RAH rules: Description and Origination of

[DrSpike]

IMO both fine.

[War4ever]

well i have another proposal for rules......we always debate, though rarely get there, the topic of nukes.....

if were going to play without nukes, then i propose in the official rules that we play without suitcase bombs as well...

spies are nearly impossible to stop and the suitcase bomb works way to often IMO.

so i propose no nukes at all, or we leave it how it is and if i get there first.....well you all know what can happen

[rah]

The games where we actually get that far, end quickly.

While I lean towards eliminating them, I don't feel so strongly that I would argue it if most people dissagree.

RAH

I'd rather discuss informal alliances for tech stealing and trading. But how would you enforce a ban of either?

[War4ever]

Originally posted by rah


I'd rather discuss informal alliances for tech stealing and trading. But how would you enforce a ban of either?

the same way we play with other rules......honor system........ it won't eliminate all the cheaters..but i think our group is very honorable and will adhere to changes so long as they are discussed ahead of time so we don't run into any snags....

besides trying things out spices up the game and if we don't like it we can always change back.

[rah]

Ok, ITEMS UP FOR DISCUSSION
topic............................................. .......... my opinion
1. Nukes............................................. ........ /ban
2. unofficial tech stealing treaties.............../ban
3. unofficial trade pacts............................../ban
On two or three i don't want to elimiate trading or tech stealing, just make it harder and almost an act of war
4. GW................................................ ........../ban in all games


Ok, register your votes and reasons. Majority of regular players will get their way.

ANy other issues to discuss?

RAH

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah
Ok, ITEMS UP FOR DISCUSSION
topic............................................. .......... my opinion
1. Nukes............................................. ........ /ban
2. unofficial tech stealing treaties.............../ban
3. unofficial trade pacts............................../ban
On two or three i don't want to elimiate trading or tech stealing, just make it harder and almost an act of war
4. GW................................................ ........../ban in all games


Ok, register your votes and reasons. Majority of regular players will get their way.

ANy other issues to discuss?

RAH

building the great wall in the games, effectively stops all forms of attack against that player. It makes the game kind of lame. One player has complete domination for the night.
Nukes. not as if we ever get that far...
Tech stealing... people who are behind will always work together..
I say allow tech trading, but you can only trade that tech as long as another player already has that tech. So if player 1 and 2 have the tech, player 3 can buy the tech or trade for it.

[rah]

"building the great wall in the games, effectively stops all forms of attack against that player. It makes the game kind of lame. One player has complete domination for the night. "

Somewhat agree, but not 100%, I have taken cities that were gw protected.
but I agree enough for me to want to ban it also.

"Nukes. not as if we ever get that far... "

"Tech stealing... people who are behind will always work together.. "

That's the point, make it a little harder. If you're going to steal techs, at least you can put something at risk instead of just waltzing up. Really, when a diplo fails and isn't killed the next turn................

"I say allow tech trading, but you can only trade that tech as long as another player already has that tech. So if player 1 and 2 have the tech, player 3 can buy the tech or trade for it."

Heresy. No allance/tech trading was the primary reason for starting a standard rules set. NEVER
(unless everyone else wants to) But I highly doubt that.

But thanks for the opinions.

RAH

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah

Heresy. No allance/tech trading was the primary reason for starting a standard rules set. NEVER
(unless everyone else wants to) But I highly doubt that.

But thanks for the opinions.

RAH

Good idea, the problem is your games never go anywhere. Same old routine every single game

[Ming]

Originally posted by markusf
Same old routine every single game

But it was worse when we allowed tech trading. The first two players that met won... it was that simple. And it happened every single game... yawn... So it all came down to luck...

[rah]

Originally posted by markusf
Good idea, the problem is your games never go anywhere. Same old routine every single game

Actually I have seen more combat early the last few weeks. It's fun. Even when your Cap gets trashed

I'd like to encourage that trend.
(the war part, not the CAP part)

RAH

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah


Actually I have seen more combat early the last few weeks. It's fun. Even when your Cap gets trashed

I'd like to encourage that trend.
(the war part, not the CAP part)

RAH

I thought you where yellow at the start, built up a mass of knights.. Then poof yellow builds GW... All these units and nowhere to go, so i sent them over to your cities.. your cap was the closest city, i didn't want to attack a hill city or a river city.. I wanted to get a foot hold. I never thought there would be 6 damn units in your cap.. Good thing i trashed both your cap and mikes

[rah]

Yes you certainly did. Tips hat. But the price you paid was a civ worse than the one I had even after you trashed those two cities. Heck you didn't even get trade (stole it anyway) till after 1000. If we had both turned on berz, it would have been more fun.

RAH

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah
Yes you certainly did. Tips hat. But the price you paid was a civ worse than the one I had even after you trashed those two cities. Heck you didn't even get trade (stole it anyway) till after 1000. If we had both turned on berz, it would have been more fun.

RAH

I was screwed from the start that is why i went war.. Something like 29 turns a tech at 2000 bc..

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by rah
Ok, ITEMS UP FOR DISCUSSION
topic............................................. .......... my opinion
1. Nukes............................................. ........ /ban
2. unofficial tech stealing treaties.............../ban
3. unofficial trade pacts............................../ban
On two or three i don't want to elimiate trading or tech stealing, just make it harder and almost an act of war
4. GW................................................ ........../ban in all games



RAH

1. Nukes............................................. ......allow all nukes
2. Unofficial Tech stealing treaties............ban
3. Unofficial Trade pacts...........................ban
4. GW................................................ .......ban


RAH for wanting to ban GW - you sure do seem to build it alot

[Straybow]

Hey, if it isn't banned ya might as well beat the other guy to it.