Team Game Starting

Ironhawk · #1 March 7th, 2005, 08:42 PM

Wow! I thought this game was going to have more buildup, but instead its just been all-out warfare from turn 9-10 on. My apologies for not double-turning last night. I was just too spent to do another turn. Probably I will be last out when I get home from work and I will double-turn then.

As to Ulm crying about being "abaondoned by the Vans" all I have to say is: best laid plans of mice & men, etc, etc. Stop *****ing cause I am the only thing standing b/w Man/Abysia and you.

msew · #2 March 8th, 2005, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Ironhawk said:
Stop *****ing cause I am the only thing standing b/w Man/Abysia and you.

I retort: self preservation

if it were not for that my lands would have been burnt to the ground by the invaders!

msew · #3 March 8th, 2005, 09:16 PM

okie seems team B is conceding.

At least that is what I got from the IRC conversation and that no one has done their turns. or what not.

So are we up for another team game?

Same rules?

The map this time will be 100-110 provinces. That will stop the cramped capital placement and will stop massive fighting from turn 9 onwards.

Conflicts over expansion provinces should occur around turn 15 or so.

With a bigger map that will occur. Further when that occurs and one side wins, they are not just a hop skip and a jump away from the opposition's capital.

In short: 80 provinces is too small for 6 people in a team game setting.

~msew

Arralen · #4 March 9th, 2005, 03:03 AM

I'm interested playing on Parganos v2 (still), but only if teams aren't pre-made. I hate being pressed to use the kitten/feeder strategy.

Maybe my modified Chandrea Map (with or without the Steel Ovens) would be even better: It's wraparound and has lots of "ferry connections" between the islands, so hiding a week "feeder" nation behind a strong one will not work ...

Ironhawk · #5 March 9th, 2005, 05:35 PM

Your end goal seems to be a team game without team-integrated nation designs, right? If that is the case then you should just request that as a house rule. Cause you can follow an integrated strategy even without knowing your teammates or map in advance, its just more risky to do so.

Make a house rule that is like... honestly I just dont even know how to phrase it. Cause it is such a grey area. If I play a nation and choose to take no earth magic whatsoever in the hopes that one of my allies will have it and be able to feed me earth items, is that a feeder strategy? What level of limitations are you wanting to place on team interaction?

quantum_mechani · #6 March 9th, 2005, 06:12 PM

I think I would draw the line at regular gold shipments. Disaster relief or specific one time gifts are one thing, but regular gold transfer as part of a wider strategy should be outlawed (not sure on the wording myself).

Ironhawk · #7 March 9th, 2005, 06:43 PM

Yeah, its *very* hard to phrase. Because I think its just a fact of life that allies will help each other. Be it with gold, gems, items, etc. That is the purpose of the alliance. I mean, if I was playing in a team game and one of my allies was in very intense combat I would certainly funnel them as much gold/gems/items as I could budget. Cause if they die then the chance of my team losing goes way up.