Home World Forum: New Game Announcements » Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted

Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » New Game Announcements » Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted

Mon, 31 March 2008 13:48

jimroberts

Petty Officer 2nd Class

Messages: 52
Registered: March 2008
Location: Germany

(Current information now moved to top for ease of reference. Latest change 2008.04.09, battle-board-overload definitely forbidden.))
Current state

Player list as of 2008.04.04

Organisation

Game announcement
I'm proposing a large conventional game with about ten players. No public scores, no accelerated start, not max minerals. Any sort of race allowed. Play will be fairly slow to allow time for diplomacy throughout the game, to allow for micromanagement for those who like it in the middle game, and for careful battle planning in the end game. In spite of slow play, I would like to see an end in a reasonable time, say about a year at most. Any sort of race should be able to win, if it is good in its own way, so multiple victory criteria.

Edited to add: This game is mainly for beginners and players with just a few games' experience.

There aren't going to be any radical changes to my proposal, so if there are a lot of things you disagree with, you are just not interested in the sort of game that interests me. In particular, don't propose AccBBS, banning PRTs and the like. Some little things can be changed, see below.

Proposed name: Pebbles in the sky. (Unless this has already been used.)

Proposal

ten players. It might well be hard to get ten in a reasonable time, so we might settle for less.
diplomatic. Hopefully no pre-game alliances, but alliances during the game are fine: tech exchange, mineral trading, whatever. At some point, your ally will probably stab you in the back to try to win, unless you get him first
large, dense. This gives us 640 planets, so reasonably large but not unmanageable empires.
distant. This is more reliable than farther for avoiding unfair distributions.
standard. None of the check boxes in Step 1 of New Game Wizard checked.
- non-AccBBS. For a lot of race designs, the first 20 years starting from 25000 pop are interesting and important.
- no Public Player Scores. Use your scanning to find out as well as you can who's ahead of you.
unrestricted. Well, as far as possible. There are exploitable bugs, things that are clearly not intended by the designers, please don't exploit them. But there are other dubious tricks that might help a race in a losing position at least postpone extinction: I think we should look tolerantly on this.
- (Update 2008.04.02) Only one race per person! (How could I have forgotten this?)
- PRT, SRT all OK. I don't believe that (for instance) CA can easily beat anyone else.
- chaff. Definitely OK.
- split fleet. OK. Animals scatter to escape predators. Throwing a weakling to the wolves is common behaviour.
- battle board overload. Update 2008.04.09 Forbidden.
- North-south/east-west minefield avoidance. Do not do this!
- Starbase friendly fire. (I'd never heard of this until today!) Forbidden.
- Oviously, anything involving editing game files is forbidden.
rate of play.
- First 30 years: daily.
- After that, when two people request slowdown, three times a week. Update 2008.04.02: Later perhaps dropping to even slower.
- Generally: pauses for important holidays, unexpected problems etc. as required.
proposed victory criteria. After at least 100 years, at least four of
- 30% planets Update 2008.04.02: maybe more - under discussion.
- tech 25 in 5 fields
- exceed score 9000
- exceed second place score by 30% Update 2008.04.02: maybe more - under discussion.
- production capacity (resources) > 150000
- own 300 capital ships
- highest score after 130 years.
[/list]
Might change
- galaxy clumping, if it's popular Update 2008.04.02: it isn't popular, so no clumping.
- details of victory criteria

About me.
I've played three public multi-player games from the beginning and a few others as replacement for dropouts, but nothing since 2001.

