Rock the Cradle--Noob Only! (RUNNING)

earwicker7 · #1 November 5th, 2010, 12:16 AM

EDIT: ALL SPOTS ACCOUNTED FOR; GAME IN BEGINNING STAGES.

http://www.llamaserver.net/gameinfo....ock_the_Cradle

Hey, all. This will be my first MP game, so I'm kind of wanting to wade in with people who aren't going to slay me within a few rounds lol. So... I'm thinking "noob" should be defined as no more than 3 MP games under your belt. I'm also wanting to avoid mods for my first game, so, um, no mods

The game will be PBEM, with lovely me as your host. Here are the parameters I was thinking of:

Middle Age.

"Cradle of Dominions" map.

Turns start at 24 hours; will adjust as necessary (I don't want to call this a "busy person" game, but I do want it to be a "has a life" game

).

Number of players is hopefully ten, but if we can't get that within, say, a week, it's cool if we go to eight.

Non-standard settings: Score graphs disabled, 15 Hall-of-Fame. EDIT: By request, re-naming is allowed.

Diplomacy will be decided by vote... I really have no opinion, as it's my first MP game, so I'm good with the majority.

Water races are fine IF there are at least two of them. EDIT: We have two water races. Woohoo!

Abyssia - earwicker7
Arcoscephale - Korwin
Bandar Log - Colonial
Marignon - 13lackGu4rd
Pangaea - nrasch
R'yleh - CthulhuDreams

Atlantis Dead
Man Dead
Shinuyama Dead
Vanheim Dead

Domenje · #2 November 5th, 2010, 05:43 AM

i want to play as marigon

earwicker7 · #3 November 5th, 2010, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Domenje

i want to play as marigon

Sweet. You're in.

cwkjc · #4 November 5th, 2010, 11:22 AM

+1 as Bandar Log

Nosantee · #5 November 5th, 2010, 11:41 AM

Arcoscophale reporting in.

earwicker7 · #6 November 5th, 2010, 12:01 PM

6 more spots available... get 'em while you can!

Korwin · #7 November 5th, 2010, 03:21 PM

dips for Vanheim.

Whats the reasoning behind the disabled score graphs?
Not really against it, but ... it seems to be hard to make an reasoned choice without those graphs.
(well Scouts seems to be more important than they allready are.)

What are the choices for the diplomacy vote?

earwicker7 · #8 November 5th, 2010, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Korwin

dips for Vanheim.

Whats the reasoning behind the disabled score graphs?
Not really against it, but ... it seems to be hard to make an reasoned choice without those graphs.
(well Scouts seems to be more important than they allready are.)

What are the choices for the diplomacy vote?

Alright, you're in.

I like the graphs being disabled just for realism. Imagine that you are a general, and you're considering attacking an enemy's army; what's the first thing you do? You check the graphs and say, "No, that won't work... even though I only see 200 soldiers and I outnumber them ten to one, my chart says they have five times more total troops than I do, and their dominion is crazy, so I'll hold off for now."

I'd rather have players say, "I thought they were weak, then they destroyed me the next turn with their stealthed army!"

As far as diplomacy goes, my choice would be the following: no declaration of aggression needed, you can attack out of nowhere, but any treaties made are binding, with three turns warning needed to break them. This is just off the top of my head; I'm totally open to different ideas.

CthulhuDreams · #9 November 6th, 2010, 01:27 PM

This would be game three for me.

Can I join as Ryleh? It's my favorite nation for reasons that should be very obvious.

I would vote to enable score graphs.. it's pretty useful for knowing what the heck is going down, which will be more important in a newbie game.

Edit: I'm not in favour of 'binding' treaties. What does binding even mean? You're going to kick the offender out of the game?

earwicker7 · #10 November 6th, 2010, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CthulhuDreams

This would be game three for me.

Can I join as Ryleh? It's my favorite nation for reasons that should be very obvious.

I would vote to enable score graphs.. it's pretty useful for knowing what the heck is going down, which will be more important in a newbie game.

Edit: I'm not in favour of 'binding' treaties. What does binding even mean? You're going to kick the offender out of the game?

You're in as Ryleh!

As far as binding treaties go, I was just thinking of role-playing, where it's a world where a leader's word is considered important, and treaties are only broken after months of convincing the populace your decision is just. I have no problem with "Do what you want" if that's the general consensus, I've just heard that a lot of veterans say it's not a bad idea to have binding treaties (again, you can break them, just not without three turns notice). How does everyone else feel?

I'm pretty set on ditching the graphs, though. I just don't like them.