Current Setup suggestion:

Map Type: Pangaea
Resources: Strategic Balance
Sea Level: Medium
Difficulty: ???
Map Size: Tiny
Pace: Quick

4-player games.

Now we just need to agree on a universal difficulty setting.

1. ghug
2. brainbomb
3. DemonOverlord
4. wjessop
5. yoyo
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

1. ghug
2. brainbomb
3. DemonOverlord
4. wjessop
5. yoyo
6. Captainmeme
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

I'm in, down for any settings

1. ghug
2. brainbomb
3. DemonOverlord
4. wjessop
5. yoyo
6. DemonRHK
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

Edited:

1. ghug
2. brainbomb
3. DemonOverlord
4. wjessop
5. yoyo
6. Captainmeme
7. DemonRHK
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

1. ghug
2. brainbomb
3. DemonOverlord
4. wjessop
5. yoyo
6. Captainmeme
7. goldfinger0303
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

@meme any suggestions for difficulty?

1. ghug
2. brainbomb
3. DemonOverlord
4. wjessop
5. yoyo
6. Captainmeme
7. DemonRHK
8. goldfinger0303
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

I once played a multiplayer game where one player had a large, fertile area of land surrounded by almost a complete circle mountains with only two 2-tile points of access on either side.

Amazing luck of the draw.

if only there were armies of eagles eh?

I wouldn't mind immortal difficulty

Oh, another caveat for me. Don't put me with meme.

it'll be random buddy :)

Its good practice for me to use randomizers for M20 anyway

Map needs to be Pangaea. Isolation is a real problem in multiplayer civ - if someone has no neighbors they can very easily run away with the game while others are fighting, and Pangaea is the only (non-DLC) map type that mostly stops that from being the case.

Difficulty should be Prince, King or Emperor. Since there's no AIs it doesn't make all that much difference, but I'd suggest King, since I think that's the level a lot of webDippers are at. I think players should be required to play on until either:

- they are completely eliminated,
- another player has won some victory type, or
- 2 players both agree to concede to the third.

This stops the problem of AI neighbours being too easy to conquer.

No Raging Barbs (the main adversary in the game should be other players, not the environment - normal barbs are enough), no policy saving (this makes every tree except Tradition/Liberty and Rationalism practically worthless since the best strategy is almost always just to complete your starter tree and then save for Rationalism).

Pace needs to be quick or games will never finish (as Wjessop said - quick games tend to take 8-9 hours to finish in general, standard games would take even longer).

No preference on sea level, I'm happy with strategic balance, and I'm happy with Tiny map size.

Quick games would take 4-6 hours to finish live, IF you guys used Turn Timer.

But I'm not even going to ask for that, because people react against Turn Timer as if it's the AntiChrist.

http://www.georgeskleres.com/civ5/

I'd also suggest using this to draft nations - each player bans 3, then use this tool to give a choice of three nations to each player.

Venice being universally banned I presume? I can't imagine anyone wanting Venice.

Also would the choices be made public to the players or should I PM this to prevent people from knowing what they might be facing?

Yeah, Venice should be autobanned at the start.

I think players should know what nations they'll be facing in the lobby, given that if you know the flags you can find out on turn 1 just by going to victory conditions anyhow.

great ideas. now we just need 8 more people. @vash, 2wl, uclabb, HR, and any other interested parties! ahah

So, each player chooses a nation and bans 3? And of course you'd be happy with tiny maps, you tyrant

Oh, I legit can not play before the 10th of April. So remove me if that becomes a problem.

Not a problem. Gives us all time to practice and me time to put my Director skills to the test! :D.

plus we need 8 more ppl anyways

I guess I'm in, but I think organizing this will be harder than some seem to think..
I would also prefer Random Leaders. Adaptation is an important skill in this game.

I'm liking my current game against someone here with Venice, even! I mean, you buy some city states, have awesome trade and don't slow your production or growth at all while buying puppets that way. You can still conquer for more puppets as well!

Gold - what happens with that is that players take turns to ban a nation until 9 have been banned, then that tool I posted is run, and it will say something like:

Player 1: Choose between (Shoshone, Korea, Iroquois)
Player 2: Choose between (England, France, Germany)
Player 3: Choose between (America, Huns, Austria)

for example. Then each player chooses a nation from their list and the game starts.

Also Tiny is actually a little too large for 3 players (it's supposed to be for 4) but it's the best fit we have.

Nvm, just saw that was covered earlier.

Pangaea is oh so dull. Tiny Islands, or Continents, are the only acceptable map types. Plus Raging Barbs!

@captainmeme: So banning OP nations to level the playing field would be fair game as well?
I would also like to add that I don't think we should automatically ban Venice in this case. Everyone would get plenty of opportunity to either ban it or simply not pick it.

@HR and rest:
We can settle for the compromise of Shuffle whenever you guys realize we're not going to agree otherwise!

Also @all: Shouldn't we discuss whether it should be 3-player games to begin with? That seems like the most important setting and while I don't neccessarily disagree, I'd like to hear why 3 as opposed to 2, 4 etc.

Yes, tiny islands and I get to be england. I see no problems with these conditions.