[Hoplosternum]

I am glad we are lifting the Capital attack (I didn't even realise it was a rule after the first 10 turns!) so we can continue and play this one out.

I agree that changes should be made for the next game. I am not sure of the Vassal idea, it would be a massive change. Especially if there was no way for a normal to win without it. Surely it would mean that the Overlord would cut a deal with a couple of normals and kill off the remainder? This game has suffered from gang ups vs some of the Overlords (but I think the map was partially responsible for that, a wrap around would have made that far less desireable) but at least they were defensively strong. A normal being ganged up on by an Overlord and a couple of neighbouring normals hardly seems a recipe for fun. I like allied victory condition options though. But there is a danger that they spark brief early diplomacy - then we just have fixed adhoc teams for the rest of the game (and those who are not 'in' the teams are simply picked off).

I like the idea that the Overlords get more attack options, especially as the game progresses. Being able to attack neutrals without dominion seems a good change for a start. But the attack standard idea seems too cheap to me. Something else is needed to help the Overlords but I am not sure that is quite it. If the next game restricted the normals Dom strength then it allows a lot more fruitful dom pushing by the Overlords. Coupled with the ability to actually attack capitals and take indies without their dom there would make a big difference.

I think even with the existing rules the next game would play out very differently. I know I have changed my ideas on what I should have done. I certainly saw the Overlords as more of a threat than an opportunity but that was before I saw how the game played out. I don't think we should use these rules again as they are too restrictive on the Overlords. But I don't think the game format needs to be completely changed. Players would adapt their play a lot in a second game.