The Middle Way - Faerun EA [Need Replacement]
 

This game will be played on the Faerun map in the early age. I am starting with the map that Hadrian II edited (starting from Edi's map) for his Faerun PBM game (here). Hadrian II's map is attached here, but I'll be doing some edits prior to starting, most notably I'll remove all the indy fortresses.

I'm looking for 16 players in this game and I'm aiming at intermediate players, but newbies are welcome. I'll not turn away veterans, but if you're a top player in veteran games, this game might be underpowered for you. For newbies, the one thing I really don't want to see is a turn 2 or 3 drop (and I've seen 4 of those in my first two Dom3 games). For that reason please be sure you're ready for a 6 month commitment on a large map game. You should have at least played the tutorial and/or a SP game through 20 turns, with a pretender similar to the one you're playing here.

I would love to see this game get started w/ a 5 - 15 turn blitz, but I know that will be difficult in a large player game. If we're having difficulty getting 16 players, we might considering starting w/ some AI positions set on "impossible"


Server:
IP: 24.17.189.161 Port: 1024

Settings:
Hall of Fame: 15
Magic Site Frequency: 50
Renaming: on
Graphs: off
Others are standard

Hosting Schedule:
28hr QH, moving to 52hr QH later

Victory Conditions:
Consent of surviving players

Mods:
Worthy Heroes

Contacting Host:
kirkpp at yahoo dot com

On Stales and Lost Causes:There is no hard and fast rule, but 3 successive stales are sufficient cause to be set to AI, unless you have communicated with the host (me). A complete lack of communication combined with numerous stales also justifies setting to AI.
I know from experience that it's depressing to playing a losing position, but your fellow players will appreciate it when you "give hell" to those taking you out. Still its clearly better to go AI then to stale indefinitely, but it would be appreciated if you would announce your intention to go AI on this thread, prior to doing so.

On Lost Internet Access, Broken Computers, or whatever: If you have for any reason lost your ability to contact the game server and get your turns in, in order to get an extension, you will still need to contact the host (me) directly with two pieces of information:
1) ETA on resolution of your issue, and
2) player password

Otherwise I may reassign the position or set to AI, at my discretion. I realize that in this circumstance it is likely that whatever technical difficulties are occuring will make it a problem to contact me. Nonetheless, internet cafes exist, friend's computers exist, work computers exist, and all that is necessary is bare minimum internet access in order to contact me (either by email or PM).
With contact, reassignment is still possible, depending on how long the ETA (but generally substitutions should be temporary). As the game goes on it will become more likely that extensions will be given.

Sheap's Rules of Diplomacy (multiplayer tips 1 and 2) will be in effect. (You don't have to role play, although it is encouraged, but you do have to be civil.)

Players:
1. Abysia - Sandman
2. Agartha - Tyrant
3. Arcoscephale - Darrel
4. Atlantis - Meglobob
5. Ermor - Jay Thomas (AI)
6. Hellheim - Amhazair
7. Kailasa - Foodstamp
8. Lanka - Shovah32 (defeated)
9. Marverni - Teraswaerto (AI)
10. Mictlan - WSzaboPeter (defeated)
11. Niefleheim - jazzepi
12. Pangaea - Dedas
13. R'lyeh - Baalz
14. Sauromatia - llamabeast
15. T'ien Ch'i - Hellboy
16. Yomi - Izzyz


Links:
Location for downloadable Faerun map (you will need Faerun_large_v2, and Faerun_large.tga within that).
Worthy Heroes v1.6

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

Thanks for adding me!

Feedback:
CB: Either way
Worthy Heroes: Yes (sounds fun)
Graphs: Either way

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

Deleted.

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

I'd like to try EA Ulm.

I am mainly agnostic with respect to mods and settings but cannot tolerate CB.

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

graphs on would be prefered if this will be victory point setting, since else the game will just end and many will just surprised about the end, having no clue that player x was winning...

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

That's a good point Evilhomer, i'll vote yes on graphs if we are playing VP and abstain if we are not.

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

I agree with Evilhomer on graphs. Usually I like graphs off, since all that information really is supposed to be gathered with scouts - or not gathered, if you think you can risk being ignorant.

However, with some kind of victory conditions that can end the game suddenly for no apparent reason, graphs should be used.

Furthermore the victory condition, if any is used, should be such that in order to win one player would have to control more than half of the provinces/VPs, maybe 60-70%.

I prefer games without victory conditions since they end naturally, and you can't use the mechanics to win before you've actually beat all your enemies. A player may lose practically all their provinces to raids and still come back, just as someone may attack 50 provinces in one turn with Cloud Trapeze or some such and not be in a position to win if there are no victory conditions.

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

Teraswaerto consider how large this map actually is. If the wictory condition is more than half the provinces/60-70% victory points the winning player will have to rule an empire of 250+ lands. I shudder at the thought of making all the scripting/strategic decisions for such an empire, not to mention the 100's of turns getting to that size.

