General House Rules for MP EU2 games...

[juv95hrn]

I am not a very active MP player yet but I plan to become one soon. I have played a few 2-4 player LAN games with friends and some 3-4 hour-end-when-someone-crashes-never-to-be-resumed games on vnet. Now looking forward to play serious long campaigns with players that don't mind to take the time to go back and restart after crashes and save the game yearly to avoid failed autosaves etc...

I have looked through the threads here and not found a discussion on house rules for MP games. If there alredy is one I apologize for repeating a subject.

I would like to start with a few rules I think could be well worth using when playing. Naturally there is no way to implement the enforcement of these rules in any other way than by an honor system between the players. The avarage age and maturity of the players on this forum do not seem to be a problem for this!

Suggestion for house rules:

Limiting the number of simultaneous royal marriages:
In the early period of the game when every European country is catholic there really is no reason why you shouldnt marry into every single country, gaining a +15 realtion and +2 victory points using diplomats that you have no other use for. You could end up having to break a few marriages when you are drawn into your allied AI countris coalition wars but on the whole it should be a winning affair.

In a MP game in peace time you have a lot of time on your hands to pursue a policy like this. To me it seems highly unrealistic with a dynastic marriage policy likte this. To me it would seem like a better way to manage this would be to limit a human players RM:s to six (6) at any given time. This forces the player to pursue a more deliberate diplomatic policy and concentrate on a few, usually neighbouring, allied countries when wishing to improve relations without subsidies.

At some times historical events will make certain countries to marry automatically with others. My suggestion to this is to let this seventh RM remain in effect but when the first Rm of the seven expires it may of course not be renewed and the number of RM:s will once again be 6. The main advantage of this rule is to limit administrative work of marrying 50 independent small European states to raise relations and VP's and to force players to make more deliberate decisions, thereby creating a more challenging game for everyone. I personally use this house rule when playing single player.

Hopefully I will receive some feedback on these thoughts and see some more ideas and suggestions on carefully considered and motivated house rules for the EU2 MP gaming community.

/Henrik/juv95hrn/PANTER

 

[jacemiles]

House Rules...

I created a list of House Rules for my current GC game. I can E-mail it to you if you like. It covers crashes, game etiquette and standard game setup. Remember this is a living document that change depending on the players.
It is written in Word.

 

[juv95hrn]

regarding post above...

Great! You can send me the word file and I will post it here or you could post it yourself if you like.

I found these instructions for MP CG on a thread where Mower were setting up a MP game. I have tried to ask for his permission to reprint them here over ICQ but not received an answer yet. Mower, I hope you dont mind?

1) Reloads are done via ICQ. Direct load is a waste of time.
2) Dont attempt to wait till you are all present- you will NEVER finish. My advise is that you play on with 5 permenant players and add 1 or, preferably 2 guests. Never play with less than 6. Expect new players to come in and join over time.
3) The host should be the best connection.
4) Austria and Spain need to work closely together to stop an automatic French victory in the early stages of the game.
5) If you need more players ask me and I'll supply them. Accept now that players will come and go as real life dictats.
6) You will all have a much more interesting game if you concentrate on the overall balance of power instead of SP AI bashing.
7) I strongly recommend that you adopt the standerd house rule we use. Players may not take more than 3 provinces from any European AI power in a peace settlement. Trade posts and colonies count as half.
7a) Spain may vassalise but not annex Portugal.
8) Running an AAR makes the game more interesting.
9) When crashes occur reload in a year unless the player was in a war. Dont attack players when they crash.
10) Dont run your country into the ground when you are losing. Settle and fight another day.
11) We can all exchange ICQ's when we start and I can fill in any gaps.

The only ones that could actually be regarded more as "rules" than "advice" would be the peace resolution with a maximum 3 provinces/six TP-colonies. Spain-Portugal relations and not attacking crashed players countries. Good ones I think!

Henrik/juv95hrn/PANTER

 

[unmerged(9244)]

We need a serious player

if u want to play in our game u can as one is leaving..Austria is free. We need one who can play regularly though. Chech forum called dedicated european game, last page

my icq is 133194349

 

[Mowers]

ICQ me this evening and I will send out a prompt for you.

Mowers

 

[Mowers]

I'm not entirely convinced on the royal marriage rules proposed, royal marriages are not always beneficial and play a relatively insignificant part of the game.

To me the real core of a decent game is the countries selected. Perhaps most importantly is an aspect of the board game which is that players change countries according to the epoch so that the differing empires are built and fall and the game takes on a more natural flow than some of the rigid set country games. I only really advocate a couple of changes so only 2 players actually change countries in an 7/8 player set up. POR-RUS (1580), POL/VEN-HOL (1570 or earlier) HOL-PRU( or suitable German State) (1690). This reflects that with less players having Russia in the begining makes the East way too unbalanced and it played a relatively inconsequential role anyhow. The POL/VEN mix means that there is a balance to the OTTs in the opening sessions. Whilst the inclusion of HOL & POR provide a more interesting colonial race. The final switch PRU ( or suitable GER state) provides a counterbalance to AUS/RUS/SWE domination of N.GER and makes for a very interesting end game.

 

[juv95hrn]

RM

Mower!

Please send me a prompt!

I tend to agree that RM are not the most important assspect of the game but a player "power-marrying" into every possible dynasty through an entire campaign will certainly amass a whole lot of +relation and victory points than one that only marries with his allies and future vassals. "-So what", asks the nifty reader of this reply. "All players can marry as much as they want and then it evens out in the end!" That's true but its a pain to remarry every single country on the map just to use your diplomats to anything useful and stay ahead in the VP race. Also, as said before, it seems unhistorical and unrealistic not to limit this. Therefore, although somewhat unimportant, I feel that it is not reason to NOT use this very simple and easily enforced rule.

