Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

ive sent what i hope is the correct file. lets get this baby rockin' http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I've read that Caelum in 2.06 is bugged so that it preferred Heat+3 (economically?), which is incompatible with their troops.

Should the Caelum player check it out and we can apply Catquiet's mod, which patch it, if it's necessary?

Wan

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

That's true, but I certainly hope there'll be a patch coming along soon... I wouldn't mind the mod, but with Caelum, I am not in for a fast start anyway, and can afford to play two or three weeks or so (which should cover the first 10 turns) with an income offset.

Thanks for the consideration, though.

I like my Caelians hot and frying. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Lets see here, we currently lack only the Ermor pretender and the machaka god. So, hury up Carnifex and Rabelais. It is currently about 8pm GMT on monday night. Tuesday afternoon, or in about 16 hours, I hope to create the game and send out the first batch of files, so it would be nice if you could send your pretender in by then. again, the email is 'markoos at mail.utexas.edu'. Lear Oh, and I leave it up to the general public to decide what we should do about Caelium. Personally, i'm not adverse to using the temporary mod to fix it.

[ February 03, 2004, 22:08: Message edited by: King Lear ]

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

There Remains only one.

Lear

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Well, speaking as biased public, I am not adverse to mod-patch Caelum either.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Sent pretender again, from 2 different accounts.

It may be that my main account is having sending issues, in which case please use

davethehunathotmaildotcom

as the standard address.

Thanks.

Rabe the Unstrung (or at least unwired) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Well, all the countries are in, the game has been generated, and all the countrie files have been sent back out. I have a little pole to ask though. If you a) put a password on your pretender, and b) do not mind if I send your turn file in a mass email to other people who did put a password on their pretender, could you please either post a note to that effect (ie, you do not mind), OR send me an email.

This will save me innumberable time because I can just send out one bigger email to all of you, rather than having to go through and attack the specific files to everyone. Of course, if you didn't password, there's not much for you to reply to here.

Secondly, I forgot (in my great stupidity) to apply a Caelium mod for the cold. Therefore, You will shortly recieve a new turn file. This will be the real one. Ignore the first. Sorry for all of you who have already sent things in... just do it again.

Lear

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

for those who do not already have the fix... here's the link. http://ulm.illwinter.com/dom2/coldcaelum.zip

[ February 04, 2004, 05:28: Message edited by: King Lear ]

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Sent my .2h in, if you don't get it... please let me know asap so I don't hold this up any more than I have...

Rabe the Packet Paranoid

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Hah...so when they say play by email they mean play by email. So figured I would ask here rather than in email in case somone else was as clueless as I.

I got all the files (god, trn and mod) and loaded my turn. Do I just make my moves and hit end turn then exit and email my turn? It wasn't obvious that the trn file had changed (although an exit and restart confirms that it is)

Guess I answered my own question. And, I am certainly willing to have my trn massmailed.

Cheers,
Eric

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

It begins...

Tholvarag stirred as if waking from a long slumber. Instantly, his holy men came to his side, but he waved them away. As he rose from the dias, he could feel the loss. He was gone; there could be no doubt.

He turned and faced his servants, who watched him with a mixture of fear and anticipation on their faces. Somehow, they too had felt the loss of Him, and they were looking to Tholvarag to fill the void. Would the other peoples of the world look at him this way, or would they resist his power? Somehow, he felt he already knew the answer to this question.

He reached down to his side and drew the ancient ice blade of Niefelheim, Winter's Bite. Upon release from its scabbard, the blade flashed with power. Tholvarag, pretender god of Jotunheim, held the blade before him. He knew it would be some time before the blade would be put back to rest.

After a long pause, he addressed his servants.
"Summon the Jarls to the fortress, and send word to the Vaetti. Jotunheim is going to war. It is time to take the truth to the people of this world, by mouth or by sword. We will save this world from Chaos once again, as He did before. It is our duty and our right. We shall be victorious."

In his hand, Winter's Bite began to glow bright with anticipation.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Nah, you send your .2h file to the host. "2h" stands for "to host". Then you get a new .trn file from him. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif


I passworded my pretender.


Cyron, Prince of the Freezing Winds.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

4 remain.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Alderath, the red dragon, un-curled his tail in anticapation. The wars would soon begin. He had only to wait a short time. The Wardens of Avalon were training, the armies readying, the swords of iron and steel would soon be clashing. Fire would rain upon his enemies, it would burn and torch their forces. Nothing but blackened ruin will remain.

Sighing, he changed back to the small, weak human form. But Alderath must prepare as well, researching in the depths of magic.

The Ascension Wars were beginning.

-Alderath, Lord of Flame

[ February 05, 2004, 02:39: Message edited by: EternalSpearman ]

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Massmail of a compressed files of trn files would be fine. I have password. If somebody doesn't have a password, it might be better to restart with one while it's still early.

