Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

Oh well, if you need more time for discussion that's cool, then I have more time to setup the server... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

I would agree to any of the proposals presented. Consider me a yes vote.

My preference is for as little nerfing as possible.

I think no Imprisoned pretenders is a good one. No war for 10 turns sounds a bit contrived, a little stilted for a wargame, but I would agree to play with it.

SR

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

No imprisoned pretenders would be acceptable to me, too. I would prefer not to have a 10 turn truce.

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

One does not need imprisoned pretenders for dual blessing, BTW, but whatever you agree on is fine to me. I can have the server up as soon as you're ready to go, the problems I had are sorted out so far.

I'd suggest that everybody sends me his designed pretender by mail later on so that I can start off the game by myself and I know how to contact a player in case he becomes inactive in the game.

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

Sure, but it will force a trade-off on scales.

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

My only concern is getting stomped early on when there's absolutely nothing I can do to stop it. If someone is going to do that then there's really no reason to play--if the other players can't be bothered to allow their neighbors a fair shot at playing the game as well, we should know about it now.

So I'm a little concerned when the 10 turn truce is considered 'nerfing' by some people. It makes it sound like several people are planning on a) going high bless and b) rushing their neighbors straight off.

So I'm pretty unhappy with that. It's something I'd try to solve in-game if it comes up, but I'm not real interested in starting up a game just to be taken out turn 3, and have nothing I can do to stop it.

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

I personally favour the ten-turn truce to counteract the effects of the fixed starting location. ReverendZombie, I'd point out that the truce could help you too -- even Helheim isn't invincible, as Ich found out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Should we also set research to easy? Pashadawg did this with his own Dawn game, so I know it can be done - and it would not only offer another solution to rushing, it would also let us access spells that normally we wouldn't have the time to get on a map this size.

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

Setting indies to a 8 or 9 can help address your concerns without resorting to the 10-turn truce.

A full complement of players on a smallish map seems to naturally lend itself to early conflict.

Rather than layer on house rules, we might try a map more suited to the kind of game you are looking for.

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

I'm willing to take my lumps. As I said, this is my first time with Helheim, and I don't expect to do that well. I'm not that great of a player, anyway.

Re: New Dawn - need players and server
 

It looks like we have one person strongly in favour of a truce, one person strongly against, and a bunch of people who can live with it. Darrel, you were the one who originally proposed it - where do you stand?

This only works for certain nations; Caelum can fly right over the indies, nations with stealthy units can sneak past, etc.

Even beelining for a neighbour would take 4 or 5 turns anyway, and would leave you vulnerable. I would rather not make either option a "my way or the highway" issue, so how about we go with the majority rule, and if we're still tied, have no truce?