Nominated Players Tourney, Round 3 (MP)

[cavebear]

Question:

Since we have 14 players, the MP games won't all have the same number of participants.

1. I can arrange them 5-5-4 or 4-4-3-3. 5-5-4 would be truer MP games, but would be harder to coordinate times. 4-4-3-3 would be easier to arrange times, but perhaps not as challenging.

2. Which are harder MP games? More players or fewer? Odd numbers or even?

[carnide_]

The more humans, the more dificult to join them all in a game.
I prefer 3, 4 humans at max games.

Keep on with the good work!

[finbar]

Yep, the more players in a game, the longer the odds of getting them regularly in the same place at the same time. Even for such an important event as this!

I'd vote for 4-4-3-3. I don't know what it does to the "everybody has an equal chance" theory. There's bound to be a mathematically-inclined philosopher out there somewhere who will tell us.

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[Curumbor Elendil]

I vote 4-4-3-3. BTW, my Round 2 duel with Nappy has no end in sight. It's neck-and-neck at about 1100 AD, and we both have very large empires.

------------------
Curumbor Elendil
jason.sorens@yale.edu
ICQ 56126989

[cavebear]

Oops! We are 15. I misremembered Curumbor's intent to stay with the tourney. My abject apologies, Curumbor!

So, it could be 5-5-5 or 4-4-4-3. Since there will definately be exactly (and only) 4 players who have 8 points each (won both duels), it will definately be 3 games of 4 players and one of 3 players.

I think I will reserve the game of 3 for any draws (the third player would be one with a higher score) or for the next-to-last (scorewise) MP game. That would actually make it 4-4-3-4.

That will guarantee that the top players will spread out a bit and also that 3 players will escape the "0" bracket.

[cavebear]

Curumbor - As I told Alexander and Finbar, "Que Sera, Sera". Your game will take what it takes. We are all more interested in a proper final outcome than in a fast result.

As my father always told me about playing golf, "Don't dawdle between shots, but don't be hasty on your turn, either".

[finbar]

What about improving your lie with a deft movement of the foot?

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

less players is more, taking into account timezones. I would like ai civs, but noone else will.

If there is a 3 player game, alliances should be banned.

Make barbs hoards - we seem to get just as many with bands and less money. Either that or just have huts.

[CapTVK]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by cavebear on 05-04-2000 06:35 PM</font>
Question:

Since we have 14 players, the MP games won't all have the same number of participants.

1. I can arrange them 5-5-4 or 4-4-3-3. 5-5-4 would be truer MP games, but would be harder to coordinate times. 4-4-3-3 would be easier to arrange times, but perhaps not as challenging.

2. Which are harder MP games? More players or fewer? Odd numbers or even?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

1.
I would take 4-4-4-3 (taking into account nr.15) but 5-4-3-3 would also be nice to try out. I take it the groups are organized on their wins/losses in the previous rounds?

Note: We must make clear by what rules a group will be playing!

2.
I prefer odd/even numbers, the 5-4-3-3 settings. I think that alliances should not be allowed, not that you can't attack the same enemy of course!

[cavebear]

Thanks for the excellent advice everyone. It really helps. I've continued to refer to this as a "Player's Tourney" for a reason; it *your* tournament. I just shuffle the cards and watch the blood flow... *s*

Now, about the next round: It looks like smaller is better, for both game play and scheduling. To a point, anyway; a 3-player game is likely to turn into a 2-player duel too fast, though.

I like the idea of no (formal) alliances (I didn't dare suggest it, but I'm glad some of you did), and I would make them all cut-throat 5's if I thought it would work. But, I want to keep identical scorers together (they are in groups of 4).

So, it will be 4-4-3-4, with no formal alliances (understanding that we can't *prevent* 2 players "just happening to" act in general concert). But formal "permanent strategic alliances" will be cheating (and it shows on the diplo screens).

I am making maps for these last 2 rounds, in the interest of fairness of starting positions. MP maps are actually easier than duel maps (for me, anyway). They will all be somewhat different (enough so that cross-game discussion will not reveal vital info).

About "cheats": Everyone knows the general things not allowed (far too extensive for me to try and list) in regular play. I encourage each group to work at particular variations among themselves for their game.

I will dredge up the particular world settings (age, landforms, barbs) later. They're in the original posts, I just have to go find them. There are 3 Round 2 games to be finished, so it isn't urgent yet.

[cavebear]

Finbar -

"What about improving your lie with a deft movement of the foot?"

