After playing a 5 player game a few weeks ago,
we would like to start a new game with some more
players, potentially between 8 and 12. We will play
on a weekly basis, maybe 4 weeks in a row, 3 hours
each, for a complete game.

Unfortunately, there will be some players eventually
missing for a week and jump in again in the next
week. Our first idea is to give every player the
option to denote a specific secretary which will lead
the nation, if the player is missing for a week.

If this option is not used (no trust, no given advices
before, no possibility to denote someone... whatever)
we are right now thinking about a "Missing Player Policy".
What would you do in such cases?

I think about a nation without a ruler, temporarily.
-> no taxes, no war, no regulations...

Just to do nothing with this nation would lead to an
incredible advantage for neighboring nations.
Therefore there should be some basic rules for
- missing players
- late arrivals
- early leavers

My first proposal is:

**********************************************
Missing Player Policy
THIS RULES APPLY ONLY IF A PLAYER IS TEMPORARILY
NOT AVAILABLE AND HAS NO SECRETARY APPOINTED

1. TAX COLLECTION
No tax collection at all. Tax revolts occur normally, if the
player could not pay the tax in the usual way, choosing
border cities first.

2. POPULATION EXPANSION
Population expansion happens with the usual restrictions.
Fruitful areas are expanded first followed by unfruitful
areas in the center of a civilization, followed by border
lands up to the limits of each area. Afterwards all areas
are expanded over the limits of the area if possible.

3. CENSUS
Census happens as usual.

4. SHIP CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
No ship construction possible. Ships are maintained for
one turn from the treasury and dropped in the second
turn.

5. MOVEMENT
Only surplus population is moved to adjacent areas,
without usage of ships. Thereby only areas are populated
which are previously empty or less populated than the
population limit. The area to be moved in is never
overpopulated by movement!
Military does not count for movement order. Road
building can not be used.
Ships do move as much as possible in the direction of
the starting area of a civilization. Cloth Making and
Astronavigation can be used.

6. CONFLICT
Conflicts are resolved as usual.

7. CITY CONSTRUCTION
No new cities are built.

8. REMOVAL OF SURPLUS POPULATION
Removal of population happens as usual.

9. /14. CITY SUPPORT CHECK
City support checks as usual. Border cities are
chosen first to be eliminated if necessary.

10. TRADE CARDS ACQUISITION
No trade cards are drawn or bought.

11. TRADE
No trade occurs.

12. CALAMITY RESOLUTION
The player can’t be named as secondary victim of a
calamity. As no trade or trade card acquisition occurs,
there should be no calamity for a missing player
(except Volcano, Flood or Cyclone). The missing
player can’t be beneficiary or controller of someone
others calamity.

13. SPECIAL ABILITIES PHASE
No special abilities can be used.

15. CIVILIZATION CARDS ACQUISITION
No civilization cards can be bought.

16. RETURN OF EXCESS COMMODITY CARDS
If the player holds more than 8 commodity cards,
the surplus are drawn by random and surrendered.

17. MOVEMENT OF SUCCESSION MARKERS
AST markers are moved as usually.
*********************************************

Hi Merlok

Welcome...

Maybe you'd like to repost this in game variants.

The problem you describe is a thing we have experience before too.
Most of the time we realized after 10 hours of playing that someone had to cathc a bus or train or so, and that's very dissapointing for the rest, so a good compromise should be made.


We realized this is best to do before you even start a game, like you suggest, so that in case of a player having to leave (temporary) every player is prepared.

Actually we haven't got a good policy for this. It's all compromise and unfair for some players. But it's choosing between either playing the game being a bit unfair or on the other hand to not play at all. When you have 10 players 'round a table most of em would choose for the first option.




We would consider all tokens as Barbarians and all cities as Pirate cities.
Freeze the AST marker (don't move back for no cities).
Discard all tradecards and leave all advances purchased by this player as is. Keep in mind the advances for this player when it comes to 'metalworking' , urbanism.
Any choices made for losses are done by the player with the most units in stock.
The missing player is considered as standalone barbarian (not as a general barbarian) and thus cannot be the target of FX like calamity's and cards like Monotheism, (though by Universal Doctrine)

Now you can finish the game with a reasonably fair competition for the neighbours of the missing player.


Would the player return. He can just take place and continue, Keeping in mind he's got a big era to catch up (which will reasonably not work) but still he can play and wait for a civil war or Tyranny to get some more room.

Would he be removed from the table, he's still counting as player with 100 units in stock.



NOTE1:
This will never be an official rule, but just a houserule or variant. We like to use this rule at our group only. Still we prefer to let a player that cannot make it to the full game to NOT PLAY AT ALL. It might be sad for that person, but fair and not dissapointing for the rest of the players. Still he can be there for fun or act as Gamemaster (or waiter, hehe).

