PBEM game: The first step (Running)

Alneyan · #1 April 25th, 2005, 05:37 AM

Welcome aboard CyborgMoses!

Alneyan · #2 April 25th, 2005, 10:54 AM

So, there are now five players in the game; I think we have room for a few more players, two or three or so.

On another note, what patch should this game use? I have most patches from 2.08 onwards on my computer, so I can use any patch; using the same patch as the host is needed to ensure that the battle replays aren't incorrect.

BigDaddy · #3 April 25th, 2005, 11:45 AM

Alneyan, are you waiting for 10 players?

Alneyan · #4 April 25th, 2005, 11:51 AM

There is room for a couple more players, but I wouldn't expect to reach 10 players; seven or so would be enough. On another note, if someone would like to play a water nation (or if there are only five players), Desert Eye could be a better map: it also comes with the map, is also wrap-around, and has some sea provinces (and fewer land provinces than Inland).

If you have already made up your Pretenders, feel free to start sending them to me. They can be found in the newlords directory: if your nation is Ermor, the Pretender fille will be ermor.2h . My address is alneyan[AT]fastmail[DOT]co.uk (replace [AT] and [DOT] by @ and . respectively).

RibbonBlue · #5 April 25th, 2005, 03:25 PM

I would like to use patch 2.16.

Ironhawk · #6 April 25th, 2005, 08:59 PM

Alneyan, I am willing to sign up as a "seasoned" advisor.

Also I have a general question about your games: why do you run them as PBEM games, and not regular? If you need a server to host your games, I can provide it.

Alneyan · #7 April 26th, 2005, 06:43 AM

There are a couple of reasons; in no specific order, here they are:
- As a player, I much prefer PBEM over TCP/IP, though I have been known to play TCP/IP once in a while.
- I usually cannot play in TCP/IP reliably, though it looks like this problem has disappeared.
- I feel that PBEM is much easier to handle backups than TCP/IP, both for the players and for myself.
- Some of my games simply *have* to be PBEM, as I must run the actual hosting of the turns. They include King of the Hill and Entwined Destiny (I have to dump the scores regularly, which is something that wouldn't be quite as easy with TCP/IP).
- Lastly, I prefer to make sure all game files are saved up somewhere else, both for reference purposes (looking at the whole game once it is over) and to check for miscellaneous cheating attempts. This is something I cannot be sure of via TCP/IP.

Oh, and I am just a glutton for punishment and love running the turns. So thanks for the offer, but I think I will stick with PBEM (even if I could run TCP/IP on my own computer, I am not sure if I would switch to TCP/IP in this case).

Agrajag · #8 June 4th, 2005, 06:13 AM

I was wondering, other than death sites, what kind of sites can cause an increase in unrest?
Also, it seems that my cold scales are none-existant (that is, not a single one of my provinces is cold, including the capital!), is there any explanation other than I somehow forgot to take my cold scale? :\

Agrajag · #9 August 6th, 2005, 05:00 AM

Well, its official, I don't have enough free time to play the game. I've posted a request for replacement over at the MP boards here.
And as for NAPs and the like, don't worry, I'll update my replacement (if there will be one :\).

sushiboat · #10 April 25th, 2005, 11:49 AM

I am using version 2.16, so that is my preference.