Re: Team Game Starting
 

The desire to not have feeding nations comes from the idea that playing one isn't much fun. How much fun were you having buying a mage and sending gold to Vanheim? And yet there's no denying that it was an excellent strategy under the conditions.

I don't know if having a wrap-around map is a sufficient preventative measure, especially if it were larger than the one we were using. You tell me. If we used a wrap around map, would your team dare to use a similar strategy?

Re: Team Game Starting
 

I'd agree with that assessment. I like too how it does not stop "feeding" which we have been having such trouble defining - because, as you, I feel that it is to a certain extent inherit in any team activity - but rather just makes it so that all nations need to stand on thier own due to the game settings, not a house rule.

Re: Team Game Starting
 

Chandrea Map is only nominally bigger:
Lots of it's 100 provinces are small and rather worthless. Furthermore, there are lots of "ferry links" between the island, connecting just the most valuable provinces.

I have tested it in SP and found it very difficult to defend an area bigger than one of the small island due ti the wraparound effects of the North-West / Southeast streched-out "continent": Plenty few possiblities for a pure "feeder" nation to hide ..

Re: Team Game Starting
 

Is 100 provinces enough? We just played on 80 and there was conflict from turn 9 on. If we move to 100 provinces that is only 4 more provinces per empire. By my guess that will only delay conflict by 2-3 more turns.

I guess the best question to ask would be: when do we want/expect war to break out?

Re: Team Game Starting
 

14 land provinces per player should be enough. Obviously, if someone really wants tio go for another player early, there are few things to stop him. Maybe up the indies to 9.

Re: Team Game Starting
 

Probably as much fun as I would have if I was playing the vans.

It is a TEAM game. The TEAM winning is that matters.

My nation (Ulm BF) was SLOW starter and end game ungodly powerful (given the game settings).

I am more than willing to spend time setting up blood economy and letting my allies take out the indies and shelter me from attacks.



Also I guess people's definition of "feeder nation" is a bit flawed.

A feeder nation would be one who's ONLY job was to feed other nations and have no purpose in the game except that.

For our strategy it was:


Vans: does no research, just makes troops
Ulm BF: only does blood research and alcheminizes
Arco: item construction, site searching spells, global spells, remote attack spells


Vans: early strong, middle semi strong, end weak
Ulm BF: early weak, middle semi strong, end ungodly
Arco: early medium weak, middle semi strong, end strong




Let's play again and you can see what strategy we will employ!


If the Ulm BF can be protected (either by his allies or by him not buying a blood mage every round), he is going to be a force to deal with.

Allied Game?
 

I think that a wraparound map would be sufficient to deter people from picking nations which were too weak to stand on thier own in the early parts of the game.

Also, I was thinking that we should call this an Allied game instead of a Team game? I know it's just semantics, but I think it would do something to address the differing viewpoints. Like people seem to be looking to play a game where all nations are independent and so could stand on thier own, but choose to work together. As opposed to the three nations being a single entity.

Anyway, whats the status on this one? Do we want to shoot for next weekend?

Re: Allied Game?
 

yeah

Re: Allied Game?
 

Well, if Saber Cherry's mod game gets gong, I may not have time to play in another team game. From my point of view, having that game start as a blitz would be the ideal situation.

Re: Allied Game?
 

Yeah, I would put Saber's game as my first priority as well. His mod sounds really cool. Check it out at:

Saber Cherry's Unit Rebalance Mod