MP Game - Zap's New game with House Rules

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Yossar:

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%.

---

That's my point.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Cohen:
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.

Nobody is talking about prohibiting all castles Cohen. You can (and should) build a strong mutually supporting network of castles, covering up to 1/3 of all your provinces (more in potentially hot spots), together with temples. (and btw who said that you have to build temples in _every_ province?) Than you'll rely on your castles backbone to retaliate against raiders and destroy them. Even loss of single not fully equiped SC is much worse for attacker than loss of 1 turn province income (and possibly temple) for you.

IMHO this would make the gameplay richer and clearly closer to what was intended by devs - instead of covering each and every province by crappy castles, you actually have to choose where to build them , based upon your strategical and tactical situation, your intelligence on the enemy, local resourses and your future plans. With copycated castles in every province all these points are mostly irrelivent.


Last but not least - keep in mind that everybody is in the same boat. So it would be equally easy or hard for everybody to defend/attack their territory.

[Stormbinder]

All right, password was send. I'll design and upload my pretender when it will become clear what map/settings we would be playing.

[Stormbinder]

double post

[ May 26, 2004, 19:21: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

[Zapmeister]

Bump.

I'm curious as to why we're not getting many players. Do people not like the house rules, or the idea of registering with a non-playing registrar?

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
I'm curious as to why we're not getting many players. Do people not like the house rules, or the idea of registering with a non-playing registrar?

I personally don't like the limits on castles, especially since the nations I'd like to play are either blood nations or Ermor, and both have a higher than normal need for castles.

[Balmoth]

I want to join as Arcoscephale.

I had trouble creating a MoseHansen account, but I will send my pwd and mosehansen id, as soon as I get it.

[Stormbinder]

All right, we seem to have 7 players now. What do you say Zapmeister, are we waiting for more or we are good to go?

[Zapmeister]

Stormbinder, could you take it over?
I'm afraid I've totally lost interest in Dominions, and won't be playing any more, at least for a while.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
Stormbinder, could you take it over?
I'm afraid I've totally lost interest in Dominions, and won't be playing any more, at least for a while.

Ouch. Sorry to hear it Zapmeister. ;(

Hopefully it's just a "burnout" stage for you and you'll return later.


All right, I suppose I can try to take over orginization-wise in this game.


With Zap gone we are back to 6 players. I propose we wait for the 7th player and than begin our game on "dry" Karan map, since based upon the current thread we will have to start our game on Christams if we are going to wait for 17 players.

What do you think folks? Any comments/suggestions are welcome.

[ May 31, 2004, 10:00: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]