Victory condition should preferably be attainable within a reasonable amount of time.

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

It's true that the map is rather huge... That doesn't change the fact though, that with something like 40% of provinces there is no quarantee that the winner is in an utterly dominant position.

In the late stages of the game, on large maps, winning isn't just a matter of skill, but also of endurance. If there are no victory conditions it's not uncommon that the few remaining empires agree to allied victory simply because they balk at the amount of work going to war would be. Is that a bad thing? Don't know really.

If owning more than half of all provinces is too much, then VPs are better, since it's easier to grasp what exactly is needed to win.

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

My votes:

CB: No
Worthy Heroes: Yes
Graphs: Yes

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

Roughly when are you planing on starting this game?

Re: The Middle Way 2 - Faerun EA [Recruiting]
 

Is there any particular reason you want to limit this game to 16 persons? The map is easily big enough to accomodate everyone willing to play imho.

On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Right now, I'm hearing more votes for graphs off, than graphs on, so I'm going with graphs off (at least for the moment). As posters have noted, there is a dependency w/ victory conditions, so I could imagine changing this if we end up going w/ VPs.


I agree with this, and overall this is my intent regarding how this game should be won. I would suggest then that the primary way of ascertaining victory is simply by consensus of the players still alive.

However, as you have stated this map is in fact huge, and I think this means that the end game could become rather tedious and painful for those that stick it out. In general I suspect that barring raiding tricks, the outcome of most Dom3 games becomes inevitable once one player controls 40%+ of the resources (maybe gem income [including item hoards] is more important than # of provinces? The value (imo), then of either using VPs or province totals is that they can serve to estimate who will become the inevitable winner, and save time in playing out a tedious endgame.

In any case, I think that if we set a victory condition of 70% control of provinces, this would at least give an "out" to a dominant player, playing against someone too stubborn to concede. Now, I would say the value of 70% is in fact tremendously conservative, most especially on this huge map. I would hope that if I am the victorious player, I can win with never having to manage a 200+ province empire.

Also, while I do believe that we want to avoid the raid type of victory that happened in this game, I just don't see myself losing sleep over a raid involving cloud trapeze into 50 provinces.

So, at this point I see myself leaning towards a game that I would hope will end by consensus, but that still has some kind of province count condition in it (maybe 50%?). But, in my admittedly limited experience on seeing these games go through to completion, I'm flexible on setting the number.

To put it more pedantically, 70% is very, very safe that no one will "steal" a victory, but at the same time holds little value in enforcing victory against a stubborn player(s). While perhaps 40% still holds some risk of the stolen victory, it has more value of forcing the question.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Set victory to 1 province over half of all provinces on the map. So if there is 422 provinces, set victory at 212 provinces. Anyone who owns half the world, in my book as won. No one can get to this sort of total, without everyone knowing whats going on, graphs on or off.

On starting positions and # of players
 

Well, at least by the province numbers, this is true. However, I am somewhat concerned about starting positions. In my limited experience on the Faerun map, once I go over 16 players, I always seem to see at least two positions that end up pretty near each other. I think this might be true because (perhaps) there are a lot of nostart provinces, and those nostart provinces are not evenly distributed.

So, I am willing to add another land position (or possibly more), if most players think that is a good idea, but please beware that this will increase the chances that two players end up unreasonably close, or one or more players get screwed in their startup.

I'll have another post shortly where I'll comment on the Faerun map and startup positions, as there may be some partial fixes I can do in editing the map. Bottom line, I think that on the Faerun map you can't look at provinces/player alone, and I suspect the risk of player(s) getting short changed goes up rapidly as we increase above 16.

Edit: Oh yeah, one more thing - I do think it is unwise to add a 3d sea position, the sea players get screwed even when you just look at the # of sea provinces per sea player, in this case.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Personally, I'm fine with this.

On Start Time and Blitzing
 

Good Question! I honestly didn't expect this game to fill up so fast. Originally I was thinking to start on Friday or Saturday (just based on how long it took big games to fill), but I can move that up to Wednesday evening (PST), perhaps. I still need to spend a significant amount of time editing the Faerun map, and testing the server.

So, this is not a requirement for the game, and I realize it may be impossible with so many players, but I did at least want to put out the idea of doing a short blitz (1-2hrs) on either Saturday or Sunday. I guess that if we did it early afternoon EST (GMT - 5, iirc), I think that would cover a lot of time zones at vaguely reasonable hours. Is this even remotely possible?

If a blitz is not possible, it would still be nice to see if we can't crank through some of these early turns this coming weekend. Blitz or no, it would be lovely to get well into the teens (turn number-wise), by Monday.

