-
02-01-2009, 11:15 AM #76
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
I'm fine with that too, I'll update the mod with that then and pass Bernout another copy for hosting.
Is that the last edit, so we can roll with this mod then? Are we decided on all the settings? Are we ready to roll? Are we there yet??
-
02-01-2009, 05:37 PM #77
-
02-01-2009, 06:38 PM #78
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
This will hopefully be the last edit. As soon as you email me a new version I'll get a new test server set up with it.
Ok...here's the game format for everyone to look over. Most of it shouldn't be a surprise based on where we've been headed with the mod. Also, I need to investigate being able to use a map generated by that script that Oyzar pointed me at.
Game Format
Custom Mod
A custom mod has been developed and will be used for the game. The features it provides are:- Limited score. Only Wonders count and with as small a value as possible.
- No global demographics.
- Custom deity difficulty level. Tech cost has been increased to that of a deity epic game. Also, all AI bonuses have been removed.
- Barbarian events have been removed.
- Technologies popped from a Hut have been reduced.
Nation Assignments
Players will be assigned player numbers based on an alphabetical list of TG account names. Nations and their leaders will be assigned randomly.
Difficulty Level
The difficulty level being used is Deity (custom version) for all players.
Settings:- Map: Big and Small
- Size: Huge
- Climate: Temperate
- Sea Level: Low
- Era: Ancient
- Speed: Normal
- Continents Size: Normal Continents
- Landmass Size: Islands
- Island Overlap: Islands Mixed In
Game Options Selected:- City Flipping after Conquest
- Choose Religions
- Permanent Alliances
- No Vassal States
Full Option List:- No Advanced Start
- City Razing
- City Flipping From Culture
- City Flipping After Conquest
- Barbarians
- No Raging Barbarians
- Restricted/Normal Leaders
- Choose Religions
- Full Technology Trading
- Permanent Alliances
- No Require Complete Kills
- No Vassal States
- Tribal Villages
- Random Events
- Espionage
Victory:- Time
- Conquest
- Domination
- Cultural
- Space Race
- Diplomatic
- Custom Diplomatic (see below)
Multiplayer:- Simultaneous Turns
- Take Over AI
- Turn Timer - 24 hours (approx. 28 hours of real time at game start)
End Game
The end of the game will be determined either by player vote or by an in game victory condition being met. In the case of the vote, the following procedure is to be followed:
1. A vote to end the game may be called by any player but may not be called within 30 days of the previous vote (if any).
2. The vote will be held in these forums for a period of 1 week. Every attempt will be made to get a yes or no vote from each player but in the event a player can not be reached it shall be counted as a 'yes' vote.
3. At the end of the week, if a yes vote results in the game ending then the player with the highest score at that time will be the winner unless they concede the victory to someone else. Note that this game allows a team victory via a permanent alliance.
Thoughts? Let's use this coming week to nail down the map generation, game format and make sure the new mod version is good to go. I'll then post a sign up topic.
BernoutLast edited by Bernout; 02-01-2009 at 08:01 PM. Reason: Corrections as per Emperor's message.
-
02-01-2009, 06:58 PM #79
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
Err... a mistake, I think. No peak options on Big_and_Small.

Hmm, why has this option been selected? I don't remember discussing it. I happen to strongly disagree with allowing city flipping after conquest. In my opinion, that makes things far too easy for the defender, who already gets a lot of advantages from being in his home territory. I noticed that this option had been selected in the Terrible Twos game, and wondered about it.
There's a reason why this is not a default option in the game.Emperor / Lord Parkin
Want a private forum for your Civ4 alliance to chat easily? Then come to Parkinsworld - I'll be happy to set you up with whatever you need.
Link: http://z14.invisionfree.com/Parkinsworld/index.php?act=idx
-
02-01-2009, 08:02 PM #80
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
Yep...copy and paste error there.
It's been corrected.
Well, it seems to end up being a no-op anyhow so I've never bothered changing it from previous games. I have no objection to removing it.Hmm, why has this option been selected? I don't remember discussing it. I happen to strongly disagree with allowing city flipping after conquest. In my opinion, that makes things far too easy for the defender, who already gets a lot of advantages from being in his home territory. I noticed that this option had been selected in the Terrible Twos game, and wondered about it.
There's a reason why this is not a default option in the game.
Bernout
-
02-01-2009, 08:10 PM #81
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
I wondered about that too. What's the idea behind it? EDIT: X-post with Bernout. Yeah, better remove it.
-
02-01-2009, 10:49 PM #82
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
New test server is up!
Mod: http://home.comcast.net/~bernout1/Fi...oreMod-0.2.zip
CivStats: http://www.civstats.com/viewgame.php?gameid=1197
Note: After deleting the first mod and unzipping this one, I renamed my directory to "NoScoreMod". I wasn't sure if that was needed but it seemed like the safest thing to do.
So far it seems to be working great! CivStats is working as expected.
I'd highly encourage everyone who is thinking of playing in the next game to install the mod and test your connection to the server. If needed I can post some instructions on how to create a new .ini file and desktop icon so you can quickly get into the game.
Now all I need to do is figure out how to make use of that map generator.
Bernout
-
02-02-2009, 05:14 AM #83
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Posts
- 39
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
I could log in alright.
-
02-02-2009, 05:18 AM #84
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Posts
- 39
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
Oh, and by the way, about City Flipping after Conquest. I agree that it is a big deal, making it much easier on the defender, but it makes the game interesting IMHO. City razing becomes a much more attractive option (You'd rather destroy the city than have it flip right away). Either that, or it slows down conquest because you need the "cultural backup" to invade a city.
I agree that it is not an option to be chosen lightly, but I'm not necessarily against it.
-
02-02-2009, 06:49 AM #85
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
Multiplayer already makes it very difficult for the aggressor, because the defender has ease of movement and line of sight through his lands. So I don't think there's any logic in choosing an option that makes aggression even more difficult and even less rewarding.
Emperor / Lord Parkin
Want a private forum for your Civ4 alliance to chat easily? Then come to Parkinsworld - I'll be happy to set you up with whatever you need.
Link: http://z14.invisionfree.com/Parkinsworld/index.php?act=idx
-
02-02-2009, 07:15 AM #86
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
The safest thing to do would have been to leave it as it was. I did that naming on purpose, so we wouldn't have problems with people accidentally using the old mod to connect. They would get an error so it's no big deal, but better to get that error earlier on in the process, a version mismatch when trying to connect instead of a protected assets error after everything has downloaded already.
I'm not sure how it works when the server is running "NoScoreMod" and the client runs "NoScoreMod-0.2", I'll need to test that (or someone else could of course). Though I think the best would be to restart the server under NoScoreMod-0.2 right away.
-
02-02-2009, 11:58 AM #87
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
-
02-02-2009, 08:45 PM #88
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
Mod folder name must match the name on the server.
NoScoreMod works
NoScore does not, even with identical files inside
I'd suggest doing a final version before game launch simply named NoScore "mod" is redundant anyway, and version numbers in the filename are annoying
-
02-02-2009, 09:06 PM #89
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
Fair enough, I sent a NoScore to Bernout for publishing and use in the live version.
-
02-03-2009, 10:27 PM #90
Re: New Pitboss Game Discussion (Jan 17/09)
New test server is up!
Mod: http://home.comcast.net/~bernout1/Files/NoScore.zip
CivStats: http://www.civstats.com/viewgame.php?gameid=1197
Bernout
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)



Reply With Quote















Bookmarks