• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

boehm

Danish Guy
22 Badges
Oct 15, 2001
2.500
44
Visit site
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall - Revelations
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Age of Wonders III
  • BATTLETECH
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Rome Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
I was thinking that with 1.06 and the introduction of much more expensive army maintenence for human players than for ai nations PBEM would get even better since IMO one of the problems previously experienced was that it was way too easy to expand during your own turn.....now atleast it wont be that easy anymore since u will probably have to disband a huge portion of your army the second u load up the game to avoid going bancrupt......

ofcause this is assuming playing on VH...and personally I would prefer VH/Normal....

claus
 
Sure, I'm up for a game--if that was the point of the thread. Well, the title was kind of like an invitation but then the narrative was more like the start of a discussion, but I will conclude that you were doing both :D

The start of each player's turn will mean the disbanding of previously built ai armies, but then the end of the turn will be the rebuilding of them; it adds a bit more complexity to the strategy.

I like Hard/Normal, but maybe Hard/Weakling is better. (Is Weakling second from the bottom? That's the one I mean anyway)
 
sorry yes actually when thinking about it I would prefer Hard too....BB wars would otherwise be impossible to avoid since its impossible to control your BB in pbem....however I do have one concern and that is the ability of the ai nations to cope with the carry-over WE without the WE cheat on VH?...what do u think? but OK I will try to test it..so until furthere notice the suggested settings are:

Grand Campaign
v. 1.06
Very Hard / Weakling

Country size? I would like to exclude the super powers...they are too easy or what do u think?
 
Originally posted by boehm

Country size? I would like to exclude the super powers...they are too easy or what do u think?

Depends on the setup; ie, number of players and turn length. For a low number of players, we could play medium powers, if we could find ones that are equal. If we have about four players, though, super powers might not be a problem since they at least guarantee survivability for all players. I assume that the rivalry would be such that we are obviously playing against each other and going after the strongest person. If France does very well on his turn, then Spain will just have to work against him (or her)on his own, for example.

But you are more experienced with PBEM than I am, and I am easy-going on this subject. My only fear is that if the country is fairly weak and develops a bad reputation on its human turn, it might get wiped out once it becomes ai-controlled. Have you come up with a 'classic' setup for PBEM? I seem to remember that with four players a SPA/FRA/AUS/OE setup was one of the popular ones. Maybe a VEN/BRA/DEN/SCO one is good for medium powers.
 
Problem with playing super powers is that the players all play the strongest nations thus ai alliances doesnt matter much...also if we start in 1419 then France is WAY too strong....ofcause my experiences are all from 1.05 and before...but in 1419 Austria is WEAK...and so is Castille..only England can match France...and only if they go first....otherwise Im fairly confident that France will grab most of the HRE and or Italy fairly quickly.....if they choose to go the path of the warmonger that is....

Therefor I would prefer to play medium powers.....although Im not sure your example of Denmark, Venice, Brandenburg and Scotland would be optimal....Denmark is in 1419 (and for 200yrs thereafter) vastly stronger than Brandenburg and they are situated quite close to each other.....but I dont know....I think I would prefer if we could find 5 players so that it wouldnt just end up being 2 vs 2....although team games can be quite fun too...they sure have more interplayer warfare...(see my "Europe Devided"-link below...)

I just want to play and have fun...
 
Originally posted by boehm

I just want to play and have fun...

Me too :D

So you're the boss, once you get enough players, set it up and away we go. I agree five is a good number which should make for a dynamic diplomatic system. What five do you suggest for 1419? My BRA/DEN/VEN/SCO had 1492 in mind. I tried to think of nations with approx 4 provinces. Anyway, I'll stop posting after this one, otherwise it will only look like an exchange only between the two of us. :) Maybe Prince Eugene would like to join, he's always up for a game....
 
A suggestion for a 2 player competitive pbem game...

Basically my idea is that each player have several nations which he switch between so as to not "just" make it a game of nation A vs nation B...this way hopefully there will be more flexibility and less certainty.

Rules:

Very Hard / Normal
I think we need to play on Very Hard so the ai get the extra WE cheat so it doesnt collaps on itself...Also to avoid triggering constant BB wars during the "player" turn because of the AIs rampant DoWs and annexation I propose we use BB-edit!

BB-Edit
Before loading up and playing nation X, you are allowed to half that nations current BB....this way BB should still mean something without constraining the players too much.

Free DP-clicks
I furthermore propose that each player is allowed 1 free DP click per turn.

Colonization 1419-1492:
To avoid rampant colonization prior to entry of "later" nations I propose that players are NOT allowed to colonize outside of Europe/N. Afrika prior to 1492 - this also have the effect of keeping the attention on Europe for a while....

