C3C PBEM Tournament

Adagio · December 20, 2003, 08:07

A tournament has started. The game is to be like this:
Each first "round" game is played by 4 player each. The winner from each game goes to the finals. The winner from the last game is the winner of the tournament.

When the first game reaches AD, no more new players are accepted. If we don't have enough players for a full game, it wont be played

Rules:
-Four players
-No AI
-tiny map
-pangea
-70% water
-restless barbs
-slight modification to ensure no one gets a very bad start
-all other settings random

Players:
Updated player list:

Game 1:
ADG (GMT + 1) a_grau AT hotmail DOT com
Conqueror (GMT +2) conqueror AT mbnet DOT fi)
Rommel2D (GMT - 6) jwala AT fastmail DOT fm
predesad (GMT - 6) predesad AT yahoo DOT com

Game 2:
Iron Jackson (GMT +1) warrenlynch AT gmx DOT de
conmcb25 (GMT - 5) conmcb25 AT bluemarble DOT net
GhengisFarb (GMT - 6)
Soltz (GMT - 8) jsosiak AT shaw DOT ca

Game 3:
Wittlich (GMT - 8) wittlich AT sbcglobal DOT net
smellymummy (GMT - 7) sm AT inethighway DOT com
notyoueither (GMT - 7) notyoueither AT hotmail DOT com
CerberusIV (GMT) CerberusIVciv3 AT aol DOT com

Game 4:
BigFree (GMT - 8) bigfree1 AT comcast DOT net
Sir Ralph (GMT + 1) sirralph AT gmx DOT com
E_T () royparrish AT earthlink DOT net
Paddy the Scot (GMT + 11) paddythescot AT hotmail DOT com

Game 5:
Beta (GMT - 5) brucehynes57 AT rogers DOT com
Arnelos (GMT -5) arnelos AT aol DOT com
SAMUEL2904 (GMT - 6) samuel2904 AT hotmail DOT com
Master Zen (GMT - 6) civ AT masterzen DOT net

Game 6:
SirOsis (GMT - 8) sirosis AT hotmail DOT com
Trampler.se (GMT + 1) trampler_civ3 AT yahoo DOT com
OPD

Dropped players: (Missing to send their password within the timelimit)
Tarquinius (GMT + 1) redmar_damsma AT hotmail DOT com
rogerurb (GMT) rogerurb AT netvisao DOT pt

Civs:

Game 1:
ADG (Arabia)
Conqueror (Egypt)
Rommel2D (Spanin)
Predesad (Portugal)

Game 2:
Iron Jackson (Spain)
Conmcb25 (Germany)
Ghengis Farb (Russia)
Soltz (Rome)

Game 3:
Wittlich (India)
smellymummy (America)
notyoueither (Persia)
CerberusIV (Spanin)

Game 4:
Big Free (Dutch)
E_T (Persia)
Sir Ralph (Korea)
Paddy T S (Japan)

Game 5:
Beta (India)
Arnelos (Sumeria)
SAMUEL2904 (England)
Master Zen (Germany)

There is a 24 hour turn limit, if it's been more than 24 hours before last turn, send the turn to Octavian X.

alva · December 21, 2003, 09:08

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=103736

GhengisFarb™ · December 21, 2003, 12:03

Alva, that is a link to the MP tournement. He's trying to start a PBEM tournement. I would be interested as I can't play MP.

alva · December 21, 2003, 12:47

Ah yes, true that.

1 on 1, I think lends itself better IMHO. Scores don't really say anything or at least can be misleading.

Adagio · December 21, 2003, 12:50

Yeah, 1 on 1 gives a better result, but I think it's more fun to play Civ with more players...

Maybe we could just have two AI's playing also...

But it doesn't seem to be that many players interested...

I can't play Civ3 MP either, so I couldn't join the other game...

GhengisFarb™ · December 21, 2003, 15:31

Maybe we could add more variations, but set some standards.

Say always Tiny with 4 human players. But we could have a Pangea league and an Archipeligo League.

Then award points for your place in the game, say winner gets 10 points, 2nd gets 5 points, 3rd gets 2 points.

We could have a main thread with sign ups and their various ratings.

Harovan · December 21, 2003, 15:37

I'd like to participate in a PBEM tournament. However, I am not interested in 1-on-1 games. That has nothing to do with civ.

And NO AI please.

notyoueither · December 21, 2003, 15:43

I might be interested, depending on the final format and how much time would be required. Count me in for now.

GhengisFarb™ · December 21, 2003, 15:47

How do people feel about the 4 human player Tiny map concept?

Harovan · December 21, 2003, 16:10

Fine with me. The map should not be larger than by default for the given # of players, to avoid a REX-till-industrial-age mess.

