Onan's game! (04a2043f)

Smack Talk
15

The club rules are pretty good.
There are a couple of them I don’t really agree with though:

No trading with the AI

Good, but I think you should be able to accept incoming deals from the AI.

AI is in the game? The only city that can be captured from that point on is the capital. All others must be razed.

If a player suddenly surrenders, should I not be able to take the rest of his cities if I’m halfway there? I get that you shouldn’t declare war on the AI just because he’s an easy target and you shouldn
t abuse the fact that is an AI but there are cases where you’d feel really cheated out of cities if a player drops out in the middle of a war.

Casus belli is required to declare war.

No surprise wars? To give the other player a heads up or what? I guess formal war is allowed although it is not really a casus belli?

16

The last one might be all right because it’s nice to give a heads up i guess. Is it to avoid settler and builder steals?

17

I recommend the friendly rules for this game if you are considering having rules.

18

The friendly rules do look a lot simpler!

This may clear some things up: there are no city states and no AI.

Old habits from civ3 MP die hard.

The club rules seems okay, as well. Just there’s a bunch of options and I’m not sure I can be bothered, at least not right now, specifying which we’ll follow.

Friendly rules okay? Seems minimal but banning a couple obvious exploits.

19

Can you clarify what the difference is? I read through that page a couple times and couldn’t find a clear delineation between friendly vs club rules. I thought it was all one ruleset.

20

From what I can see, these are the only rules under Friendly (while Club has many more possibilities):

  • Not reloading for the purpose of tile or battle scouting.
  • Great people outside of your territory must be escorted by, at least a scout.
  • Once an AI is in the game; players consider adding AI rules from the club rules.
    –
21

Correct. I’ll leave it with you guys.

1 Like
22

OK, sounds good. Are we all on board with the friendly rules? And then if somebody bails we can discuss adopting the AI rules at that point. Like @J_Dennis said, you shouldn’t be prevented from finishing a conquest just because the other player rage-quit.

23

Yeah, it sounds good.

We should use our common sense and also not use exploits.

24

Hmn, I didn’t set a password and I’m not sure I can add one. So hopefully, um, I can trust the Vikings not to snoop around in my “empire”. Shrug.

25

PYDT automatically sets a password to every other players’ turn except the current player. You shouldn’t be able to take the next players’ turn.

26

Ah, that’s cool, didn’t know that! Should be fine then, there’s definitely a password for the next player’s turn.

27

We are playing without city states. Are we also playing without natural wonders? It kinda looks that way in the options.

28

No, there are natural wonders.

1 Like
29

Ah, i guess i misread. The options probably meant there are no natural wonders in the pool because we play with everyone available.

30

There aren’t any other deviations from “standard” setup than the ban of city states?

31

Um, just the no AI players, as mentioned. Otherwise nothing changed.

32

The early game is painful sometimes. Just watching the countdown of turns until the unit is produced. Not much to do except trying to plan out my cities. All that will probably change as the fog lifts and better options become available.

Anyone else got barb problems?

33

Planning, huh, that’s a good idea. :sweat_smile:

Barb camp sighted; not a problem, yet.

34

I don’t have barb problems, I have isolation problems. I’ve got a civ with trading bonuses, but I have yet to meet a single other city-state. I got a bonus trader when I researched pottery, and then I got a second trader from a friendly village, so now I’ve got two traders sitting idle in my capital with nowhere to go! :frowning: