Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Anyone for an MP game?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Shuma said:
I think it might be wise that for the next MP game that starts, the difficulty be put to very hard and some more serious restrictions on heathen bashing be implemented.
Cheers
Click to expand...

You call getting your homeland getting invaded by 10k infidel armies heathen bashing!?!?!

Anyhow, i'm for continuing with things like they are right now. However, I am willing to butcher the events if it means swifter gameplay.
 
Yeah, I was reffering to the Cuman and Lithuania. Although I know it is difficult not to crush the Cuman if you want to survive in that area.
 
Perhaps next time (?) we can all play as different french duchies or, even more fun, different counts of the same kingdom. ;)
Yeah, I know, i've said that dozens of times...
 
Shuma said:
Hmm, sorry it took me so long to answer. The thing is, it's not about me being the duke of yadda-yadda when I join, and fasq being the king of rus, manstein almost the king of germany... it's about all that being accomplished in 36 years, won't be much to do later :D I think it might be wise that for the next MP game that starts, the difficulty be put to very hard and some more serious restrictions on heathen bashing be implemented.
Click to expand...

That's my line of thinking. A Rus kingdom by 1089 was far too fast, especially when combined with the potential for a player-controlled Germany upon the death of its AI-leader. It should also be noted that both Rus and Germany were AI creations (in the sense that Fas inherited the largest principality in Russia through player manipulation while his own principality was on the verge of extinction; Germany obviously was massive from Day 1) which gives the players lucky enough to inherit control of those kingdoms an incredibly unfair advantage.

The Ultima game has a rule in which players may only DoW pagans/heathens once per king (or session, can't remember which). This drastically cuts down on their ability to expand at pagan expense. We should consider it if we restart.

My vote is for a restart. If our goal was only to finish CK, the current setup could be interesting. As it stands, however, this game has the potential to get dreadfully boring in a few decades.

As it stands, I'm going to be dreadfully busy up until the end of the year. It's looking like I'll be out of town this coming Saturday and I know of at least 3 Saturdays that I'll have to miss in December.

Ganso said:
Perhaps next time (?) we can all play as different french duchies or, even more fun, different counts of the same kingdom.
Click to expand...

Interesting idea. I see it ending in one of two ways, however: (1) one player becomes king, which creates a rather dull game for the other players, or (2) most of the players rebel in order to make their game more interesting, leaving the player who ultimately obtains the French crown with a very small kingdom.
 
Manstein16 said:
The Ultima game has a rule in which players may only DoW pagans/heathens once per king (or session, can't remember which). This drastically cuts down on their ability to expand at pagan expense. We should consider it if we restart.
Click to expand...

I agree with this rule :), but what if your dragged into heathen wars by your AI ally?
 
Manstein16 said:
That's my line of thinking. A Rus kingdom by 1089 was far too fast, especially when combined with the potential for a player-controlled Germany upon the death of its AI-leader. It should also be noted that both Rus and Germany were AI creations (in the sense that Fas inherited the largest principality in Russia through player manipulation while his own principality was on the verge of extinction; Germany obviously was massive from Day 1) which gives the players lucky enough to inherit control of those kingdoms an incredibly unfair advantage.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I hadn't wanted to become a king, but the dang AI was much less humble than I...

Manstein16 said:
The Ultima game has a rule in which players may only DoW pagans/heathens once per king (or session, can't remember which). This drastically cuts down on their ability to expand at pagan expense. We should consider it if we restart.
Click to expand...

Maybe. I'm not sure about its utility. Most of the gains against pagans in my area was from defensive wars. I've only made 4 agressive DoWs against pagans. Once against the Mordvins, once against the Bulgars, once against the Yatvigs and once against the Lapps. And the main reason why I went for the Yatvigs and the Lapps was because I didn't want to be boardering too much of Germany. Note that I've had 5 princes/kings so far...

Manstein16 said:
My vote is for a restart. If our goal was only to finish CK, the current setup could be interesting. As it stands, however, this game has the potential to get dreadfully boring in a few decades.
Click to expand...

