PBEM 109

Post here to seek opponents for multiplayer match-ups.

Moderator: MOD_WestCiv

User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

ORIGINAL: terje439

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro

This is pretty sad; my AAR is almost caught up to the game-8 turns behind.

You do ofc mean that the sad part is that you are behind with your AAR? [:D]

Terje

Well, actually, in view of how slow my AAR has been I never should have been able to get caught up.
6 turns behind.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

Coming up on the 4 day mark again. At this rate we are still looking at well over a year to finish this game. Pretty sad.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

Turkey T142 sent in.

Trades for timber with France and Russia have been initiated. One for one in each case- totaling 5 or 6 from each.
All my settings should be good.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

Kingmaker
Posts: 1678
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:38 pm

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Kingmaker »

HiHi

England T142 sent in.

All the Best
Peter
User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

Is someone sick? Is there some technical problems? If there is some problem, my condolences.

Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Russian Guard
Posts: 1251
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:05 am

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Russian Guard »

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

T139 RusDone.

Generals? You guys have _Generals?_ [:D]

Have not noticed any new ones for me since the early years of the game.

Are you guys using the 1792 All-Generals mod I created?

If so, the Generals should be coming in as scheduled. Russia doesn't get many "new" ones after 1807, except they do get Barclay turn 187, and Wittgenstein on turn 211.

The Prussians should get new generals on turn 219, 231 and 239.

R/G





User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

ORIGINAL: Russian Guard


Are you guys using the 1792 All-Generals mod I created?


R/G

Someone did not do a proper install at the beginning-so the mod did not work in our game. Further, a few dozen turns back I did a reinstall of the game and did not put your mod back in as it was not a factor in this game anymore.

I will try it again at a later time. The early campaigns seem to be the best-to have the correct generals would be nice.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

Tophat1815
Posts: 1824
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:11 pm

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Tophat1815 »

been following this but the prolonged breaks are troubling.Think you felas are loosing interest?
User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

ORIGINAL: Tophat1812

been following this but the prolonged breaks are troubling.Think you felas are loosing interest?

I don't know what is going on. It seems that those that do know ain'nt talkin. That's what is really irksome; there is no news as to why this is happening. Exceptions for RL need to be made, but is that what is needed here??
I don't know.

We have put a year into this game. It would really be a bad joke just to have it stop without any explanation. If someone was, in fact, too bored to continue the game, then a replacement could be found. As it is, there is just a big question as to why each turn is taking twice as long as the agreed maximum turnaround time.

If I was told that this game was going to take 3 years to finish I think I would have passed on it-actually I know I would have passed on it.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
aprezto
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:08 pm

RE: PBEM 109

Post by aprezto »

Well i know I have been guilty of a few missed turns, but Prussia is in...
Image

Image courtesy of Divepac
User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

Turkey 143 in.

The trades did not go through. I wonder if this has anything to do with the -1000 relation Turkey has with France. This seems likely, but why should relations be so low in the first place? Relations with Austria are much better-now that is strange.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

Kingmaker
Posts: 1678
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:38 pm

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Kingmaker »

HiHi

England T143 sent in.

All the Best
Peter
User avatar
Zap
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:13 am
Location: LAS VEGAS TAKE A CHANCE

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Zap »

How many more turns?
User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

ORIGINAL: Zap

How many more turns?

127-we are over the hump. Of course, if we had maintained the minimum of a turn every two days we would now be at about 180. At the beginning of the game this was accomplished. It still happens once in a while, just getting more rare.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

Turkey T144 in.

There is an open trade proposal for Sweden and France. Wood-1 for 1.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

Kingmaker
Posts: 1678
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:38 pm

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Kingmaker »

HiHi

England T144 sent in.

All the Best
Peter
Kingmaker
Posts: 1678
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:38 pm

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Kingmaker »

HiHi

England T145 sent in.

All the Best
Peter
User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

ORIGINAL: Kingmaker

HiHi

England T145 sent in.

All the Best
Peter

You talking to me? Must be. [:D] Turkey's in too.



Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
06 Maestro
Posts: 3997
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Nevada, USA

RE: PBEM 109

Post by 06 Maestro »

Hey Peter! Turkey T146 sent in! [:D]

I have a proposal that has surfaced in several other games. I think we should ban feudal level changes by surrender terms. It should be apparent that to demand feudal level changes as part of a surrender treaty is not only unreasonable, but downright barbaric.

I think that a legitimate quorum can be claimed by those present in this forum during the next 72 hours. A simple majority wins. Yea for banning, nay for continuing this unseemly, disgraceful practice.

I shall cast the first vote-Yea.
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson

Kingmaker
Posts: 1678
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:38 pm

RE: PBEM 109

Post by Kingmaker »

HiHi

"Yea" for me too.

England T146 sent in.

All the Best
Peter
Post Reply

Return to “Opponents Wanted”