Pagans:
To avoid the "big rush" where all pagans are annexed instantly upon their discovery I propose that players are barred from waging war or taking provinces from any pagan nations with the exception that Spain after 1492 has "free hands" vs. the central- & south american pagans.

Teams:
A) Ottoman, Sweden,
"after 1492" + England
"after 1570" + the Netherlands

B) Austria, Poland
"after 1492" + Spain
"after 1570" + Russia

(basically the teams are catholics/orthodox vs. protestants/reformed/muslim....so that it should be easier to maintain alliances and not have your ai´s start fighting each other!)

.....u cannot play the same country two times in a row, so that when u have 3 nations u can effectively drop 1 if u wish...and when u have 4 nations u can effectively drop 2 if u wish!

Years per Turn:
you can play either 5 or 7 yrs per turn. However u CANNOT play nation X 7 yrs. if u played that nation 7 yrs last time u played it. ( to make it less predictable how much the opponent will be able to do!)

Victory Conditions:
hmm well total VP of the 4 nations?...or just a vote? :)
 
If you're still looking for people I'm interested in trying this out.
 
So at the start of each of our turns, we pick which one of our countries we wish to play, or is there switching within our turn? We could say, play one nation for seven years, or, if you want/need to switch to help one of your guys out, play only five years if you do a switch? I'm sure we'll work out the details but I like the general concept, especially, not playing the same country twice.

I'll think about good team selections as well, especially now that we have a 3rd player in (Isaac Brock). Ideally, each player has one member of 3 nation geographical set, such as FRA/ENG/SPA, AUS/POL/TUR and SWE/DEN/MOS to name a few although as you can see in my examples, there is always some overlap. I'm also tempted to suggest banning Spain completely since they never have any problem racking up a high number of VP's. Okay, I'll think of some good country groups and post my suggestions.
 
Personally Im more concerned about France than Spain....France is just awfully strong....and I must admit that I would actually prefer either a 2 player...or perhaps a 5 player...otherwise it would quickly become a 2 vs 1....or alternatively a game where every body is afraid to make it "personal" because they are afraid of making it personal.... :) thing is we have to make damn sure that the teams are very well thought out.....
 
Hi Boehm

Sign me up if you're looking for another player. With 1.06 it should be interesting playing minors but if the majority want we can play larger nations that's cool.

Joe
 
Well, that makes 4 then and we're looking for five. If one of us can find someone else then we're set.

Claus, I'm still interested in your two-person team game so we'll give that a go as well. We can go with the teams you suggested, although I think the religious alignment is not all that relevant initially since the future Protestants start out as Catholic. I think Austria-Poland might be a harder go since Poland is so hard to play, and will eventually end up in the same camp as Russia (who is supposed to cooperate to destroy it) but if you're happy to play it, go ahead :) I'll take the other side then.

So I suggest we get our team game going between us and just wait for a fifth to join PBEM, unless of course these other players were only interested in the 'team concept'. I do agree, five is the ideal number.
 
I'm up for medium sized powers. The team thing is interesting, but not really manageable with 5 people.
 
Originally posted by VinceV
Well, that makes 4 then and we're looking for five. If one of us can find someone else then we're set.

Claus, I'm still interested in your two-person team game so we'll give that a go as well. We can go with the teams you suggested, although I think the religious alignment is not all that relevant initially since the future Protestants start out as Catholic. I think Austria-Poland might be a harder go since Poland is so hard to play, and will eventually end up in the same camp as Russia (who is supposed to cooperate to destroy it) but if you're happy to play it, go ahead :) I'll take the other side then.

So I suggest we get our team game going between us and just wait for a fifth to join PBEM, unless of course these other players were only interested in the 'team concept'. I do agree, five is the ideal number.

well the thing with Poland is that I expect that u would use it to keep the swedes and ottomans in check until Spain and Russia gets playable by which time I assume that u would probably want to drop them.....

What I like about this idea of play is the unpredictability...when u play your turn u can never be entirely sure which country your opponent will play next or for how long....

also I like the idea of either a 1 vs 1 game or a 2 vs 2 game etc since this makes it a lot more competitive...otherwise it often has a tendency to get a bit "booring" since no one wants to attract attention as being a warmonger....but Im still willing to give it a go! :)
 
Originally posted by Mike of NW8
Is there a post explaining how this works? I'd be interested, but need to see how PBEM works exactly first.

I'm sure there are posts, as well as an in-depth explanation of Non-Player PBEM (invented by Boehm).

