyone in the game despite if i have met them or not...

Last time we said it's ok to chat with other players, but no talking about the game or making pacts/trade decisions etc unless you have met them. Obviously this is impossible to enforce, but as above the game is about fun and roleplaying. If you're going to break the rules then play against the AI please.

To me the early turns is a stage of planing and exploration, removing this phase makes the game quite different.

Advanced start with 1000-1500 points doesn't really remove this phase, it simply speeds it up. Remember in BTS advanced start is different to starting in a future era like in vanilla (some people got confused by this first time around). Essentially, each player will start with a few more units and probably 2 cities - but you'll still need to explore a lot even to meet your neighbours!

Why not turn of vassal states alltogether? It removes some amount of exploits from the game...

This was suggested last time. However, we added rules in to prevent the strangest scenarios and they add to the roleplaying element. My vote is to keep them in.

As someone said earlier it is extremly anoying with people who only sometimes take their turns.

True - but if you're expecting a fast paced game this really isn't the place to be. With this many players it's very likely the turn timer will be close to the end on every turn. Fill up the time with roleplaying instead!

About civ choices, are they random or do we chose them or what?

Last time we chose them. I'd like to enable "Unrestricted leaders" too so there are even more possible combinations. What do people think?

Do we have to download the mod to play or could we potentially log onto the pitboss server without the mod?

I think you'll have to download it to play. I doubt the game will let you join otherwise. It MIGHT work, but then you'd probably get out of sync errors.

[oyzar]

Unrestricted leaders.. Woah. That enable quite some combinations, some of them might be veiwed as overpowered... I know quite well the difference between advanced start and starting in a future era. Advanced start remove very early MM which for me is quite enjoyable...

[Capsavian Hopewell]

I started posting responses to Oyzar's inquiries, but then Drib pretty much answered everything identically to how I would.  Though probably more succinctly!   

As Viktor inferred, Chaos and Civility II's settings and rules will be very similar to Chaos and Civility I, as we found it to be an enjoyable mix for what our aims were -- long-term roleplaying, and not "win-at-all-costs" as Drib confirmed.  The purpose of this thread was to refine and clarify a few of the points which were questionable; not a rewrite of the rules.

So while we would love to have you join us, if you find that the majority of the rules and settings do not appeal to you, it's likely you will not find this game to your liking, to be honest.

For the Mod, yes I do think you have to have it installed to play (though I'm not certain).  I think that you would otherwise be unable to join the game.  Mods are very easy to install (just unzip into your Civ IV > BtS > Mods folder) and can be loaded/unloaded literally with a click of a mouse in-game under the Advanced option in the main menu.  I would urge everyone to install and test the mod out and make sure it works for you.

I'd like to enable "Unrestricted leaders" too so there are even more possible combinations. What do people think?

I'm not sure if the bug has been fixed, but previously Unrestricted Leaders was NOT an option in Pitboss games.  Regardless, we discussed this too, and it was posited that unrestricted leaders opened up a pandora's box of potential game imbalances. 

I'm open to allowing it though, if the bug has been smashed and if the majority wants this.   I'll test out a pitboss game now to see if unrestricted leaders is even an option yet.

[oyzar]

I play in another game so unrestricted leaders certanly work.. The mod you are talking about, all it does is make the map bigger and put in more people right? It doesn't change any game mechanics? How would the map look? like costum continents? hemispheres? or something different altogether? What about resource balance?

[Capsavian Hopewell]

As far as I know, it just allows for more nations, yes.  No change in rules or anything like that.  You can read the original thread on Civfanatics.com which I posted earlier in this thread if you are curious.  Also, the mod has a readme text file which specifically describes each and every modification as well as simple install instructions.

Game settings will likely mimic what we did for the original:

Here are the game settings for Chaos and Civility:

My idea for this game is to be one that isn't necessarily just about warfare (although there is no getting around conflict, of course).  This game would be aimed at more mature players who want to engage in a little bit of roleplaying, political intrigue, and exploring how Civ IV can be used as a basis for a long-term strategic roleplaying game of sorts.   And when I say "long-term" I mean a year or maybe longer!

• This will be hosted on a dedicated laptop "game server" nothing fancy, but it will be available 24/7, on battery backup and with a reliable broadband connection.
• This game will be meant to be a long-term commitment; this game may well last over a year, depending on how aggressive players are and how many factions form to counter-balance those aggressive players. 
• I am dedicated to seeing this game through to the end; it will NOT end right when you are starting to get your empire built up!  Well, not unless I get hit by a bus or trampled by a camel.  Yes, that means even if I get killed off in the midst of the game, I will still continue hosting it (although I hope that doesn't happen!).
• CivStats.com will be used, to aid in the notifications and review of global points stats (trying to keep everything fair; you will know everything that I as the game host will know).
• 28 players total, all human.
• Huge map, Custom Continents, 3 continents, low sea level, temperate climate, cylindrical wrap.  Choose your leader/civ, and multiple picks of the same leader are allowed. 
• Epic game speed (so units won't become obsolete before you have a chance to use them!)
• "No tech brokering" will be enabled -- thus, you can trade only techs you've researched.
• All victory conditions will be allowed, although hopefully this will not result in someone pulling off too early of a victory.  The goal is to keep this game going, not to rush through it.
• Turns will be 20hours long, simultaneous.
• Advanced Start, in Ancient Era
• Advanced Start: 1500 points
• No predesignated teams, although you can of course form alliances if you wish.
• Early rushing will be discouraged--but not illegal--for the first millennium or so, to allow newer players a chance at survival against ultra-early rushing.  You won't be kicked from the game if you do rush, although please understand that beating up newbies is not the intent of this particular game.
• Vassal States allowed; no permanent alliances, goody huts off (unbalances a MP game); Barbarians enabled (not raging though); city flipping allowed; city razing allowed; cylindrical map wrap; AI takeover allowed (in case a player quits, we can invite another human to take over).

[Elkad]

Interested.  Some questions/suggestions.

Normal or Epic is acceptable.  I prefer epic for single-player, but Normal is fine for MP.

No tech trading at all please.  Trading (with or without brokering) just leads to superpowered alliances tearing thru the tree at a rediculous pace.  You get more time to use your new unit without it becoming obsolete on Normal-NoTrading than on Epic-NoBrokering, especially the later units.

I prefer NON-advanced starts.  The first few turns of the game are both some of the most critical, and the most fun, why skip them?.  Also, on a crowded map, advanced start gives a pretty serious advantage to the guy that logs in first.  By aggressively placing cities he can often box another opponent completely.

Unrestricted leaders is fine.  Bodacia of the Romans isn't overpowered when her neighbor is Churchill of the Native Americans.  With all human players we will all tend to pick strong combos (whether thats military is a different question).  Standard leaders are fine as well.

If we are going with 28 civs, I'd think 4 continents would be more appropriate.  Spread us out a bit more.

Choose religions is a harmless option, and allows a little more RP flavor, I'd suggest turning it on. 
Vassal states have so many bugs in MP I'd suggest just disabling them.  You are welcome to roleplay a footstool to a real leader if you so desire

[Viktor Ahriman]

My Friend Elkad and new players,

The game settings are not subject for change OK.  These settings we used for Chaos and Civility I and they worked out great.  Thus the reason why we are keeping them.  Glad you can join us!  It will be fun!

VIktor

[Elkad]

My Friend Elkad and new players,

The game settings are not subject for change OK.  These settings we used for Chaos and Civility I and they worked out great.  Thus the reason why we are keeping them.  Glad you can join us!  It will be fun!

VIktor

Hmm.. Glancing thru the old threads I see something about gifting a pile of cities to release a Vassal.  So thats at least one thing that didn't "work out great", except maybe for the Vassal.

The thread is titled "pre-setup discussion", not "pre-setup choose your leader", so I expected that discussion would be a part of it.  And while this game may be similar to the last one, adding more players is a pretty big change.  I would consider "civs per continent" a more relevant setting than "number of continents", so adding 10 more civs without adding another continent would seem to be a major change.

How about the "choose religion" checkbox?  Is there a reason to NOT use it?  Pretty simple change and adds RP flavor.

[Viktor Ahriman]

I was just mearly talking about the game layout:

Here are the game settings for Chaos and Civility:
 
Huge map, Custom Continents, 3 continents, low sea level, temperate climate, cylindrical wrap.  Choose your leader/civ, and multiple picks of the same leader are allowed. 
Epic game speed (so units won't become obsolete before you have a chance to use them!)
"No tech brokering" will be enabled -- thus, you can trade only techs you've researched.
All victory conditions will be allowed, although hopefully this will not result in someone pulling off too early of a victory.  The goal is to keep this game going, not to rush through it.
Turns will be 20hours long, simultaneous.
Advanced Start, in Ancient Era
Advanced Start: 1500 points
No predesignated teams, although you can of course form alliances if you wish.
Early rushing will be discouraged--but not illegal--for the first millennium or so, to allow newer players a chance at survival against ultra-early rushing.  You won't be kicked from the game if you do rush, although please understand that beating up newbies is not the intent of this particular game.
Vassal States allowed; no permanent alliances, goody huts off (unbalances a MP game); Barbarians enabled (not raging though); city flipping allowed; city razing allowed; cylindrical map wrap; AI takeover allowed (in case a player quits, we can invite another human to take over).

About the vassale that you noted, we did work that out in the new set of rules.  Refer to that to see what we did so this is not allowed in future games.