RAND REDUX - ASHDOD WINS (Calmon)

Zeldor · #1 June 7th, 2008, 10:11 AM

Yeah, just yeah! I just hope I get some decent nation that time, not Atlantis

Hmm... I would be really happy with some resource heavy nation for a change, never really played them.

PashaDawg · #2 June 7th, 2008, 10:15 AM

I am happy with any victory condition, because I am just hosting. We'll got with whatever the majority of players prefers, if there is a clear preference.

VP's in capitals is a good way to go, of course. Or, we could do a % of provinces with no VP's, etc. Whichever.

WraithLord · #3 June 7th, 2008, 04:27 PM

Quote:

PashaDawg said:
I am happy with any victory condition, because I am just hosting. We'll got with whatever the majority of players prefers, if there is a clear preference.

VP's in capitals is a good way to go, of course. Or, we could do a % of provinces with no VP's, etc. Whichever.

Would something between 60%-70% controlled provinces work?

quantum_mechani · #4 June 7th, 2008, 04:41 PM

I think that might result in just a different kind of teleport grab. Capital only VPs have their flaws, but I think they are probably still the most reasonable way to go.

EDIT: I also think 160 provinces is fine for 13 players, so I hope we do end up using Rim of Darkness.

Shmonk · #5 June 7th, 2008, 05:10 PM

Same victory conditions as before is fine with me, 50% Capital VPs (7 of 13).

Zeldor · #6 June 7th, 2008, 05:20 PM

Capitol VPs seem fine. I also like the idea of 3 turn hold to make it count, but that is not really necessary with forts...

QM:
12 provs per player?

DonCorazon · #7 June 7th, 2008, 05:27 PM

I vote for a Cap VP game.
They seem to end before getting too bogged down and are more interesting by having critical provinces.

Thanks for organizing this Pasha, especially since you are not even playing.

quantum_mechani · #8 June 7th, 2008, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Zeldor said:

QM:
12 provs per player?

Sounds about right.