Of course what country players choose to play is a very much more important issue!

Hope to join a campaign as soon as possible! ICQ 103632632

 

[Mowers]

Your point is definitely a valid one but by the time that most of the European minors have been swallowed up and most European nations have changed religions you arnt going to have the opportunity to have large numbers of marriages, so the hassle is largely removed. Anyway, most sessions are only 10-20 years and it cant be that many royal marriages that you have to remake. (he hopes)

 

[Prince Eugene]

Here are some suggestions.

 

[Jens Z]

In our LAN MP-campaign we use the following House rules:


1. You are allowed to switch from CRC religion back to catholic only once. (This will prevent players to switch to CRC only in wartimes in order to use that nice moral modification)

2. Peace offers have to be answered as soon as possible. At least within a month.
(This should avoid keeping a peaceoffer “in reserve”)

3. If your country has been completely conquered you are considered to be unconditional defeted and you have to accept what your opponets demand. You are not allowed to deny the the peaceoffer. It is to the other countries to interfere if the winner’s demand is not reasonable.
(This should help against players who subbornly refuse peace and by this destroying his country as well as the attacker -> war exhaustion)



We have found out that the GC (1419) is too dependend on the outcome of the 100years war. Either England or France will become quite powerfull in the early part of the game. We therefore prefer the 1492 scenario for MP.

 

[unmerged(3571)]

Regarding Royal marriages, it quite depends on the players involved - a royal marriage can be quite detrimental if you have to get involved in a war.

Picture a player whose alliance decides to go to war with another alliance whom he has say 5 or 6 royal marriages to - that can really hurt your stability! There are many ways to turn this into as much a disadvantage as it is an advantage.

For the most part I try to avoid house rules as much as possible, if you have good players the rules will enforce themselves based on actual play. If Spain for example is overly aggressive in the new world she will quickly face an anti-spain coalition and things like that.

It isn't perfect, but I don't like to artificially restrict a player's options.

 

[Mowers]

Originally posted by Jens Z
In our LAN MP-campaign we use the following House rules:


1. You are allowed to switch from CRC religion back to catholic only once. (This will prevent players to switch to CRC only in wartimes in order to use that nice moral modification)

2. Peace offers have to be answered as soon as possible. At least within a month.
(This should avoid keeping a peaceoffer “in reserve”)

3. If your country has been completely conquered you are considered to be unconditional defeted and you have to accept what your opponets demand. You are not allowed to deny the the peaceoffer. It is to the other countries to interfere if the winner’s demand is not reasonable.
(This should help against players who subbornly refuse peace and by this destroying his country as well as the attacker -> war exhaustion)



We have found out that the GC (1419) is too dependend on the outcome of the 100years war. Either England or France will become quite powerfull in the early part of the game. We therefore prefer the 1492 scenario for MP.

I would run with all of those, they are good. Bar the about being completely conquered as your government will fall eventually anyway.

 

[unmerged(2833)]

3 is already implemented. I remember when i conquered Austria completly, and it's player was quite surprised he hasn't got a chance to reject my peace offer.

Though you might not be able to get over 100 percent anyway, i'm not sure.

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Originally posted by Prince Eugene
Here are some suggestions.

Bah, i should really resurrect that, with all those new ideas got from multiplaying... too bad i'm not exactly the most systematic person around

 

[Mowers]

I have been asked to put up a set of MGC rules. I guess my list of definitive rules would be as follows for those who have an interest.

1) Players may not take more than 3 provinces from any European AI power in a peace settlement. Trade posts and colonies count as half.
2) Spain may vassalise but not annex Portugal.
3) You are allowed to switch from CRC religion back to catholic only once. (This will prevent players to switch to CRC only in wartimes in order to use that nice moral modification)
4) Peace offers have to be answered as soon as possible. At least within a month.

Of course I have a number of opinions on play and method of hosting etc but they have already been covered.

 

[Jens Z]

I like and support all of these, especially no.1.

I would even extend no.1 to ALL AI-countries (instead of only european countries) which are not annexable.

This would include all countries east of the Ottomans who by this cannot turboannex to the east so easily. In a standard setup (players for all major european countries and the Ottomans) I have often seen the Ottomans conquering the Mameluks and other Near East major powers quite easily while the players in Europe battled against each other for one or two provinces.

 

[unmerged(3571)]

Originally posted by Jens Z
I like and support all of these, especially no.1.

I would even extend no.1 to ALL AI-countries (instead of only european countries) which are not annexable.

This would include all countries east of the Ottomans who by this cannot turboannex to the east so easily. In a standard setup (players for all major european countries and the Ottomans) I have often seen the Ottomans conquering the Mameluks and other Near East major powers quite easily while the players in Europe battled against each other for one or two provinces.

Yes, but that is supposed to be one of the advantages of the Ottomans, their position.

This is one of the rules I do like though, along with rules against exploits (like not signing peace agreements or other such things)

 

[Prince Eugene]

Originally posted by satan


Yes, but that is supposed to be one of the advantages of the Ottomans, their position.

This is one of the rules I do like though, along with rules against exploits (like not signing peace agreements or other such things)

What do you mean by peace agreements? Does this mean that you are against nonaggression pacts?

 

[Duuk]

No, like not accepting peace when it's offered.

Duuk

 

[Prince Eugene]

I know what you are getting at and just because I beat you that one time doesn't mean anything. The reason I rejected for Rouss was because I was confident I could win the war in the end. I didn't want your white peace after I crossed the border because I wanted to punish you for attacking me, not because I was being stubborn.