Global War (use new thread pls)

[CUnknown]

Okay, sounds good QM. Let's make discussing military forces (anyones) off limits, and giving battle screenshots is also off-limits.

But, if you want to say "Hey, I think Ermor is researching to Tartarians, we should gang up on him."

Wait, is that okay?

See, I don't think that is okay, either.

Maybe just as long as all military plans are off limits, including yours. Like, is saying "Just thought you might want to know, Ermor is probably researching like crazy. I think he wants Tartarians, he'll probably get them in 5-10 turns." that okay? Thing is... if the person you are talking to knows you are attacking them currently, then that is almost an attempt at military coordination, imo.

[Cerlin]

Maybe more just like rumors from around the world?

"I hear Pythium and Abysia are at war...and its a stalemate" or something may be ok. That is a pretty neutral statement but at the same time could be used by either side kinda thing.

[CUnknown]

Rumors are cool!

Just no mention of your personal forces. You shouldn't say "I am at war with Ermor." Although you can give a screenshot of the map where Ermor is seiging your capital.

Neutral factions are going like hotcakes!!

Maybe we should allow 3 Neutrals? It's just that I am actually worried about Evil. They should be an unstoppable hoard in the beginning. 8 v 7 is actually not that bad of odds, especially if 3 of the 7 are super-factions with bonuses in the beginning like Iron Mines.

[Cerlin]

Maybe adding more neutrals and making them rumor mills? Like it tends to be going? Maybe giving them a little less gold (like 1000?) Just an idea. If you had 3 of them instead of 2 that may make it more balanced for both sides? So even if people cannot communicate they can get hints and rumors from the neutral players, so they would have value of traders historically. Passing along some hint of how the world is going? And maybe all players could use vague AAR's in the thread to make it interesting? Just some ideas.

[DonCorazon]

I will go with EA - Tir Na Nog, as they seem to be about as pure as it gets. No Blood or Death if I recall, but sneaky buggers, nevertheless. I am flexible though, so if any of The League of Justice think we need something else for the team, just PM me.

Looks fun, thanks for organizing CU!

-DC

[moderation]

Just want to make sure: Multi-path death spells are okay for the good guys so long as no death gems are used right? Vengeance of the Dead comes to mind. Doesn't seem like the nicest thing to do, but I think thematic arguments can be made both ways.

[Cerlin]

"punishing the evil for killing the innocent"
Even though im an evil player, this one sounds ok to me. Thematic and doesnt technically use death gems, though you might have to if you are going to empower...

[Tuidjy]

If you want rumors, the GM should do it. I think that the only communication
outside the Good league should be a trading thread.

And for my Pythium, it would be MA. I think that the good guys would be
best off with MA Pythium/Marignon/Mictlan/Ulm. By the way, my line up is more
for thematic reasons than for brute force. All four nations are human and seem
to care about their population.

But the more I think about it, the more I believe that the Good are doomed if
the neutrals are allowed to talk besides trade. If I were a neutral, and knew
that at the end ...

Hmm... Why am I not playing EA Jotunheim as neutral, again? :-)

[CUnknown]

Perhaps there should be 5 Good factions.

I keep waffling back and forth on the Neutral talking-ability thing. The best thing about Good is that they can discuss freely.. We should all vote on this issue to decide it.

[quantum_mechani]

One other things that doesn't make a lot of sense to me is how evil races can make deals (and NAPs) with neutrals, but not other evils. I guess there is not a good way around this though.

EDIT: But the coordination with other good races is primarily of value because you are on the same page with them, you all have the same victory condition.