Wan

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Pangeas is passworded too, so no problem with mass email http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I put a password on as well, so whatever you prefer....

my email is dgoatpcfastnetdotcom for those who are interested in diplo outside of the slightly sadistic game messaging system. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Rabe

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I'm afraid I forgot to password protect my pretender, so mass emailing wouldn't work to well for me. Sorry.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

ulm is pw'ed

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I guess it's better to password protected your file and restart it. I've hosted a game. It'll be 17 times the work if he can't mass-mail (unless he's written a script or program to handle it). For a slow server or conncection, it would be a nightmare.

More so, even if we trusted Lear totally, you still don't want the host accidentally see all your move and diplomatic message at one accidental click by mistake.

But, Lear has the final call.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Well, I already sent in my .2h file for the first turn, so it would probably be more work than it's worth to send in my pretender file again. Besides, the worst that could happen is that I'll lose, which will most likely happen anyway.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It's the first sentence of my post which really matters, i.e., more workload for Lear.

But he'll be the judge for that. I won't argue for him. I'm just describing my past experience.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I've recieved enough asking that we're going to restart te game with everyone having password protected pretenders. Sorry for the delay, but as I still haven't recieved the .2h fles from everyone yet (ahem, mictlan), its not quite as much of a delay as it might have been.
So, I expect those who have not already passworded to send in one... quickly.
Lear

[ February 05, 2004, 19:42: Message edited by: King Lear ]

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I've sent a email containing the new password protected pretender file for Alderath.

~EternalSpearman~

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Lets see, waiting on Mictlan, Jotun, Marignon and C'tis

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Sent!

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Now only Marignon and Mictlan... hm, the letter M.
Lear

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Orders sent.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

sent .2h file for turn 1. If you didn't get it... let me know.

Rabe the Digitally Dysfunctional

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

What's the schedule?

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Well, we have one person, namely Mictlan, who is currently having some trouble with his internet. I sent him an email asking if he wanted to be set as a computer player or to temporarily have some one fill in for him, and i was waiting for a reply to that email before i force hosted.

I guess I'll wait annother half day before I do something to give the guy a chance.

How does this sound to everyone?

After we begin, I intend to host every 48 hours after I send out turn files. Thus everyone has nearly 2 full days. If after those 48 hours are up I've still got more than 3 people who haven't turned in orders, i will wait until that number drops and become either less than or equal to 3

If any of you think this is a bad system for doing it, post a reply, or send me an email. I'm just here to help facilitate the game running. Also, if you think i should force host now rather than wait.

Lear

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sound reasonable. But is it easier to schedule to host on fix days of the week, such as Monday, Wednesday, Friday & Sunday?

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I am fine with waiting for the stragglers for half a day.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

That actually sounds like quite a good idea.
Ok, this Wed I'll send them out, and MWF and if enough ppl are fine with it, Either Sat or Sunday will be when I host and send out the new files.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Are we upgrading?

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Seems like a bad idea, with reports of crash/hang bugs flitting about.

We won't get the rename functionality anyway....


Rabe the Butterfly Net

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

me thinks we won't use the upgrade just yet. Lear

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Actually, the only crash/hang bug reported is Norfleet's, and he's the only one who's been able to reproduce it. So it's fairly safe at this point to say that the problem resides on his machine, not in the patch.

-- fahdiz the Devil's Advocate http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I got sent the same turn file as Last go around.. the numeric coscript on my turns has been higher than the others in the mass mailing... is this perhaps why?

Eager to get the latest turn file, which should be turn 5 yes?

Rabe the Redux

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I personally would very much like to upgrade until the end of the week - the Spell AI alone is worth it, to me at least as a caster-heavy nation.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Well, I'm playing Machaka, and my research would go to h*ll if we upgraded.

For some reason they decided witch doctors were overpowered at standard research ability.

Which is strange because sorceresses have the same research stats with a nifty spider transform for on 20 gold more. (sigh)

Did I mention these aren't sacred units.

(Which Sorceresses and Black Sorcerors, really should be, with their transform)

Maybe because WD's aren't cap only?

Any Dev Comment?


Rabe the Snarly Self-Interested MPer

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Anyone else have an opinion?

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Patching will be good, if not necessary, for the some of the bugs (paralyze, orb lightning).

I generally believe the developers tweak the game balance in the right way. But for us to patch now, it's like changing some of the rules in the middle of the game. Don't know. It depends on how many more of us are affected.

For the record - the patch doesn't affect me in any bad way.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Dammit! There goes my goddamn research... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

I still don't understand why they changed WD's... machaka's mages are too expensive to be overpowered.

Now the WD's are almost useless .... except for forging fever fetishes. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Rabe the Whiny Biatch

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I won't called a non-capital 1 Fire/1 Death/1 Nature Mage useless, especially at the price of 80 gold. Send them out to battle and you'll see how useful they could be. Their Fire and Earth level can be easily raised to 2 with just 1 gems (each).

Man's Bard is 75 and has only 1 Nature. The only mages in the game who have a better value are Utgard's Seithkona.