And "Pangea" and "Archipelago" league is fine.

smellymummy · December 21, 2003, 16:15

Can I join too?

GhengisFarb™ · December 21, 2003, 22:01

So who all's interested so far we appear to have:
ADG
alva
GhengisFarb
Sir Ralph
notyoueither
smellymummy

alva · December 21, 2003, 22:33

What if we make a link in the strategy/AU forum? Or even a news item?

Paddy · December 22, 2003, 02:22

I am interested in this... looks like a fun idea.

Adagio · December 22, 2003, 04:57

As mentioned in first post, I'm more interested in having some 4 player games, than some 1 on 1 games

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
I might be interested, depending on the final format and how much time would be required. Count me in for now.

Just say how you'll like the game, then we'll see

GhengisFarb >>

I'm not sure what you mean with two leagues? Do you mean that each player plays two games at the same time?

But whatever you're talking about, I'm probably in anyway

Adagio · December 22, 2003, 04:58

Quote:

Originally posted by alva
What if we make a link in the strategy/AU forum? Or even a news item?

Isn't it against the rules to make advertising for other games in other forums?

Rommel2D · December 22, 2003, 06:11

I'm interested. I agree with SR- no 1-on-1, no AI.

How about trying to schedule "intensive turn" times? If a small group could agree to check email every 10-15 minutes for a certain period, we could get quite a few turns in a day. I've seen it suggested before, though I'm not sure how successful it has been.

Harovan · December 22, 2003, 07:25

I had it once suggested, but it didn't work.

I don't think it's illegal to advertise in other Apolyton forums. It has been done before. The other thing is, in a tournament should play only dedicated PBEM players, who are able to play at least a turn per day (with RL related exceptions, of course), or else one slow player could let the whole league wait, which for certain would be the death of the tournament. I don't know if "advertised" players qualify in this category. We should establish a strict time control.

Another possibility is, as seen in the other PBEM fora (Civ2, CtP), that every game has a "referee", i.e. a player, who gets all turns as "CC" and will automatically play, if a player didn't make his turn without reason for a defined amount of time.

rogerurb · December 22, 2003, 09:02

for the tournament
hoxygen@netvisao.pt

Tarquinius · December 22, 2003, 09:34

I am interested too provided we play with Conquests and there is no 1 on 1 or AI's involved.
And is 6 players on a small map no option, as that sounds like a more interesting setup.

Harovan · December 22, 2003, 11:08

Here are some thoughts on a rule set. Discuss!

Number of players

Games are usually played by at least 4 and at most 6 participants.
If the number of players in a tournament needs to be adjusted, exceptions are allowed, but should be avoided if possible.
No game shall be played 1-on-1.
AIs shall not participate in the games.

World setup

Games may be played at either pangaeas or archipelagos - May be different tournaments or leagues should be set up
The world size shall be determined from the list below.
The temperature, humidity and world age settings shall be set to "random".
Barbarians shall be set to (?) - to be discussed: random might be unjust

Determination of the result

Players eliminated from the game end up on the last places. A player's place is the better, the later he gets eliminated
The player, who triggers a victory condition first, wins the game
The other places are determined by the score at the end
Example: In a game participate player A, B, C, D, E, F. B gets eliminated first, D gets eliminated second. Then E achieves a cultural victory. Scores be A-2134, C-1454, E-1972, F-1709. The result is: 1st=E, 2nd=A, 3rd=F, 4th=C, 5th=D, 6th=B

3 players (exception)
Tiny 80% water (360 tiles, 120/player)
1st = 3 points
2nd = 1 point

4 players
Tiny 70% water (540 tiles, 135/player)
1st = 4 points
2nd = 2 points
3rd = 1 point

5 players
Small 80% water (640 tiles, 128/player)
1st = 5 points
2nd = 3 points
3rd = 2 points
4th = 1 point

6 players
Small 70% water (960 tiles, 160/player)
1st = 6 points
2nd = 4 points
3rd = 3 points
4th = 2 points
5th = 1 point

7 players (exception)
Standard 80% water (1000 tiles, 143/player)
1st = 7 points
2nd = 5 points
3rd = 4 points
4th = 3 points
5th = 2 points
6th = 1 point

8 players (exception)
Standard 70% water (1500 tiles, 188/player)
1st = 8 points
2nd = 6 points
3rd = 5 points
4th = 4 points
5th = 3 points
6th = 2 points
7th = 1 point

Adagio · December 22, 2003, 11:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

Games may be played at either pangaeas or archipelagos - May be different tournaments or leagues should be set up

You're talking about having several tournaments running at the same time?

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

The world size shall be determined from the list below.