Personally I think it depends on how we play it... In the great game, they also consolidated fairly quickly, but the power balance continued to see-saw throughout the course of the CK leg. Perhaps most dramatic was Norway, who imploded early in the game, but ended up as being one of Europe's powers.

Now if we play all nicey-nice and "you can have your empire and I'll have mine", then yes, it will get rather dull. But if we have some propper coalition wars, then things will be rather interesting. I think people take the present set-up too much for granted. The Rus could implode at any moment, Manstein may never inherit Germany, the Italians may end up as Bohemians, and those piddly little Irish could end up ruling the continent. 400 years is a long time, and excrament can move swiftly toward the ventilator.

Manstein16 said:
Interesting idea. I see it ending in one of two ways, however: (1) one player becomes king, which creates a rather dull game for the other players, or (2) most of the players rebel in order to make their game more interesting, leaving the player who ultimately obtains the French crown with a very small kingdom.
Click to expand...

There's an old thread in the MP games for a Byzantine game like this that had quite a good set of rules for keeping that kind of game playable.

fasquardon
 
fasquardon said:
Maybe. I'm not sure about its utility. Most of the gains against pagans in my area was from defensive wars. I've only made 4 agressive DoWs against pagans. Once against the Mordvins, once against the Bulgars, once against the Yatvigs and once against the Lapps. And the main reason why I went for the Yatvigs and the Lapps was because I didn't want to be boardering too much of Germany. Note that I've had 5 princes/kings so far...
Click to expand...

I would have to look further into their rules to see if they include anything for defensive wars. Implementing a rule that limited the offensive conquests could be a good way of slowing the game down.


fasquardon said:
Now if we play all nicey-nice and "you can have your empire and I'll have mine", then yes, it will get rather dull. But if we have some propper coalition wars, then things will be rather interesting. I think people take the present set-up too much for granted. The Rus could implode at any moment, Manstein may never inherit Germany, the Italians may end up as Bohemians, and those piddly little Irish could end up ruling the continent. 400 years is a long time, and excrament can move swiftly toward the ventilator.
Click to expand...

As I've said before, I'm willing to continue (outside of my time constraints, that is). I vote for a restart mainly because we've lost quite a few players due to the way the game has progressed so far. From the way I see it, the only way to get most of them back is to restart, this time with some stricter rules limiting overly rapid expansion...we're not the Mongols, after all.

I think you're right that the game certainly isn't decided as it currently stands. Germany will always have trouble keeping her vassals in line and Rus will experience the Mongol invasion sooner or later. My primary concern is that we only have 3 regulars as it is and my attendance will be sporadic until 2007. So unless you and Oka feel like playing quite a few sessions between the two of you, a restart may be in our best interest.
 
Heh. I'm all for a new game. :D

But if you want to continue, just send me a save game before y'all log on, along with any house rules. kentajidaxiao ( a ) gmail ( d ) com.

j.
 
Okawoa said:
All: Okay so who is playing today?
Click to expand...

Me and Lly are already here.

fasquardon
 
Well, lagging before we even report in is a new low...

Am just about ready to throw the towl in for the day...

fasquardon
 
How was the session? Productive?
 
O.K., that's this session finnished I think.

Good stuff people.

fasquardon
 
Thanks for the answer.... meh.
 
Manstein16 said:
The game went that well, eh? What'd I miss? Was anyone able to sub for me?
Click to expand...

no. We did have an Byzantine duke though :) which seems to mean we will have a good healthy Byz...

Anyhow, you died, your son took power and I've peaced out with Germany.
 
You didn't miss too much besides a couple of disconnects and CsTD :)

But that's a really fun Byz you have, even if it's about to get steamrolled by Russia... :D

j.
 
I won't be able to make it this saturday, wee religious event I have to go to.

Could someone who will be making it send me their email so I can send the save to them?

fasquardon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back