MP Game - Zap's New game with House Rules

Stormbinder · #1 May 26th, 2004, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zapmeister:

quote:
Originally posted by Norfleet:
Actually, there's a few loopholes there which are a direct side effect of this: Since the castled provinces can't be jacked, you simply jack all of the opposing provinces devoid of castles...and build castles in a third of them. Since the rest are completely undefendable, somebody else will then jack them....and build castles in a third of the ones that are left. Pretty soon your entire castle census will become a giant jumbled mess as you will automatically lose of all of the noncastled provinces because they're completely undefendable.

I'll let you know if this actually happens after the game. I seriously doubt it, but won't be afraid to admit it if I'm wrong.

I agree it'll not happen. Norf do not have a good grip on mathematics. Sure, because of territories changing hands the total perecentage of the castles _may_ increase a little. But the rule of 1/3 will always be in place for every new conquerer. There is no way the whole map will be covered by castles with this rule, it's mathematically impossible under any resonable scenario. My guess that max final percentage of the castle to not-castled provinces in our game will be 40-45% to 55-60%. And this is worst case scenario, I suspect it'll be lower than that.

Anyway, there is not much point of arguing about it now. We will see after the game. As Zap, I'll be first to admit if my predictions will be wrong, but I doubt that I'll have to.

Zapmeister · #2 May 26th, 2004, 05:16 AM

Just an update: so far I've had to turn away Nagot, Niblet, Nunchuck Exponent, Ninny I'm NOT, Natty Natt and Nogblot.

Sorry guys, but NO EXCEPTIONS to the house rules!!

Stormbinder · #3 May 26th, 2004, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
Just an update: so far I've had to turn away Nagot, Niblet, Nunchuck Exponent, Ninny I'm NOT, Natty Natt and Nogblot.

Sorry guys, but NO EXCEPTIONS to the house rules!!

Hehe.

BTW how many players are you looking for Zapmeister?

Zapmeister · #4 May 26th, 2004, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stormbinder:
BTW how many players are you looking for Zapmeister?

Up to 17. But at the rate we're going, we could be playing in Aran

Stormbinder · #5 May 26th, 2004, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zapmeister:

quote:
Originally posted by Stormbinder:
BTW how many players are you looking for Zapmeister?

Up to 17. But at the rate we're going, we could be playing in Aran

Heh.

If you don't want to wait for 17 people, than with one more player (to make it seven total) we could very well play Karan ("dry" Version), if you, as well as everybody else, would like to. IMHO 7-8 is an ideal players density for Karan in MP.

It's you call of course though, I am not trying to push you.

[ May 26, 2004, 08:02: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Yossar · #6 May 26th, 2004, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stormbinder:
There is no way the whole map will be covered by castles with this rule, it's mathematically impossible under any resonable scenario.

Depends how you define "reasonable". Potentially, every province on the map could have a castle on it, but that would probably be virtually impossible without purposely trying to do that. Reasonably I couldn't see it getting much higher than 50%.

Cohen · #7 May 26th, 2004, 09:55 AM

The fact is that Norfleet is right about castles.
They're the lone way to defend a province.

If there's no castle many spells can burn your temple.
Armies can do that too, since PD isn't worthing it's cost above 10 or 15 ... and 10 or 15 means a very weak army composed of the worst of your troops.

[ May 26, 2004, 08:57: Message edited by: Cohen ]