YARG - Yet Another RAND Game [Isokron's Midgard wins!]

[WraithLord]

TwoBits, yes.

Executor, this map is not 100% balanced and it's a matter of opinion and personal taste whether or not this is acceptable. Dominions is any way a game that is heavily influenced by luck (see: lab destroyed on turn three, or 1500 gold received on turn 1 etc) and I personally like it that way.
IMHO opinion 100% balanced games are more boring (not plain boring, just more boring). Anyway YARG1 does not strive to be fully balanced. I suggest to see how this game works out, if there are serious gripes when it ends we'll try to improve for the next round.

Also, for future reference, I wanted to ask what you guys think re. the following:
- How about if LA Ermor was allowed in this game, but had to pay a penalty. It's capital would be worth one VP to Ermor player but three VPs to any other player that controls it. In addition, Ermor player must control 11 Vps in order to win.
Would that balance Ermor awesomeness enough to allow it to join the game?

[WingedDog]

TwoBits
Yes.

Executor
It is a reworked for MP version of a map, so swams are not so nasty.

I was designing starting locations on this map for another game not so long ago, and I must say it is difficult to avoid placing anyone into the swamp or desert area.

Edit:
Ninjad by WraithLord.
WraithLord
I was thinking if Ermor is allowed in the game, perhabs there should be a starting dominion cap for him?

[ano]

Originally Posted by WraithLord

TwoBits, yes.
Also, for future reference, I wanted to ask what you guys think re. the following:
- How about if LA Ermor was allowed in this game, but had to pay a penalty. It's capital would be worth one VP to Ermor player but three VPs to any other player that controls it. In addition, Ermor player must control 11 Vps in order to win.
Would that balance Ermor awesomeness enough to allow it to join the game?

I'll tell you what will happen in this case.
Ermor's neighbours will be still crippled by his dominion while someone on another side of the map grows powerful. Then that "someone" teleports 6 stonerainers onto Ermor capital and the next turn gets 3 VP. Problem with Ermor is mainly with driving its neighbours out of the victory race and your suggestion doesn't help.
I may sound annoying but, IMO, Ermor, may be be allowed only
1) with fixed startlocs
2) somewhere in the map corner
3) its neighbours should be given some indirect bonuses like increased cap population.

All 3 quite easily doable in an hour of map editing. Under these conditions, I think, Ermor may be allowed in such a game.

[WraithLord]

My previous experience with Ermor shows it can sometimes be defeated by an alliance or even by a bless rush or SC rush. The real problem is you gain so little and sacrifice so much to achieve that. Putting a high price tag on Ermor's head in the form of 3 VPs should provide enough motivation and reward for players to come and kill Ermor.

When that is the case I don't see any reason to limit Ermor. Let him do the best he can to survive under *these* conditions.

[Executor]

WingedDog, Wrathlord,
I know it's impossible to make perfect balanced maps and positions, and I know luck is a great factor in the game, finding 50% conjuration makes a huge difference, but I'm just saying while those ingame event can't be stopped, nor should they, start locations can, and should.

If one starts in the middle of 10 farm provinces and the other player starts in the middle of 10 swamp provinces, well I'll bet on the first guy, and those sort of things should be avoided as much as possible.
I know some nations must start next to the swamp, or deserts, but they don't need to start in the very middle of it, province number 15 for example, which was marked as a start position in a game I was in for some reason!?

As long as those sort of fatal starting locations aren't set I'm good. For example 42, or 51 instead of 15 should be workable, if you get what I', trying to say?

[ano]

I don't want to argue but I'm just sure that in no-diplo game noone will attack Ermor and if someone captures his capital it will be the case I described above. Ermorian capital is tasty as it is with 15 death gems in a poor magic world. Add 3 VP's on top of that and well equipped Seraphs/Cyclops/anything else with wall breaking items will appear there sooner or later

[Micah]

IMO VP incentives and penalties are nearly meaningless with such a high requirement to win. Having Ermor's cap be worth 3 VPs would be interesting if you needed 5 VPs to win, since that would put you within one conquest of winning, but when you still need to win multiple wars to win the game it isn't very helpful, especially since whoever does end up in game-winning contention can just scoop it up from the player that actually takes out Ermor in the first place.

A dominion restriction would probably be much more effective, but I'm not sure what a reasonable number would be. (This also hurts Ermor a bit more by preventing them from taking awe on their pretender)

[ano]

2Executor
That's exactly what I've been saying for a rather long time. IF we want an interesting competitive game we need to give everything more or less equal starting conditions. For example, I doubt one'll have a large motivation to play well if he starts in a desert/swamp region and I understand it well. WL, if you remember Qwerty, on turn 9 I had 8 neighbours, 3 of which were very close to my capital. On top of that there were only wastelands around me and if not my ally there I would have surely fallen very fast. But here are no allies and no diplomacy.
2Micah
Yes, dominion restriction might be a very good idea. Something like 7 should be fine, I think

[Gandalf Parker]

The map link only contains the .map files.
As I understand it, these are not needed by the players. Only the graphic file MUST exist in the players maps directory to participate in the game? Or is this different for pbem games?

[ano]

Yes, only a graphic