Essentially:

-play as a country for a set number of years (say 5)
-save game and e-mail file to the next guy
-let the ai take over your country as the next guy plays
-conduct diplomacy while waiting for your next turn
-repeat first step
 
Re: A suggestion for a 2 player competitive pbem game...

Originally posted by boehm

Rules:

Very Hard / Normal
I think we need to play on Very Hard so the ai get the extra WE cheat so it doesnt collaps on itself...Also to avoid triggering constant BB wars during the "player" turn because of the AIs rampant DoWs and annexation I propose we use BB-edit!


Would Very Hard / Coward be better? I ask because this seems to be the recommended setting for 1.06 in SP mode. I'm not sure I've seen a lot of difference between normal and coward when playing a game.

Joe
 
I've had the whole concept explained to me now:)

And I reckon it sounds quite cool, I'd definitely be up for playing. I'm not too fussed about country etc. I'll leave such heavy decisions to those who know the format better.
 
ok so now it would seem we are 5 players.... :cool:

Ok I still think the idea about teams is a good idea since it will involve more countries in the game and also make sure that more uncertainty/flexibility is introduced. Therefor I propose the following teams:

COUNTRY-TEAMS:
Ottoman - The Netherlands
Castille or Aragon?/Spain - Portugal
Denmark - Muscowy/Russia
"choose any italian power" - Austria
Sweden - England

6th player?: Poland - France

NOTES:
From 1419-1492: Only the country listed "first" may be played...thereafter each player may decide himself which nation he would like to play when his turn comes.

Basically the teams has been chosen so that they with the exception of the "Ottoman-NET" team are sort of natural allies....or in the Ottoman-NET case atleast not likely to go to war...and the Ottomans CAN try to make sure that Austria does not get too strong and manage to suppress the dutch. (perhaps a deal can be struck?)

The reason France has been left out is that although it and Poland would have been a natural pair (perhaps for a 6th player?) it would also be an extremely strong alliance - France is just god awful powerfull and can almost take on the rest of Europe.

TURN LENGTH:
I would like to introduce some flexibility here to again make it less predictable what will/can happen in the "next guys turn"...ei. to make it less possible to exploit the nature of this game! Therefor I propose a variable turn lenght of 4, 5 or 7 yrs. where:

1) if you played for 7yrs during your last turn, u must play only 4 years during your next turn!

2) (after 1492) u must play each of your nations atleast every 3rd turn, if possible. ei. that nation exists!

3) If one of your nations end up having annexed the other then u MUST release that nation as a vassal ASAP!

GENERAL HOUSERULES:

Very Hard / Normal (coward? I havent tested too much but I did notice some weird examples where the war ai- vs ai just continued forever...)
I think we need to play on Very Hard so the ai get the extra WE cheat so it doesnt collaps on itself...Also to avoid triggering constant BB wars during the "player" turn because of the AIs rampant DoWs and annexation I propose we use BB-edit!

BB-Edit
Before loading up and playing nation X, you are allowed to half that nations current BB....this way BB should still mean something without constraining the players too much.

Free DP-clicks
I furthermore propose that each player is allowed 1 free DP click per turn.

Colonization 1419-1492:
To avoid rampant colonization prior to entry of "later" nations I propose that players are NOT allowed to colonize outside of Europe/N. Afrika prior to 1492 - this also have the effect of keeping the attention on Europe for a while....

Pagans:
To avoid the "big rush" where all pagans are annexed instantly upon their discovery I propose that players (as opposed to when their nations are AI controlled) are barred from waging war or taking provinces from any pagan nations with the exception that Spain after 1492 has "free hands" vs. the central- & south american pagans.

Ai-Edits:
in patch 1.06 the ai-information is stored in the savegame so it is really easy to edit without having to send around customized ai files...therefore Ai editing is allowed with the exception that use of "ferocity=yes" is banned! (this messes up the game!) - the most useful/basic fiels to edit will probably be these:

combat = { "who to attack and try to annex" }
continent = { "where to explore & colonize" }
area = { "where to explore & colonize" }
region = { "where to explore & colonize" }
war = "a score from 0-100%"

Colonization-Edit:
likewise it is allowed to change setting of your nations from "colonialnation = no" to colonialnation = yes" if so desired! (this will cause your ai to actually colonize if able to)

Patch 1.06 bug-issues:
in 1.06 the serfdom stability modifier is broken, which can hurt especially Russia and Spain...but they are extremely strong anyway so :rolleyes: - if the majority think its fair we can allow any player to alter his serf-freedom setting to neutral "0" anytime he feels like it. (to offset the negative impact from +serf events)
 
Last edited: