WAR game

[TheBirdMan]

Calling for wargame.

Supergigantic map, most sea, large islands (mostly), a little over average of trade goods.

25 settlers - not all starting on the same tile, 20 advances, 250.000 gold. Raging hordes of babarians.

And the special:

8 players, 24 hour rule. 1 fixed team of 3, 2 fixed teams of 2 and 1 alone. The single player must be no 1 or 2 to play, no teams will get 2 turns in a row. The teams are not allowed to make allicances with other teams - peace yes, but not official alliances. The single player can do as he likes and feel lucky to as long as he not officially joins a team (by using the diplomatic screen - offering alliance). A fixed team must not break up - only if a teammember leaves the game. Then the rest of the "team" plus the replacement WILL BE FREE TO MAKE NEW ALLIANCES, JOIN WHATEVER TEAM THEY LIKES (if the other team(s) will allow them in, that is) - OR BE ALONE.

Wonders: No wonders before turn 5. At least one stoneage wonder to each team - negotiations will be nessesary. If 5 players agrees, rush buy are allowed. If not - then it should take at least 20-25 turns to finish a wonder. I know that supicious minds would say NO-NO (expecting cheating) - but that's just another edge to the game. Some would cheat - perhaps.

No attacks on others before turn 3.

Maybe a ranking game?

Other suggestions?

------------------
Woodstock was here!

[Solver]

Actually, this depends on your skills, but thanks to my PBEM ladder system, I'd like the game if we rate it, so letð wait for the others to express their opinion.

------------------
Solver - http://www.aok.20m.com

[Arthur]

I'd be interested.

[quinns]

I'm in. Quinns of the Inca. Settings are fine with me . Rated game sounds good!
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited November 20, 2000).]

[TheBirdMan]

This makes us 4.

Though this will be a wargame - the game are also open for diplomatic players - peaceloving players - and of course smiling players (just waiting to put a knife in your back).

Treason are welcome - want to go close to the real world - that's why I'm suggesting an UNBALANCED GAME.

Suggestions are welcome - fixed teams maybe not so fixed at all? A little less gold?

[quinns]

My only suggestion is to simplify the diplomacy a little. I'm kind of dense, and I don't quite understand who I can make an alliance with and at what time (and whether or not it's an official alliance or an unofficial allicance). And when is that allowed?

:scratching my head:

Quinns

[TheBirdMan]

General:

If I have understood the gamerules right, an official alliance (ally in the diplomatic screen) cancels the "zone of control", that your units has. 2 ally should be able to go/fight side by side.

Unofficial ally is when you use "private" e-mail to other gamers - either to ensure, that they don't use the oppotunity to backstab you while you are engaged somewhere else or even help you splitting another nation up.

Specific:

In this game, you can suggest who you want to be ally with (one or two other gamers). Then we make a fixed team out of you two/three. This team is then fixed UNTIL one of you drops out permanently. That would make a new situation, that we have to deal with.

Of cuourse, we could make this a "normal" fixed teamgame with 3 or 4 team of 2 players. But I like to try, how a game would be with unbalanced teams - and the possibility, that teams could change over time.


[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited November 09, 2000).]

[quinns]

Alright BirdMan, thanks for the lengthy explanation. That helped me. Okay then, I think I got it. Sounds fine to me to stay "unbalanced". What does "the solo player must be no 1 or no 2" mean? Does that mean in terms of ratings?

Quinns

[TheBirdMan]

Nothing really but to give him the best possible start.

[quinns]

Okay then. I would like to try the solo position, if you don't mind.

[TheBirdMan]

So this is an agreement.

good luck - when we get players enough.

------------------
Woodstock was here!

[TheBirdMan]

OK YOUR OLD FASHION GAMERS

You do not want to try something new ?

Then we do it the normal way (the gameplay I mean ).

8 players - but still: Many settlers, advances and gold.

I do not want to spend the first one or two months just pushing "next" buttom.

No fixed teams - no nothing else. Just plain game with or without alliances, backstabbing, treasons and what-so-ever .

This will lead to nothing else but a wargame. Peace will not be the most wanted feature anyway

Edit: Why can't I see the misspelling before I hit ?
[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited November 11, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited November 11, 2000).]

[Kralj Matjaz]

I would join if it is possible. It will be my first PBEM game so perhaps I'll need some help. I've beat AI on King level. I can play about turn a day.
[This message has been edited by Kralj Matjaz (edited November 13, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Kralj Matjaz (edited November 13, 2000).]

[Solver]

So, we come to a game with many settlers gold an tech. Yes, it might be interesting since the very begginig, as I have tried the game with normal start, and quit after seeing how slow it was. Rated game should be nice, of course, as we like the rating system, as I can see.

------------------
Solver - http://www.aok.20m.com

[TheBirdMan]

But still - if we only are 5-6.

It would be more fun with 8 I think.

Should we "push" someone?