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I won't called a non-capital 1 Fire/1 Death/1 Nature Mage useless, especially at the price of 80 gold. Send them out to battle and you'll see how useful they could be. Their Fire and Earth level can be easily raised to 2 with just 1 gems (each).

Man's Bard is 75 and has only 1 Nature. The only mages in the game who have a better value are Utgard's Seithkona. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The bard is hyperstealthy, caries a standard and agitates very well. It also has spell songs that make its 1N better than it looks.

Different critter.

WD's are ok for combat early, but unless they get a lucky HoF ability, (precision, quickness etc.) they aren't worth the freight. i.e. The micromanagement hell of putting gems (alchemizable no less, what's THAT do to the upkeep math?) on feeble mages to make them slightly less so isn't worth it.

They weren't broken, IMHO.

Machaka has decent mages, but are too expensive.

Only Pangaea and atlantis have such pricey non sacreds.

In any case it's over and done with, I just wish I had known of the "bug" before I bought a bunch as my optimal researcher.


Rabe the Feral Isolationist Cursing Hallucinogen Acclimated Savage

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I won't called a non-capital 1 Fire/1 Death/1 Nature Mage useless, especially at the price of 80 gold. Send them out to battle and you'll see how useful they could be. Their Fire and Earth level can be easily raised to 2 with just 1 gems (each).

Man's Bard is 75 and has only 1 Nature. The only mages in the game who have a better value are Utgard's Seithkona. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The bard is hyperstealthy, caries a standard and agitates very well. It also has spell songs that make its 1N better than it looks.

Different critter.

WD's are ok for combat early, but unless they get a lucky HoF ability, (precision, quickness etc.) they aren't worth the freight. i.e. The micromanagement hell of putting gems (alchemizable no less, what's THAT do to the upkeep math?) on feeble mages to make them slightly less so isn't worth it.

They weren't broken, IMHO.

Machaka has decent mages, but are too expensive.

Only Pangaea and atlantis have such pricey non sacreds.

In any case it's over and done with, I just wish I had known of the "bug" before I bought a bunch as my optimal researcher.


Rabe the Feral Isolationist Cursing Hallucinogen Acclimated Savage </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I know that it's frustrating that the rule of the games is changed in the middle of the game. And I wish that the patches can be separated into two branches - one for bugs and one for game changes.

But for discusssion sake. Machaka has very good mages.

Research for Alteration 3, Conjuration 1. Put your witch doctor near the frontline and let them cast "Protection", "Tangle Vines". The former increases all your Hoplite's protection by 7 (to 24!). And the latter immobilize your opponent (Defense to 0). They can even cast "Eagle Eyes", increasing their precision to 15 - give them bows even if you don't like their "useless" spells like Fire Darts or Flying Shards.

For comparison, C'tis Shaman is 110 gold with 2 magic; Abysia's Apprentice Warlock is 150 gold for 3 magic; even Ulm's Master Smith national mage is 140 gold and they have only 3 magic. Even with the research penalty, WD is a super bargain.

Only Machaka's capital mages are expensive. 190 gold for the Sorcerer (4 + 1?) is a bargain. Almost everybody else have more expensive mages. The fact that they're sacred doesn't help as it's the gold you pay upfront matters. Yeah. Check on Abysia's, i.e., my mages and you'll know what expensive mages are. Sorry - getting frustrated playing Abysia http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . Even the most expensive Black Sorceror is only 250 gold and they turn into spiders after first death... Their price is at worst average - Man's Crone is 230; Abysia's warlock is 270.

Sorry... getting jealous on your mages http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

I agreed the WD's are decent combat mages early.

W/R/T 3 magic: If you are going to have 3 magic... 1/1/1 is much weaker than 2/1 or 3/0 long haul (outside of research), because the spells worth casting once you have decent research... almost always require more than 1 (or even 2 courtesy of a booster) in a path. At which point you use the experienced but no longer combat efficient mages for ... research!

(or forging, which is even more favored by >1 in a path, though this is balanced to some extent by the ease of empowering multipathers.)

Unless it's an extremely crowded map, I tend to think upkeep is much more important than initial cost.

Usually by ~turn 25, 50+% of my income is mage upkeep.

It usually means you have to make infrastructure decisions early, because you won't have the cash to do much once the basic expansion is over.

Not to mention with sacred your boomers are blessable.

I'm not saying machakas mages are bad, I'm just saying that the change is quite large, and not obviously needed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Machaka has lovely units, but with the exception of the archer, hoplite and priests they are all extremely pricey.

IMHO Pythium Arco Vanheim (etc...) are much stronger, and no nerfing has been seen or even suggested there. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif


Rabe the Deficit Spender

P.S. I believe... (PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong, that would be great!) ...the spider transforms require you to survive the first hit. This doesn't happen particularly often without specially loading you mages with (many) forgable items.

[ February 24, 2004, 07:32: Message edited by: rabelais ]

Re: PBEM Multiplayer Game: No new positions (was "New Multiplayer Game")
 

Sounds like you have quite an interesting MP game going. How about a game progress report for us bystanders?