MP Mists of Time: Early Era Game [full] - Page 3

Iron Duke · #1 August 8th, 2009, 04:27 AM

just to let you know, if the game is delayed again, more than 6 hours, i'll probably miss my turn. I got a flight 10th of august and will be without net connection until 11 aug midnight. There's also a vacation plan under development, so I may be in need of a temporary sub for a week or two. It's still not for certain, I'll make sure to inform the host.

Firewalker if you will have to delay the game, PM me and we'll see if we can work out the delay together...

TwoBits · #2 May 22nd, 2009, 01:02 PM

Well, I haven't played an "at large" MP game yet (just some games with a small group of friends), but I'd like to give it a go, if you don't mind.

If that's OK, I'd like to try:

Pangaea, T'ien Ch'i, or Marverni.

Thanks

Oh, by the way, what's "Streamers & Standards"?

Firewalker · #3 May 22nd, 2009, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoBits

Well, I haven't played an "at large" MP game yet (just some games with a small group of friends), but I'd like to give it a go, if you don't mind.

If that's OK, I'd like to try:

Pangaea, T'ien Ch'i, or Marverni.

Thanks

Oh, by the way, what's "Streamers & Standards"?

Sounds like you fit the bill perfectly.

Streamers & Standards is a mod that replaces the stock banners with more distinctive and larger icons. It's just cosmetic. I think it was originally made to differentiate the different eras of each nation for the mega games, but ever since I played one using the mod, I've never liked to go back to the stock icons.

hEad · #4 May 22nd, 2009, 01:32 PM

Abysia, Marverni, Fomoria please.

thejeff · #5 May 22nd, 2009, 02:07 PM

I'm not technically new, but I haven't played much MP. None in the last year or so.
So if you'll have me anyway, I'd like to try:
Mictlan, T'ien Ch'i or Ermor.

The only quibble I have with the victory conditions is that non capital VP provinces are risky. Everyone castle them or expect the game to end suddenly with a mass teleport attack.

llamabeast · #6 May 22nd, 2009, 03:18 PM

I have seen quite a few games end miserably with non-capital victory conditions, so I third thejeff's comment. Not that I'm actually playing, so feel free to ignore me! Capital VPs seem to work quite well.

shard · #7 May 22nd, 2009, 09:25 PM

I'll play, not entirely new but haven't touched dom3 for over a year.

Sauromatia, Fomoria, Niefelheim

Stretch · #8 May 23rd, 2009, 02:24 AM

I'd like victory points in capitals. Maybe something like 50% of the world's capitals to win, unless we get a lot of people and then 40%.

hEad · #9 May 23rd, 2009, 08:29 AM

Perhaps victory conditions can be somewhat dynamic? For instance, once it gets to teh stage where their appears to be a winner, ask players to declare them. If it is unanamous, then the leading player wins, if not, then those who voted for the leading player join in a campaign to rid the world of belligerents - who knows, maybe these belligerents may form a counter alliance and fight against them in a war for liberty.

Victory conditions that fit the evolution of the game rather than an arbitary number, would in my opinion, breath a bit of new life into the end game still with out it requiring a individual total conquest.

Firewalker · #10 May 23rd, 2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hEad

Perhaps victory conditions can be somewhat dynamic? For instance, once it gets to teh stage where their appears to be a winner, ask players to declare them. If it is unanamous, then the leading player wins, if not, then those who voted for the leading player join in a campaign to rid the world of belligerents - who knows, maybe these belligerents may form a counter alliance and fight against them in a war for liberty.

Victory conditions that fit the evolution of the game rather than an arbitary number, would in my opinion, breath a bit of new life into the end game still with out it requiring a individual total conquest.

My experience is that standard victory games usually grind down to a few players remaining, who concede to the one who is doing best once the game becomes more of a chore than fun. So it is usually an informal version of what you've described. What about deciding a given turn ahead of time -- 50,60, whatever -- that a vote is taken and then a sort of sudden death war ensues like you've described? That could be interesting, but it would depend on where the game was at.

I like VP games because it sets a goal for everyone. It does shape the way the game goes ahead of time. Decisions get made based on VPs needed. But, it also places a definite end point to the game.