Incidentally, I will be out for Feb 13th, 14th and most of 15th, so I will need to set the server to 72hr QH over that period.

Re: On starting positions and # of players
 

Fair enough. I don't mind more people comming in if they want to play, but if you (and/or others) want to keep it at 16 that's equally fine.

Re: On starting positions and # of players
 

On the subject of more people: I don't mind more people if our host manages to fix the map to incorporate this (i.e not to close starting positions)

blitz: Blits sounds like really fun idea and would get the game started, both days would work for me but I would prefer to do it on sunday.

Re: On starting positions and # of players
 

I am happy to start wednesday if possible. Also I can blitz for a couple of hours saturday or sunday afternoon GMT -5.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

I've actually played an all-player DomII game on this map, and i gotta say, the very concept of someone taking even 40% of the provences boggles the mind. That game ended in exhaustion at turn 120ish, long after an anonymous smart alec had Wished for the apocolypse SEVEN times. IIRC, there were 10 players left even still, castles in most provences, and 4 or 5 players with vast empires and defences so mighty that any thought of destoying them was madness. No one really did or could claim total victory, i think all of us that were big and mighty were satisfied that we had succeeded, and , by my way of thinking at least, anyone still alive at all got glory points.

I'm fine with any VP method that does not let someone win a cheap and easy victory, and perfectly happy to just count points when we are done.(or not if the graphs are off). To me, it is one of the virtues of Edi's masterpiece is that it is effectivly unconquerable and one is left to pursue one's fate in a local theater of the wider world.

Re: On starting positions and # of players
 

Hmm, I'm afraid I'll have to go out to a birthday party around 8'ish CET = 2EST on saturday, so any afternoon blitz will be very short I'm afraid http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Sunday I'm free as a bird (for now...)

Re: On starting positions and # of players
 

I cannot blitz on Saturday, i could do sunday afternoon.

On Faerun Map Edits and Starting Positions
 

General Comments:

As I mentioned in my initial posts it is my intention to start w/ Hadrian's map and make some edits from there. That said, there are a couple of variations and issues that are worth discussing. Starting from Edi's original and most excellent work on the Faerun map, as contained in the file "Faerun_large_v2.rar" (for which I need to repair the link in the initial post, and will do so shortly), I think there are 2 critical changes which I will certainly include:

Removal of fixed start positions (as Hadrian did)
Removal of all indy fortresses

Less critically, but hopefully useful, I will closely examine the neighbor listing, and see if I can't fix any mismatches between the visual map borders and the neighbor list.


Starting Positions:

One thing I am quite certain of is that whether we have 16 players or 18 players, some player (or possibly more than one) will get screwed in their starting position. This is not a reason for restart, and this applies to everyone (including myself). If you happen to be that player, it would be much appreciated if you soldier on, and make life as inconvenient as possible for your better endowed neighbors. Also remember that in a diplomacy based game such as Dom3, coming from behind in even the worst starting positions is always possible.

All that said, I am more than happy to make some changes that will reduce the chances of players getting screwed and/or increasing the number of players (and perhaps adjusting the edit strategy to accommodate this).

For example, I know that one of the more likely ways to get screwed is to have your starting position come up in certain locations in the western islands (e.g. The Moonshae Islands). I could go through all of those, and make them all nostart, but I think that would be unwise as it would greatly increase the odds of starting close to another player (since so many land provinces would be eliminated as starting candidates) and it would also favor starting positions in the area of the Sword Coast (since they would have this big indy back yard area).

The better solution would be closely examine all those islands and make any one of them w/ 2 or less land neighbors a nostart. I can attempt this, but I would not want to be held accountable for missing one, and if someone still got screwed by landing in an island w/ just 2 neighbors, that would not be reason for restart.

All the above said, I still welcome input on this kind of edit, and the number of players we start with (especially from anyone w/ experience on or knowledge of the Faerun map).


Other Faerun Edits:

The main other point for discussion is the VP provinces that Hadrian set up. Personally, I like the idea that there are a number of very tough provinces out there, and that they would remain indy until the time in the game when the Uniques are beginning to be summoned. At least so long as the rewards for those provinces are correspondingly high.

From playing on Hadrian's map, I have the impression that his VP provinces are just as I have described above. However, I don't have a ton of experience on his map, and so I'd like to open up the discussion on that point. Also, if someone wants to make the point that Edi's "Faerun_large_v2.rar" file, w/ the map file "Faerun_large.map" has better special locations than Hadrian's version, then I'd be willing to consider that, as well.

However the editing procedes, the one goal that I intend to stick to, however, is that there are a number of special provinces that are impractical to take w/ just your national troops.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

This sounds like good & relevant experience. I would say that this sort of outcome would be good (maybe even desireable). Based on this I think that for a victory condition, going as low as 40% of the provinces is reasonable, and that even then we may well not see any clear victor (at least not by province count alone).