NOTE2:
The possibility of a totally new player joining the game halftime when Civil War occured, used to be a rule in Advanced Civilization. This is removed in the Expansion Rules. Still a player who has started the game and would eventually be removed from the board by calamities, or battle is still counting as player and can return by Civil War or Tyranny.

Looking at your option:

Who is deciding where to move tokens of the missing player?


you can always decide to ask a substitute player and if no-one is available see if you can know in advance if a player is going to miss a game.

This way you could play with one less player and share one nation by two persons. One week one player is playing, the other week the other person is playing this nation.

You could randomly choose (before picking nations) who is left out for that day (and will be playing susbstitute the next)

Ofcourse you can make notes who was left out during a game so that the next full game another person will be left out.

I tried to make this sure by given guidelines.
So usually tokens do not move. They only move
if they are somewhere as surplus population.
As they are "unguided by a ruler", they will move
- only if necessary,
- directly into free areas,
- without producing war
- into the most fruitful areas (the one with the highest counters)
- areas without adjacent enemies
- trying to stay close to their homelands.

I think the actual "controler" of this moves will be the "neutral"
gamemaster (me ) hopefully without any choices to make,
as I hope that the rules above are clear.

Some more general words:
As we are playing for 4 weeks in a row on the same game,
there will be 10 players starting, some are missing some time,
but I still hope these players will be back in the next week.
All friends of mine...
So your rule of "barbarians/pirates" may be acceptable for a one day
game. But for our kind of game we need a chance for players
to stay ingame, if they are missing just an hour or so.

Greetings
MerlokDD

You should designate a neutral observer game host that plays for the players that cannot attend. Not having any civ of their to play, they can kep the game going when others are not present.

Like I said, This is a good thing anyway, but when you have 5 players it's tricky to take one out.

Last week we had the problem of one player dropping out for the first week.
We wanted to offer his seat for the next week, so we decided to start with
9 players, playing 10 nations on a area for 10 civilzations.

The 10th nation was played by the "missing player policy" stated above.
Hellas extended it's borders, claimed some nice area, but did not build
any cities. Gaming was quite ok, but we fastly realized that the neigbors
were quite in trouble. Nobody wanted to go straight into war with "him"
(due to fairness) and he had masses of population on board (big area,
but no cities, no ships...)

This week this player will be back, play his nation and build 5 or 6
cities from scratch. This should give him a lot of fun to play, he is
3 steps back on the AST. I think he will have all gaming experience
offered by the game, also being a strong nation with some military
influence. Maybe without a chance of winning, but still in the middle
of the game.

Yes it's a compromise

It gives the opportunity for you all to play and for players who can't make it all the time to still compete.

But you have to accept some unbalancing in the game

Guess when you choose for this option in the first place all players (including the missing one(s)) should agree on this before even starting the game to not get problems afterwards like players who think it's unfair.

To be fair I would do the following:



I'd make it an official optional rule.

Let me know what you guys think.

pff, takes some more reading before I think it's good to be added to the rulebook.

In Advanced Civilization, there used to be a rule that could add a new player during the game, but this has been removed for the expansion. I certainly I agree it's unfair to still hold on to that rule, cause it's unbalancing the game a lot. (lack of room, lack of tradecards, a new player might even win by just copying a player)

Therefore, a rule in the rulebook that give the option for a player to leave during the game and to later rejoin is not a good idea if you ask me.

Still I agree, there should be some optional rule for player's leaving the game and don't come back. Something like above.

I agree. We need a rule for people to leave but not one for people to join.

Same opinion for me. It was just a necessary option for a group playing
6 weeks in a row, with some players missing one evening here and then.
No need, to place it in the rule book.

This is my proposal:

This should be mentioned in the rulebook somewhere at the end. The right numbering should be applied conceirning its place in the rulebook.



In addition, at the start of the scenario handbook/appendix there should be included the following:



In addition there should be a mention of 'out of play areas' in the map defenitions:

I think there are two approaches:

1. Kick him out of the game entirely.
2. Let him keep at least his actual placement and achievements.

I prefer the second option, so only two minor changes to your last proposal (4 and 10):

Some comments:

ok, well actually, that was covered by my nr. 1 point.
maybe it's better, to change that.

1. If desired, note all purchased civilization advances, AST position and current VP's of the leaving player (32.1).

and leve the rest as is.

You can later decide whether his score is actually counting or not.

Some players may prefer to NOT record scores for a leaving player, so I left that to optional.

It's up to anyone to either write down or leave purchased civilization advances on the player mat. (for it may save room or something)

thesame for AST position

The tradecards however need to be shuffled back.