New multiplayer games on longturn.org

[Chanthiran]

At an earlier time phalanx obsoleted warriors but I think it was changed from that to current version on civ2civ3 after people complained the lack of cheap units. Not sure if we should actually change that back.

I seem to remember that in the original Civ2, pikemen obsoleted warriors.

[Chanthiran]

Btw, how does one "win" or end the web based multiplayer games?

I was under the impression that one won either by a) Winning the space race, b) Being the sole survivor in the game i.e. killing off everyone else or c) being part of an Allied Victory i.e. all remaining survivors are allied to one another.

[wieder]

Pikemen obsoleting warriors? Could have been like that. Sounds reasonable. We could do that for LT40 and leave the old setting for LT39.

So, I guess allied victory is enabled for web multiplayer? Sounds similar to the way longturn.org games have been in the past. Is the difference here the players who are not seeking to win that much? Hard to say since I haven't been playing. I also never really understood how Greatturn was that different to longturn.org. The only game I played there was GT0 and it ended with an allied victory where everyone else was wiped out.

[Corbeau]

I didn't play GT0 but I'd say that the difference was that there everybody didn't HAVE to be wiped out.

But generally, allowing alliance victory tends to do that, you get into the "us and them" mentality that is then hard to shake off. Uncivilized.

And I'm not sure allied victory was enabled here, just that people assumed it was and behaved accordingly. Also, the fact that a newcomer can get 5000 gold only for joining late and create trouble was a strong motivation for wiping out everybody. Otherwise, I don't think it would be necessary.

[wieder]

Yeah. We tried out the wiping strategy on one game and it didn't work that well. I'm still glad we did that. Now there is no speculation about if it should be done like that. In the last game, LT37, there was no reason to kill everyone but sometimes people just want to have the fun and do it

I was thinking about some setting where people would get more score if more players are left alive but that wouldn't also work and it would be artificial anyway.

5000 gold? Really? This sounds like a huge motivation for someone to do multi accounting. Even if gold trading is disabled, there is a way around it assuming the other nation can be wasted. Simply build only one new city and then conquer it. Most of the gold will be transferred to the attacker and there is no tax for it. If I would really really have to compensate, I would probably use giving techs, maybe some cities and buildings. Just few buildings. Maybe more compensation with small wonders because those can't be sold.

[Caedo]

And I'm not sure allied victory was enabled here, just that people assumed it was and behaved accordingly.

At least in Game 1, it was enabled, unless Andreas disabled it midway through the game and didn't tell us about it, which is unfortunately quite possible.

Also, for these games, there was no official rule about and alliance claiming victory, like there is on Longturn.org, so the only way to win as an alliance would have been to directly employ the game mechanics. Andreas wanted to end the first two games prematurely, simply declaring the player with the highest score victorious, but just about everyone protested against that. Granted, it still happened now, which is something plenty of people are upset about.