[Updated on: Wed, 09 April 2008 05:47]
Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Mon, 31 March 2008 13:48
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: donjon on Mon, 31 March 2008 14:00
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Mon, 31 March 2008 15:31
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Braindead on Mon, 31 March 2008 18:53
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 01 April 2008 06:32
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: iztok on Tue, 01 April 2008 16:39
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: donjon on Tue, 01 April 2008 16:45
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Wed, 02 April 2008 03:42
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 01 April 2008 17:26
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Alter Ego on Tue, 01 April 2008 21:02
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 02 April 2008 05:13
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Mon, 31 March 2008 15:40
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Mon, 31 March 2008 18:41
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Wed, 02 April 2008 01:49
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Alter Ego on Wed, 02 April 2008 03:50
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Soobie on Wed, 02 April 2008 04:40
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 02 April 2008 05:32
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: aphar on Wed, 02 April 2008 06:21
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Kettch on Wed, 02 April 2008 08:55
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 02 April 2008 11:37
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 02 April 2008 11:49
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 02 April 2008 12:08
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 02 April 2008 13:35
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: q974739 on Wed, 02 April 2008 12:47
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 02 April 2008 13:04
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 02 April 2008 13:39
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 02 April 2008 13:53
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Wed, 02 April 2008 16:15
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 02 April 2008 18:45
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Thu, 03 April 2008 03:09
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Thu, 03 April 2008 06:02
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Fri, 04 April 2008 05:37
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Fri, 04 April 2008 16:41
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: joseph on Fri, 04 April 2008 17:58
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Sat, 05 April 2008 09:13
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 02 April 2008 13:43
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Sulpholobus on Fri, 04 April 2008 04:35
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Fri, 04 April 2008 06:01
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Mon, 07 April 2008 10:25
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Mon, 07 April 2008 14:03
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Mon, 07 April 2008 14:22
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Mon, 07 April 2008 15:02
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Mon, 07 April 2008 20:17
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: aphar on Tue, 08 April 2008 17:21
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Kettch on Tue, 08 April 2008 17:46
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 08 April 2008 20:13
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 09 April 2008 05:49
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 09 April 2008 06:55
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: joseph on Wed, 09 April 2008 07:46
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 09 April 2008 09:46
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: joseph on Wed, 09 April 2008 07:55
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 09 April 2008 09:51
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Wed, 09 April 2008 10:26
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: djf01 on Thu, 10 April 2008 06:26
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Thu, 10 April 2008 06:57
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Thu, 10 April 2008 07:30
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Thu, 10 April 2008 14:58
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Kettch on Thu, 10 April 2008 16:12
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: joseph on Thu, 10 April 2008 16:52
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Thu, 10 April 2008 18:48
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: AlexTheGreat on Fri, 11 April 2008 04:30
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Sat, 12 April 2008 10:03
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Sat, 12 April 2008 13:27
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Hilton on Sat, 12 April 2008 01:23
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Sat, 12 April 2008 09:43
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Sat, 12 April 2008 10:12
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Sat, 12 April 2008 13:28
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: joseph on Sun, 13 April 2008 07:42
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Sun, 13 April 2008 09:49
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Sun, 13 April 2008 10:16
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Hilton on Sat, 12 April 2008 11:37
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Sat, 12 April 2008 12:05
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Sun, 13 April 2008 10:34
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Sun, 13 April 2008 10:36
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: aphar on Sun, 13 April 2008 11:09
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Sun, 13 April 2008 11:53
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: joseph on Mon, 14 April 2008 03:24
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Mon, 14 April 2008 06:29
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Mon, 14 April 2008 16:44
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Mon, 14 April 2008 16:46
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: joseph on Mon, 14 April 2008 18:18
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Tue, 15 April 2008 00:45
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Hilton on Sun, 13 April 2008 19:59
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Mon, 14 April 2008 05:38
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Sulpholobus on Tue, 15 April 2008 03:43
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Tue, 15 April 2008 07:50
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Tue, 15 April 2008 08:01
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 15 April 2008 10:05
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Wed, 16 April 2008 11:07
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 16 April 2008 11:17
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Thu, 17 April 2008 07:33
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Thu, 17 April 2008 10:16
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Tue, 15 April 2008 14:53
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 15 April 2008 15:07
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Kettch on Tue, 15 April 2008 15:24
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 16 April 2008 14:24
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Thu, 17 April 2008 13:12
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Kettch on Thu, 17 April 2008 15:38
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: djf01 on Fri, 18 April 2008 03:08
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Fri, 18 April 2008 12:28
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Fri, 18 April 2008 13:43
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Fri, 18 April 2008 14:20
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Sulpholobus on Thu, 17 April 2008 17:24
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Hilton on Fri, 18 April 2008 23:56
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Sat, 19 April 2008 04:44
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Sun, 20 April 2008 09:37
		UPDATE Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Sun, 20 April 2008 15:53
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Mon, 21 April 2008 14:15
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Mon, 21 April 2008 14:21
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Mon, 21 April 2008 14:25
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Tue, 22 April 2008 04:53
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Tue, 22 April 2008 04:56
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Tue, 22 April 2008 04:59
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 22 April 2008 06:55
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: djf01 on Tue, 22 April 2008 12:07
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Tue, 22 April 2008 11:40
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: rolfverberg on Tue, 22 April 2008 13:04
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Tue, 22 April 2008 13:30
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 22 April 2008 13:40
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 22 April 2008 13:36
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Kettch on Tue, 22 April 2008 15:11
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Darkwyng on Tue, 22 April 2008 15:12
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Tue, 22 April 2008 15:23
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Kettch on Tue, 22 April 2008 15:21
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Tue, 22 April 2008 15:54
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Tue, 22 April 2008 16:27
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Tue, 22 April 2008 17:43
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Tue, 22 April 2008 18:38
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Hilton on Tue, 22 April 2008 22:39
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: djf01 on Tue, 22 April 2008 23:08
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: djf01 on Tue, 22 April 2008 23:56
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 23 April 2008 03:00
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Wed, 23 April 2008 03:35
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 23 April 2008 05:21
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Wed, 23 April 2008 05:30
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 23 April 2008 07:26
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: djf01 on Wed, 23 April 2008 10:31
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Wed, 23 April 2008 10:48
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Wed, 23 April 2008 13:24
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: jimroberts on Wed, 23 April 2008 13:43
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: donjon on Wed, 23 April 2008 15:39
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: djf01 on Wed, 23 April 2008 18:41
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Thu, 24 April 2008 02:46
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: m.a@stars on Thu, 24 April 2008 06:09
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: donjon on Thu, 24 April 2008 12:50
		Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted By: Micha on Wed, 23 April 2008 03:30

Previous Topic:	New game: LSD
Next Topic:	mega newb

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Mon May 20 20:57:37 EDT 2024