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

I know I am not participating in this game, but I thought I might be able to help out. With regards to the Western Islands, you can place a Navigators Guild in one of the provinces. I think the magic site allows you to recruit sailing commanders.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

*****Possible spoiler warning******





















I am not 100% certain, but I believe in dominions 2 this map had a navigator's guild in the Waterdeep province. If all the special provinces are still intact from the transition to dominions 3, you may not even need to add a navigator's guild.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Still spoilering...





Actually, it's in Luskan. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

More spoilers...


Actually, I just checked my dom 2 version and there are several nav guilds. One in Calimport, one in Baulder's Gate, one in Waterdeep, and one in Luskan. I don't remember where these provinces are off the top of my head, but they may already be placed in good position.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Regarding starting positions:

Is there anything wrong with placing 16 (2 water) fixed starting position (evenly spaced and all atleast decent)?

Yes we would know from start where the other starts are but not what nation, and more importantly, this will give all atleast a fair startingposition.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

In the game i played Edi the mapmaker started in the western isles. Despite playing Vanheim, he thought it was a bad start spot, but i don't really know why. Seems to me that starting in the middle of the map will be tough.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

CB:no(already made pretender)
WH:either
Graphs:YES oh god please yes http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

I forgot to vote for graphs and I vote NO! Thanks a lot.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

So, looking at the posts, it looks like if we're going to have a blitz, it'll be Sunday afternoon. So, I'll propose Sunday 2pm EST (GMT - 5).

If it doesn't work out, that's ok, but with or without blitz, I would love to see move through these early turns quickly.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

So, based on what I've seen so far, I think we're narrowing in on our settings, and I would suggest the following:

Graphs: Off
Victory Conditions: 40-51% of total province count (w/ expectation that consensus on game end will happen before reaching that point)
Magic Site Freq: 60 - I haven't heard much comment on this one, but in absence of debate, I'd go w/ this value.


PLEASE NOTE: The server is now tested, we are on track for starting tomorrow evening. If for any reason you do not expect to be able to play 1 turn/day early turns, 1 turn /2 days later turns, please pull out now. If, for example, you have great heartache w/ the proposed game settings, now is the time to withdraw. I really, really don't want to see anyone disappearing or going AI on something like turn 3.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

True, but imo it would also be a pretty big advantage for those that go for a SC pretender that is available turn 1. Or any other rush based strategy, where you want to go for the early player knockouts.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Deleted.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Count on Frank to get to the point...

Well, right now my knowledge of map editing is very limited, all I know how to do is #nostart, and #specstart, I really don't want to start in precisely fixed positions, and it seems like a pain to put in #nostarts everywhere but the 16 we actually want to use.

I'll look into it further tomorrow morning, and see if there's something more direct we can do.

BTW, I don't have much experience in playing w/ magic site frequency: if 60 makes many provinces just as good as capitals, that would be a good reason to lower it. I know from playing SP that 45 still leaves plenty of sites, but nonetheless I was thinking it'd be fun to have more than average # of sites. OTOH, simply having the huge map, w/ its special provinces maybe means the gem supply will be far more than adequate right off the bat.

Re: On Graphs and Victory Conditions
 

Actually, thinking more about it, isn't it the case that if you know precisely where all your neighbors are, that the # of provinces/player is irrelevant? Instead, I would think that the limiting factor would be the distance between capitals. At least if the rusher has an SC Pretender, I would think that if he is 4 provinces away, then he could arrive at your capital on turn 5 (or sooner, utilizing flying). Am I naive to look at in this fashion?

You can never have enough gems...
 

60 for magic sites for gems sounds great to me.

I have played several MP with 50 and I still have never had enough gems to do all I want.

Also 60 will make the game alot more fun.

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

Magic sites 60 sounds a bit high for my taste. It will probably tip the balance in favour of nations with many paths and hinder those who rely on one or two. Without graphs, racking up gems will be even easier.

50 is plenty for a large, rich map like Faerun.

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

I agree that 60 is too high. 50 sounds more reasonable.

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

Server is up, and you can load your pretenders.

Server info:
IP: 24.22.140.14 Port: 1024

Edit:
There is still time to change the game settings, and map suggestions are also still welcome, as I am working on that today.

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

We will use Worthy Heroes, right?

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

Do we all have to install that mod, or is it just the server that matters?

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

Yes.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you will need to install the mod. Be sure to use version 1.6, the link is on the initial post.

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

you are indeed correct

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

Kailasa Pretender uploaded.

PS: don't click "Start Game" when you upload!

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

Okey, on my way there. How will it affect other games (present and future), where I don't want to use the mod, though?

Re: You can never have enough gems...
 

Pretender uploaded, my command line options:

D:\dominions3\dom3.exe -C --ipadr 24.22.140.14 --port 1024 --nocredits --nonationsel