Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another game of Royale, folks?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I was more particularly reffering to Midshipman's request to play. No offense intended, but Royale just isn't for newbies. I also suggest the collection of all the Saxony rules into one set, for easier refference, and so that we can have a named sub-variant that originated at Apolyton
    "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
    -Joan Robinson

    Comment


    • #17
      Indeed, I would be in favor of Saxony again, simply because it's a more historical map and for color. Heptarchy would certainly work though, the only thing is that some nations on the Heptarchy map have rather few neighbors while pretty much everybody on the Saxony map has at the very least 3, leading for lots of fun diplomacy.

      The one warning I will give is that Victor is correct about the early alliances bit. I pretty well offered Stefu whatever terms he wanted for Russia to keep off my back, and I was reasonably nice to Mao as Denmark too, which insured I would only have a one-front war, something psychotically important to Saxony since you can almost insure it.

      As for the lying bit, well, you can lie, but it's only really believable early on or for very barren households. Any compotent player will ask for a marriage to cement your promises, so really your only excuse is "I don't have anybody available right now."

      I would be interested in playing, but fevrenetly hope that we won't have this start until the middle of May when I get out of college and have more time for Dip.
      All syllogisms have three parts.
      Therefore this is not a syllogism.

      Comment


      • #18
        I still favor the normal Dip map. It is seven-player map, and unlike Heptarchy, the nations are quite near each other, leading to game getting diplomatical right from beginning. Plus, I've wanted to have a game of Royale with normal map for some time now.
        "Spirit merges with matter to sanctify the universe. Matter transcends to return to spirit. The interchangeability of matter and spirit means the starlit magic of the outermost life of our universe becomes the soul-light magic of the innermost life of our self." - Dennis Kucinich, candidate for the U. S. presidency
        "Thatís the future of the Democratic Party: providing Republicans with a number of cute (but not that bright) comfort women." - Adam Yoshida, Canada's gift to the world

        Comment


        • #19
          Well, I was afraid that LordStone was going to take that position. Ultimately it's his time being spent, and it's difficult to criticize him for that. Although I have to chuckle at the "ONE HOUR" comment. I know all too well how long it takes to adjudicate some of these variant maps with 10-13 players. I wish it only took an hour to do these things.

          Can we have a look at the oft-mentioned Heptarcy map?

          This is just a recommendation, but I think LS should consider soliciting interest in the game and then selecting the players that he feels most comfrtable with. As has been mentioned this is a very complicated variant, and requires a lot of committment and effort. Even though I have not played Royale before, I folowed Saxony the game. And I would be willing to stand aside or act as an advisor/mentor to a less experienced player. Or if invited to play, I would accept a protoge player that could watch and assist me. This way if someone who's genuinely interested is left out, we might be able to accomodate them. I'm a little overwhelmed with things right now as it is. A start up in late may would work better for me too.

          Gerwald, in Victor's defense I raised the crossgaming issue, not him. It's not that big a deal. Royale's treaties will in effect create some mandatory alliances. And as previously mentioned, the wording of the alliance treaties will add some interesting twists.


          Comment


          • #20
            Oops. Once again, here's the Royale rules. http://w1.132.telia.com/~u13206915/ROYRULES.htm

            As for playing on the Heptarchy map, I have indeed GM'ed a game with that map before (Dip9) after taking over from Stewart Spink. http://web.libertysurf.se/baches/heptarch.htm I used the Heptarchy III Map, and to be honest I think Heptarchy IV is an improvement because all the powers are made more equal.

            Yes, I'll admit, Heptarchy isn't that great for the diplomacy aspect -- Scotland will rarely ever need to talk to Mercuria or Anglia until the very end of the game. Moreover, this is a game where everyone's pretty much Anglo-Saxon, and for me, if it was used for Royale it'd lose much of its international dynastic flavor.

            If we used the Standard Map, each dynasty could really adopt a distinctive national character with use of names and titles (just compare the Albayraks to the Ahponovs). For me, that makes the game more exciting. And with 7 players, I think it'd force everyone to talk to each other cuz everyone's in each other's way. With the 1600 map, people could ignore the Castilles or the Vasas and just walk over them.

            But one thing I'm concerned about the Standard Map is that it actually has too few provinces. What do you think? How do you feel about a game on the Modern map? It's been used a lot...
            The honorary duty of a human being
            is to love, I am human and nothing
            human can be alien to me.

            -Maya Angelou

            Comment


            • #21
              That'd be interesting. Perhaps you could post a link to a modern map (yes, I know, but I'm doing some serious downloading and it's hard for me to do a search through dip resources... if only I had high-speed access.)
              "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
              -Joan Robinson

              Comment


              • #22
                Modern Map: http://devel.diplom.org/Online/maps/modern.gif

                One prob is that this has 10 players, and will result in a longer game. (Remember, Royale is three times slower than a regular game). And the map itself doesn't lend itself well to additions of build sites and archbishoprics.
                The honorary duty of a human being
                is to love, I am human and nothing
                human can be alien to me.

                -Maya Angelou

                Comment


                • #23
                  In that case, the 1600 map would be better. Same number of players, and more historic.
                  "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
                  -Joan Robinson

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Actually, 1600 has 9 players. Modern has 10.
                    The honorary duty of a human being
                    is to love, I am human and nothing
                    human can be alien to me.

                    -Maya Angelou

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I could be up for a game of Royale, if you're still looking for players. I've never reaaly plyed a game with more than the regular rules, but I expect I could follow...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        So..what do you think?
                        The honorary duty of a human being
                        is to love, I am human and nothing
                        human can be alien to me.

                        -Maya Angelou

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I vote for game of Royale on 1600, named after a German province which will prove a key battleground in the mid to late game
                          "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
                          -Joan Robinson

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Baden?
                            Bayern?
                            Brandenburg?


                            How about Bayern Munchen in honor of the soon to be European Champions?

                            LS has some neat ideas too. Saxony II would be fine with me, but I guess I'm not all that picky.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Westphalia and Mecklenburg are too much of a mouthful. Hesse is a bit too short, but works, I suppose. My votes would be for Silesia, which as we all know was a pretty important province in history, or Tuscany, which while not German certainly is an interesting province and rolls off the tounge pretty well too.

                              And oh yes, one extra restriction: you can't play the same country you played in Saxony. So no Sweden for me.
                              All syllogisms have three parts.
                              Therefore this is not a syllogism.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                How about Styria? That has a nice ring to it. I thought about "The Concert of Europe" as the new title but that's a bit off the beaten track. Styria, I like it. Makes me think of Slytherin. Go Gryffindor! Go Hufflepuff! Go Ravenclaw!
                                The honorary duty of a human being
                                is to love, I am human and nothing
                                human can be alien to me.

                                -Maya Angelou

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X