MP: ANDalusian Sun: Lolomo wins after more than 2 years of gruelling competition!

[Amhazair]

Originally Posted by Calahan

If opinions are still allowed though, then for capital requirements I'd prefer 50%+1 rather than anything approaching 60%+, if 50%+1 is the minimum offer on the table that is. As given the field we have lined up it should probably be nearer 40% IMO, as the higher the quality of players, the more chance of a game dragging on forever if the goal posts are too high.

Changed to 8 since you me and Llama are all of the same opinion and the three of us together trump even Wraithlords opinion.

Originally Posted by Calahan

For the map, Riverlands looks a good choice. If all options for starts are open, then in order I'd prefer

1 - Non-marked VP capitals with preset starts done by a non-player.
2 - VP marked capitals with preset starts done by someone (note this can be a player)
3 - Non-marked VP capitals with random starts.


What should be avoided at all costs though is VP marked capitals with random starts. As then rush nations could start just 2 provinces away from a neighbour, and given the bulleyes marking, they can beeline for someone's capital and be attacking it on turn 4. [Calahan puts his broken record on again]. And rush nations certainly shouldn't be given this sort of unfair help and advantage from just the start locations. [Calahan turns off his broken record]

My personal preference is to heve VP's marked, mainly to avoid bookkeeping hassle, also since intelligence gathering is harder as it is in RAND games. I don't object to fixed starting locations. If you want to I hereby give you leave to arrange start locations. (Though you might want to wait till signups are finalised.) Possibly at the same time you do this:

Originally Posted by Calahan

ps2. I checked the Riverlands map last night (the "crown5" version of it), and there are one or two errors that need correcting, and one or two other things to tidy up a bit. Which I will probably volunteer to do myself unless someone else does.

Also, while I agree that it's very scant consolation for the rushee, I can't remember the last time I've seen a nation optimized for an early rush actually win a game. So it might* be argued that rushers in fact do need an unfair advantage.

* I'm still not arguing it though. Just playing devil's advocate for a moment.

[WraithLord]

hehe, just one of you three is enough to trump my opinion

8 VPs are cool
Option 2 (2 - VP marked capitals with preset starts done by someone ) is most preferable to me though the others are also ok (if somewhat time consuming due to added book-keeping).

Calahan's rules are golden and I know from experience that he's very good at balancing and fixing maps