House Rules

[Gimboid]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atrocities:
One thing you should add to this thread is a warning that if your using MODIFIED files, your PBW game will have some problems. I used modified files, and experienced a few annomolies. (sp) Just and FYI.

---

I'll make sure to add something about this in the PBW FAQ.

Hopefully, along with this thread, it should reduce the frequency of such an easily avoidable booboo.

[Deathstalker]

There has been another 'House Rule' that I have thought of recently. No experience (that I know of) in this myself, but others have expressed frusturation with the 'Multi-Game Trade' (heck, call it MGT for short). Example: Player 1 trades for tech in game 1 with player 2, but the trade is that player 2 give player 1 tech in game 2 which they are also both in. (ie, I'll give you ppbV in XX1game if you give me NullSpace III in XX2game...deal??). Please guys, avoid this!!! Treat every game as a 'seperate world'...Alliances sometimes go this way as well...Just cause I happen to be allied with Puke in one game dosn't mean I'll go easy on him in another game ...Same thing for defeat..Just cause Spoo/Peoples Empire of Night rocked my world in one game does not mean I'll be out to get them in every game I see them in....(or will it?? ).

Just some things to think about when creating a game....and why some players do the inexplicable.

------------------
"And what the hell would you know about sanity?" demanded Beatrice. "There are depressed lemmings on the edge of cliffs who've got a better grasp on reality than you have. And more common sense."--Simon R. Green 'Deathstalker Rebellion'.

"We are all...the sum of our scars"....(paraphrased) Matt. R. Stover-'Blade of Tyshalle'.

[Puke]

thats a great point DS. To take it one step further: just because I was dealing behind your back to the C.H.A.O.S. when you were playing the EEE, it does not mean im going to stop supporting them now that you are in charge of the C.H.A.O.S. and not the EEE in the same game! on the other hand, if someone gets the reputation for being a treacherous sneak-attacking back-stabber, people will probably start treating you that way in whatever game you join.

If i can add my own little pet peeve to the house rule section here, its people NOT LINKING TO THEIR CUSTOM SHIPSET. I dont know if people are trying to be confusing, or they dont understand how to upload their shipset, or they are just too lazy. but this really sucks. it makes it difficult for people to figure out which race is which when they keep changing pictures, so if youre not going to provide a link then just use a standard shipset. its only courtious.

------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

[Rollo]

Hi,
here is a set of house rules that we use in a PBEM game called Galaxy, which I also play.
It's fun you should check it out . I am sure some of you have heard of it before.
Anyway, I have left the rules unchanged. Just food for thought. I would like to see a set of "general house rules" to be established and published on the PBW site to avoid troubles before they start.


Galaxy House rules

Rules for Players

Behavior that is not allowed:

[1] Using another player's password to send orders without that player's consent.
[2] Using another player's password to request a copy of that player's turn report without that players consent.
[3] Trying to crash the server.
[4] Gaining access to the server and/or reading the game data files.
[5] Out of character verbal abuse of other players. Remember it is just a game and people are just playing a role.
[6] Playing more than one nation in a game. It is allowed to do this for a short time to help out an ally that is on vacation. However you should notify the GM before you do this.

Sin against any of these rules and you are expelled from the game.


Behavior that is considered bad:

[7] Joining a game and then dropping out after a few turns. Joining a game implies an intention to play the game through to the end. Leaving a game without a good reason is considered very disrespectful. Don't join unless you are willing to commit yourself to an entire game, which may take several months.
[8] Giving your planets very offensive names.
[9] Attempting to influence a player's behavior in one game by offering threats or concessions in another game is called "cross play". This is strongly discouraged.
[10] Forming alliances before a game starts.

There is little a GM can do against this but it won't win you any friends.


Behavior that is allowed:

[11] In-game and in-character everything is allowed. If you can express it as a set of orders it is allowed(1). Provided you do not sin against [1], [2], or [3]. In-character, that is in the role of leader of the nation you are playing, everything is allowed. So you can lie and cheat, come back on agreements, or send a mass 500 warship while claiming you are only sending a small cargo ship.
You are also allowed to do this out-of-character, but you will not make many friends that way. If you want to enjoy galaxy for a long time make sure that you clearly identify when you are talking in or out of character.


