Global War (upgraded to 3.20)

[CUnknown]

Okay, so we are going to continue with the game, and look for a replacement for Pythium? But, Arco will be set AI and all his stuff sent to Good. If no replacement is found, I will take Pythium's turn again. Everyone agrees?

[LoloMo]

Hi, I've agreed to sub for LA Arco. Give me a couple of days to look things over and read over some of the posts. This seems like an interesting game.

[Rathar]

I am still adamantly against one human playing two nations. No matter what.

Don't get me wrong. I understand the situation and I "think" I am accounting for my bias in it but it's still uncool. Not quite cricket, what what!

[Zeldor]

Well, if Arco is not going AI I can probably take them back on 5th. Assuming there is not bad attitude in good team and no one screwed what I repaired there

[Baalz]

THE BURNINATOR WILL BE SCREWING EACH AND EVERY PART OF ARCOSCEPHALE, ASHES IS ALL THAT WILL REMAIN SHORTLY SO NO NEED TO WORRY.

[CUnknown]

Rathar, so the game will be on hold until a sub for Pythium is found. Or, I guess Zeldor can take them back over on the 5th.

[CUnknown]

The game is back on, because we found a sub for Pythium (archaelept)!

[Kheldron]

I've given some thoughts about a possible sequel to this game.

First of all, I want to assure everyone that I'll be adamant to play this game to the end. There's no playing and investing 40+ turns over several months in a game to just let it slip into nothingness.


- I really like the secret enemy idea even though it didn't played out as I thought it would. Imho, two things went wrong : a lot of evil players didn't have connection with their secret enemy and many secret enemies died by other hands before any connection could be made.

There are two ways to correct it : either we force starting sites to make secret enemies neighbors or we give several secret enemies to each evil player on medium-large maps.
The second choice has my vote because it would be a heck of a task for any moderator to place each starting players and it wouldnt be that secret if you knew from the start that your predator was necessarily starting close to you. It would narrow your choices and lessen the backstab possibilities.
Imho, a good rule of thumb would be one secret enemy every 5 evil players. 1 for 1-5 evils, 2 for 6-10, 3 for 11-15...
That would assure you to still have a secret prey and/or predator by mid-game and make for a lot of gleeful backstabs whwen connections can be made.

- The ban on any kind of communication for evils was at best frustrating to them and at worse cause for weakness for the depth of this game imho. It hadn't got any rpg reason and it didn't bring any more pleasure for anyone I fear. imo evils should be able to communicate with anyone.
If you want to believe or trade with an evil player, do it at your own risks ! At best you're dealing with someone so untrustworthy you may never see the other end of your trade fulfilled, at worse you're dealing with someone who may very well have got your head on a pike as a victory condition !
The only exception would be for good players to trade items or gems with evil players for rpg reasons. Evil players should be allowed to communicate (insult, misinform etc...) with any players, up to the listener to believe or not, but I don't think a good player would lower himself to trade and help an evil in any way.

- Neutrals were supposed to be alone in this world but for most purposes they never acted as enemies and should not as long as good or evil represent any threat. When and if evil and goods are defeated or on their way to, neutrals shall fight as in vanilla...but I don't see the point : this doesn't fit in this game flavor imo. The settings make them unofficial allies? Well, just make it official and they shall be recon with. You could even have goods or evil striking at them before the end...

- otoh, I don't see a point in giving neutrals anymore advantages as evils and goods already have to cope with each others.

Good advantages :
- allied till the end. Win or lose together.

Good restrictions :
- can't use death and blood magic or gems.
- victory conditions : all evils defeated and possession of all good starting locations.
- can communicate with evils but can't trade items or gems or make any NAP with them. can do anything they want with neutrals.

Evil advantages :
- biggest faction on the map
- can do anything they want as long as it further their (evil) goals

Evil restrictions :
- must eliminate all good and neutral nations.
- They also have 1 secret enemy for every 1-5 evil players on the map. Only those who meet the first and second victory condition shall enter the hall of fame
- Goods wont trade with them and the above makes them at best third choice partners for any trade or alliance be it neutrals or other evils.

Neutral advantages :
- no restrictions on behavior whatsoever.
- goods dont have them as primary targets as they dont need to eliminate them to win.

Neutral restrictions :
- They must eliiminate good and evil factions to win. Win or lose as a team.
- They are the smallest faction

All this sums up to a sequel where we would have 3 real teams, evil, good and neutral. For obvious reasons, they should number according to their advantages and restrictions. 3 neutral vs. 5 goods vs. 8 evils is a good ratio imho. or 2 vs 3 vs 5 for a small map. 5 vs 8 vs 13 for a big one.


What do you think ?