Since it's a tournament I'd say the world size should be tiny, to get some small quick games, otherwise the games are never going to end
Ever tried to play 16 Civs on a tiny map? It's fun... different, but fun...

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

Barbarians shall be set to (?) - to be discussed: random might be unjust

How can random be too unfair?

rogerurb · December 22, 2003, 11:26

Indeed!

CerberusIV · December 22, 2003, 11:41

I'm interested.

I do think it should always be the same size map and number of players if there is to be scoring on a league or tournament basis, just so games are more directly comparable.

I would say 4 players so there is variety but also a quick turnaround. I'm a bit disillusioned with PBEM's where players drop out or take forever to play a turn (admittedly sometimes for RL reasons) and fewer players and quicker turnarounds would help. I don't think it could, or should, be restricted to players with a record of not dropping out but keeping games small and simple would limit the damage if someone does walk. A referee would help.

Adagio · December 22, 2003, 11:50

Here's an updated list of players, or possible players:
ADG
alva
GhengisFarb
Sir Ralph
notyoueither
smellymummy
Paddy the Scot
Rommel2D
rogerurb
Tarquinius
CerberusIV

We're 5 people short, if we should keep the "4 players each game" rule! That is, if we're playing tournament style:
There's 4 games in round 1. The winner of each game will go on to the tournament.

I'm still not quite sure about how the point system should work? Is it like this:
Each player plays a # of games at the same time (e.g. 4 games, so each player gets to play each player), and then he gets some points for each game when done... The one with most points at the end of the last game wins!?!

Harovan · December 22, 2003, 11:56

Quote:

Originally posted by ADG
You're talking about having several tournaments running at the same time?

There may be several games of the same tournament at the same time. If you have, say, 12 participants, you have to split them in groups.

Quote:

Since it's a tournament I'd say the world size should be tiny, to get some small quick games, otherwise the games are never going to end

5 or 6 players (see below) on tiny wouldn't be good.

Quote:

Ever tried to play 16 Civs on a tiny map? It's fun... different, but fun...

I played with 24 on tiny. But Multiplayer is limited to 8 players. And if you care to look a bit closer to my list, tiny and small games are the recommended. In fact, most PBEMs have 4-6 players.

I want to avoid 3-player games if possible. 3 on a map is an instable situation, and a 2 vs 1 alliance as the only option is too unfair. Personal preferences or friendships between players may decide games over the players skills. 4 players (2 vs 2) or 5 players (3 vs 2) are better.

And since you need more options, because not every # of players can by divided by 4, I recommend 5 and 6 player groups too. They may be needed to adjust.

Look:
4 players: 1 game with 4.
5 players: 1 game with 5.
6 players: 1 game with 6.
7 players: 1 game with 4, 1 game with 3 (rare exception).
8 players: 2 games with 4.
9 players: 1 game with 5, 1 game with 4.
10 players: 2 games with 5.
11 players: 1 game with 6, 1 game with 5.
etc.

Quote:

How can random be too unfair?

Not within one group, but between groups. No barbarians means also no huts. One group may be won easier than the other. And I added the "to be discussed" for a reason.

Adagio · December 22, 2003, 12:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
There may be several games of the same tournament at the same time. If you have, say, 12 participants, you have to split them in groups.

Yeah, but I read your post as you're talking about several tournaments, not several games in one tournament... The several games in one tournament is what I've had in mind all the time, since nothing else makes much sense!?!

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
5 or 6 players (see below) on tiny wouldn't be good.

Don't see anything below that mentions why this wouldn't be good... I don't see any problems with it.
If you can play with 24 Civs on a tiny map, then why not 5-6 players on a tiny map?

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Not within one group, but between groups. No barbarians means also no huts. One group may be won easier than the other. And I added the "to be discussed" for a reason.

Between groups? What connection does 'groups' have? Group 2 doesn't get a more diffecult game in the tournament, just because group 1 gets nukes before group 2 gets pikemen?

GhengisFarb™ · December 22, 2003, 13:03

I think the map and settings should be the same for all the games to make it more along the lines of comparing "apples to apples".

Tiny four players, with random settings except for Barbarians which we could poll on the setting for Barbarians and keep it the same through out all the games.

Perhaps we could have two ratings. One based on average final score at the end of the game and one based on place. Winner gets 5 points, 2nd 4 points, 3rd 3 points, and last 1 point (winner gets a bonus point).

Harovan · December 22, 2003, 13:40

I give it up. I think I will step back and look what rules you discuss. Perhaps I will join the tournament, and perhaps not.

Adagio · December 22, 2003, 13:48

Sorry, but I just don't have any clue what you're talking about...

If someone could make draw an example of your idea, it might help clueless me...