Exceptions to the rules for Tiger games (ed.: those are team games, usually players from the former Soviet Union against the rest of the world):

[12] Rule [10] does not apply.
[13] Rule [6] does not apply provided you play a nation in the same team.
[14] The team leader can remove a player from the team and give the nation to another player.


Some of those don't apply to SE4, but most of them do and make a lot of sense. As I said, just food for thought.

Rollo

[Menschenfresser]

I am just about to finish my first PBEM game, which is also a tourney game. In our game two of the general codes listed here have been broken: Surrender and Exploiting a Known Bug.

Either one of the two might not have completely destroyed the fun of the game, but both together have turned it into a walk-through for all sides. Since the game is virtually over, unless a huge God-thrown cosmic fireball comes from outside the known universe, I will relate my experience as it might shed some light on this topic.

Let's start at the moment, the turn, right before the 4th placed player (I'm pretty sure he was fourth) surrendered to the 2nd placed player. [I will refer to them as 1, 2, 3, and 4 now based on their score placement] 1 was eating up 4's empire at an alarming rate, but 4 still had quite a few planets, some of them quite large. At this moment, the alliance of 1 and 3 had a huge gaping hole in their defenses in an out of the way part of the galaxy. Had 4 simply tried to stall the attacking fleet of 1, and had 2 found this hole in the defenses, they certainly would have been able to inflict some damage...possibly heavy damage. From there I can't tell being that the game would have taken a different turn.

Now let us look at it on the turn that 4 surrendered. Suddenly 2 controls a third to a half of the galaxy. His empire is spread out stretching from the far northwest to the southeast. Because of bad warp points and long distances, 2's empire cannot be consolidated. I suppose, that after the surrender, the galaxy is virtually the same except for one key point and that has to do with the Intel bug. Even with the Intel bug, a two on two intel battle would have been more or less fair. Not only that, I think, I may be wrong, but 4, before he surrendered, had a jump start in intel on the rest of us. For a year maybe, I was getting hit by intel almost every turn. Change that to a two on one intel battle, and you see the problem. As it stands, for every planet we glassed, we stole using intel or glassed using his own ships we stole with intel, 1.5 to 2.

Honestly, if 4 didn't surrender and we didn't exploit the intel bug, the chances that the game would have turned out different aren't so great. This game was almost completely determined by the location of the players on turn one. The only differece would be the fun factor. I think my empire (not my skills as a player) was the key to the game. I started sandwiched in between two other players, with no room to expand. I had to side with someone. I think I knew that on turn 5, so whoever I sided with had one up on the other two. If I had been taken out of the mix, there would have been three equal empires each with the ability to populate a third of the galaxy uncontested.

I guess the conclusion is, I really see now, how a few events, like surrendering and bug exploitation can trump everything else in a game, making for naught the finer points of empire building, ship designing, strategizing, and tactics. All of your resources being stolen through intel because of a bug is different than the same happening because you failed to start building intel facilities till turn 100. One you cannot control...the other you just didn't think through.

I think it could make for an interesting senario, that may never happen again, if a game decides to forbid the use of intel, until the bug is fixed, but not forbid the building of intel facilities. Do you hope to gain the advantage by building extra research facilities, or do you pre-empt and build a bunch of intel facilities, that as soon as the bug is fixed, you can devastate the enemy with intel? Hahahaha!

[geoschmo]

quote:

---

I think it could make for an interesting senario, that may never happen again, if a game decides to forbid the use of intel, until the bug is fixed, but not forbid the building of intel facilities. Do you hope to gain the advantage by building extra research facilities, or do you pre-empt and build a bunch of intel facilities, that as soon as the bug is fixed, you can devastate the enemy with intel?

---

This is not a bad suggestion. It would have to rely on people's honor though.

The only way to enforce it without relying on the players would be to mod the data files. I have heard of PBEM games making the intel facilities generate research points instead of intel points. You could also remove the intel projects form the text file. You would still get the points, but not have anything to use them on.

Unfortunatly these options would make it necessary to run the turns offline. We could not use PBW for such a game because of the command line mod support bug with Version 1.41. Hopefully when that is fixed the intel bug will be fixed too.

Geoschmo

[Menschenfresser]

I would just rely on player's honor. Most of us are honorable enough to abide by such a rule.

Just make it a consequence that those caught using intel in a Banned game, are booted or punished somehow. This would be easy enough to keep track of, because someone would report intel destruction, and then you go through the Last turn and find out who did it.