My father would have a heart attack. He would "play it as it lies" from the paw of a grizzly! Old school type, and he taught me the same *G*

On the other hand, he knows the rulebook by heart, and might quote Rule 4(a) sec iii "Obstructions, Relief from..."

[cavebear]

KenThur - Don't feel too bad - I expect my AARP invitation in about 2 weeks! LOL!

The team idea must be the result of "a bit of bad meat in your gruel". Or maybe that Arena tourney you are losing dreadfully because you forgot you are entered in it.

I agree with you about the tourney. I certainly *hope* that everyone will give it their top priority (well, I'd be some kind of idiot to hope otherwise, wouldn't I?). But I understand your point.

Just as not every major chess tourney gets *all* the top players, some have passed on this Civ one as well. Still, it's darn near the best grouping I can imagine as achievable. I'm pleased with the participation; it will be a long time before such a stellar field is assembled again!

[cavebear]

Alexander - I agree with the "all or nothing" approach to barbs. The 2 MP rounds will alternate between Raging and (at most) Roving. I may change Roving to Villages only.

[Crustacian]

I vote no AI's,
Cutthroat,
No trading anything, and no co-operation..
Every player for their self as they would in a duel.
After all this is an individual player tourny in verying situations, rather than team tourny. True there is a natural tendancy to gang up on a player if they are vary far ahead, it is a risk a player takes to do so early in the game. But it should be individual efforts rather than coordinated.

Did I say NO MAP TRADING? LOL

I will of course play the way we agree, but those are some of my favorites.

Iliminate all huts... <-- is it possible?

[cavebear]

Eliminate all huts? What an interesting idea. I could put a pond square on all the huts...

Does anyone else want that?

[SmartFart]

I cooled off a bit
Looking forward to play 3rd round and i vote for 4 players.
Huts..no huts...whatever.

[finbar]

If you're talking about a fair contest - the so-called "level playing field" - and going as far as creating maps to achieve that, then you could eliminate huts. And barbs. At the risk of boring myself - let alone anyone else - to death, barb involvement in a "fair contest" is only "fair" if the buggers harass everyone equally. Which we know they don't.

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[Smash]

----pokes head in----

if you use the scenario editor it has an option to remove all huts

-----leaves quietly------

[Crustacian]

Thx for that candid thought in passing Smash.
Knew I seen it somewhere.

I love barbs as much as the next guy and when I want a shot at an occasional 150 gold and some cheap bribed units you know what I am lookin for. But no game against 3 other good human opponants can justly be called boring imo. The luck is minumized and strategy maxumized....yeah!!!

[Crustacian]

PS. BS:
Each pond should support at least 5 large bass or pike prowling unit, or 1 alligator.

[cavebear]

Oh no, "not the flying monkeys", err "the Scenario Editor..."

I'm not practiced with that yet, Smash, but thanks for letting me know about it. Still, for now, I'll have to do it the dirty way... Or at least the "wet" way. *s*

[cavebear]

Crustacian -

"Good" - The fish are biting
"Bad" - The fish are piranha
"Ugly" - The boat is sinking

[KenThur]

"Milo" here. The only entrant that has been invited to join the AARP.
Note: that means show respect & kindness to your elders.

I gather then these are NOT to be team events was originally envisioned? (Or was that another of my darned flashbacks )
I'm for this every ruler for thy self, if this is a tourney to determine who is "the best".
Having said that, are there yet posted/agreed terms of engagement? ie, NO formal alliances, NO doing things among civ's that couldn't be done in real life(double-use of wonders, units, etc), NO picking on or ganging up on old guys?
Ya know, all those important things? (right Iakins/DEITY )

As for...
&gt; size; i too vote for the 4's as max.
&gt; barbs; raging
&gt; map; medium normal/default world
&gt; formal alliances; NO, only good old fashioned horse-trading/bartering/dipolmacy
&gt; AI; none (sorry AH, i too like but can't in a tourney)
&gt; winner; the oldest (U'll will get your turn when i'm gone )
============================================
As this bunch seems to know...scheduling times will be the biggest challenge.
PLEASE, if we are going to pull this off each of us HAS TO prioritize these contests. If not over real world then certainly over other Civ'ing / game playing.
This is an extremely unique opportunity! We have a very dedicated/fair/impartial tourney master. And as good a group in THE ENTIRE WORLD as will EVER be assembled to crown a "#1". Using the as-designed*, 1x1x, open, publicized format.

Yeah, yeah, i know there are others out there that are good, very good... but if they ain't willing to go with the flow & risk their reputation, or don't consider it "fun" to play & win tourneys or rankings... do they count?

Gentlemen, start your modems. Let's get it on!

*with the seemingly universally agreed upon no-no's, cheats, & city bribes

------------------
"Hm-m-m, doubt me you will?"
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by KenThur (edited May 05, 2000).]</font>

[Crustacian]

Catchy tune there Cavebear!
remember an Ugly Stick fishin pole commercial where the guy in the bow of the boat hooks a beeg whan and while he is still fighting the fish with his "unbreakable pole" the fish pulls him and the boat down under the water, bow first while the second guy is freakin out!

------------------
The journey itself is the thing~Odysseus

Get on with it you guys so those of us who missed out on this touney can take you all on in the next

------------------
hooray hooray its a Hydey Hydey day

Damn - I lOve HuTs. I like barbs too. I somehow feel an affinity for them, and I like the money

[KenThur]

Hear, here!! AH (once again) has it right.
This is a contest about Civ II MP, as designed, toughest settings & let the chips fall where they may.
Maps, barbs, & huts ARE PART of the game as designed. Come on, jeez, to listen to some of U if this were a golf tourney U'd want all the holes lined up, exactly the same distance from the tee, with no bunkers, roughs, or trees. Then U'd want it indoors because it mite rain or the wind blow & favor the OTHER players.

Gem'mie a break! Are U men or mice?

Adaptability & using what U R given & WHO U are given to work with is the very essence of MP. Unlike duels, both the program(thru barbs & huts) & the other players(thru cooperation) provide a counter balance to players that got "lucky" starting positions.
Part of the greatness of this classic game is the doz's of different ways to devolop/build your empire. If U can't do it 1 way, or your favorite way, well, try what's needed with the cards U R dealt... don't re-manufacture the game to give everyone the same hand. At this rate, we'll have people saying "There's only 1 Mic's & 1 Leo's, can't we change the rules so there are 3 or 4 of each?"

Save your time pls Cave. I know nothing about altering maps & rules, i do not believe in altering the original game, & i frankly will not play on/with anything but the as-designed, available-to-us-all game.

Other than THAT, gentle(?)men... have a nice day.

What do you do when the game is dragging? Go and look for huts of course

I think some people who are having trouble with barbs may need to learn how to set "barb traps" - an endless source of fun and cash.

[Crustacian]

Most of us here are here because of a fondness for the random surprises and challenge of unsuspected things in this game. Horse and Milo are not the only ones to love these things.

However the luck hatchet does not allways fall in ones favor, and it still would be interesting to play a game in a tourny where the luck factor is minimized. My suggestions stand for what they are.

One of the things about this tourny originally was that it be well rounded in many aspects of the game...duels on varying situations, multy play, etc.

So why not consider the above?

Who of us does not love the "ca-ching" of the 150 gold, and the easily extorted gold and techs and premade wonders of any ai civ misfortunate enought to be near us?

But press human wits against each other without these highly variable things and you have a perfectly valid concept worth the cosideration of all.

Then who could rightly say "yeah they/he beat me cuz I had a bad start" or "oh yeah I would have won, but the barbs were lucky against me"....OH YEAH BUT FOR THE LUCK has made whiners out of most of us at some point or other. Is it not true? So lets try one where it is less-end?

I rest my case, and it is up to Cavebear, and or a vote.

I will as they say about me in the Pot Belly Cafe "tell how I like my eggs, but eat em whatever way they come" &lt;--and like it too!!!

"That is all I have to say" ~ Chief Ten Bears, in Dances With Wolves
------------------
The journey itself is the thing~Odysseus
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Crustacian (edited May 07, 2000).]</font>

[finbar]

Sorry, Milo, your (typically) erudite golf analogy misses the point just a tad. The discussion isn't about making the Civ game easier, it's about creating as level as possible a playing field for a particular competition, which is cavebear's perfectly reasonable intention.

My interest is in the barb situation. Huts are another matter, you can choose to open them or not, it's up to you. But the barbs are an uncontrollable variable, and it's early in the game that they can reduce the competition to luck. If you get hammered prior to the opportunity to research any sort of defence (or attack for that matter), and your opponent doesn't - you're stuffed. Skill doesn't enter into it. To adapt your golf analogy, you've got a competition played on different courses.

All of this, of course, is predicated on cavebear's interest in creating a level playing field. There's no point in going to the trouble of creating maps that provide equal opportunity when the barb variable can make a mockery of it.

And Horse - of course you can set barb traps, all of that. Great fun, and immensely profitable. I'm talking about prior to the opportunity to do any of that.



------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591