MP: Chronicles_MA - General Game Discussion

[quantum_mechani]

No vps is fine with me too, it's just the leaving non-cap ones scattered around that seems dangerous. For one thing some nations are _far_ better at quick grab tactic than others. I would not underestimate how quickly, say, Ry'leh could make a grab for the winning number.

[Baalz]

/me shrugs. If somebody is obviously the winner its usually not hard to get universal concession without having to play down to the bitter end (particularly in a RP game where "surrender" is potentially the way to go). If somebody is not the obvious winner a VP snatch just feels like a trick to sudden death a game which was still up in the air.

[solmyr]

First of all, though it's a roleplaying centric game, I still wish everyone play for win. (though it's not powergaming for win, just win according to the selected nation's ideal)

I don't care too much about VPs. If you guys have played Civilization series, victory can be achieve in various ways and I believe it fits well in our scenario, too. Consider these:
1. Conquest victory: a player took a certain percentage of total provinces wins, war monger's choice.
2. Magic dominance: a player took all five global enchantment slots with GEs from five different research paths wins, researcher's choice.
3. Diplomacy victory: An assembly is held every, say 10 turns. Everyone vote for a nation that is, according to their ideology, the last nation they want to destroy. They cannot vote for themselves and must vote one. A player turns out to have a dominate popularity wins.

[lch]

"See MoM or SMAC"

[Lokean]

What about using both the capital and map VPs, requiring 16 of 22 to win? That would mean having your capital and all the map VPs, for example.

Regardless, Llamabeast has fixed his bug, so I'll upload the game to the Llamaserver in approximately 12 hours. If there's no general consensus I'll go with either a vanilla victory or the suggestion above, depending on if it seems VPs are favoured overall.

[Ylvali]

That sounds like a good suggestion Lokean.

[calmon]

I would vote for 'graphs off' in this game.

This is a RPG game with hopefully a lot of exciting tales, intrigues and great wars.

The graphs just take some of the fun, everyone sees the truth instantly.

[Tifone]

Yay, that's a nice idea. Expecially as in MA there are many recruitable scouts so it shouldn't be a problem to use spionage and intelligente, far more interesting and in-character

[Wrana]

The variant with both kinds of VPs seems about right.
I would generally prefer to have graphs on - it seems silly, after all, that there no merchants or other rumormongers in the world from whom you can find out about general situation. However, in this particular case it's probably possible that we can generate such content ourselves, thus eliminating necessity of graphs. Still, I'm not sure...
Also, diplomacy victory is a sound idea. In PR-heavy game it's even possible for player to declare a vassality to other one if he is close to defeat. This allows weaker player to remain in game continuing to write stories, while his liege gets closer to overall victory (e.g., vassal votes as his liege wishes, possibly even contributing his VPs to lieges' total number). Of course, it's just an outline - agreements may differ from case to case, etc. If somebody's interested, please continue from this...

[solmyr]

I vote for close graph, too. That's how intrigue can stands out.