-
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.
I've though about starting such thread for some time, now, when JohnMK strated it in General Discussion, it's high time to get one here, only for MP.
My propositions:
1)No retreating from battles:
It's because of lag. Players who lag will be heavily handicapped by their inability to retreat, and because host never lags, he will have important advantage.
2)Peace offers (and others, like alliance calls, etc) must be answered within (1-3?) months
This is due to the fact you can ignore them indefinitly, causing obvious problmes.
3)No stealing sieges when you aren't in alliance war.
Meaning, you shouldn't DOW someone when other player is at war against it, then steal his sieges with your monarch.
It doesn't apply to alliance war.
4)No loans to AI.
Quite obvious. Can seriously unbalance the game, and is considered an exploit even in SP.
My propositions:
1)No retreating from battles:
It's because of lag. Players who lag will be heavily handicapped by their inability to retreat, and because host never lags, he will have important advantage.
2)Peace offers (and others, like alliance calls, etc) must be answered within (1-3?) months
This is due to the fact you can ignore them indefinitly, causing obvious problmes.
3)No stealing sieges when you aren't in alliance war.
Meaning, you shouldn't DOW someone when other player is at war against it, then steal his sieges with your monarch.
It doesn't apply to alliance war.
4)No loans to AI.
Quite obvious. Can seriously unbalance the game, and is considered an exploit even in SP.
Good work Maur, DarthMaur or Maur13 (depending on the circumstance)
I am particularly interested in the retreat from battle option, something I had never considered.
I would recommend one calendar month to respond to peace treaties.
No loans to AI seems good
Not so sure on no pausing, 1:2 can be fast at times. Whilst I have seen pausing abused I cant think of a hard and fast rule to work out how to stop this without banning pausing altogether.
Unclear on the stealing sieges bit. Are you saying that a player can not declare war on a country that is already at war with another player?
My own additions would be;
Players may not take more than 3 provinces (small colonies and trade posts count as half) from the AI in a peace deal with European AI countries. Forcing those that like to play MP like they in SP to stop taking advantage of the AI
Players may vassalize but not annex any power with a colonial empire of more than 10 colonies or trade posts. The reason being that it whilst this may have happened historically, it is also true that when these countries subsequently broke away they took their empire with them- this doesn’t happen in EU and seriously upsets the balance of the game- namely the 1580 inheritance.
I am particularly interested in the retreat from battle option, something I had never considered.
I would recommend one calendar month to respond to peace treaties.
No loans to AI seems good
Not so sure on no pausing, 1:2 can be fast at times. Whilst I have seen pausing abused I cant think of a hard and fast rule to work out how to stop this without banning pausing altogether.
Unclear on the stealing sieges bit. Are you saying that a player can not declare war on a country that is already at war with another player?
My own additions would be;
Players may not take more than 3 provinces (small colonies and trade posts count as half) from the AI in a peace deal with European AI countries. Forcing those that like to play MP like they in SP to stop taking advantage of the AI
Players may vassalize but not annex any power with a colonial empire of more than 10 colonies or trade posts. The reason being that it whilst this may have happened historically, it is also true that when these countries subsequently broke away they took their empire with them- this doesn’t happen in EU and seriously upsets the balance of the game- namely the 1580 inheritance.
DarthMaur is just for intimidation
I'm not in favor in pausing. Though it can be annoying for players who don't have much to do, especially if it's very often, or for prolonged periods, i doubt that it actually slows game that much.
And despite EU II is not turn based, it's not RTS at all
Another question is if pauses should be used when two players wage war. In this case, it would be interesting not to pause, but still, i'm very reluctant to include it. Actually, i think common sense (well, when someone pauses too much...) would be enough.
This one i am not sure. But let me explain.
Let's assume Russia declares war on Astrakhan, and begins to siege it (with normal leaderless army). Few days after that, Ottomans DOWs Astrakhan too, and steals the siege with their monarch.
I don't think it would happen IRL.
On the other hand, if Russia DOWs Astrakhan, and calls their Ottoman allies to join alliance, it's perfectly viable for any one of the allies to steal another sieges.
I think it's ok, with one exception-core provinces. I think player can get all core provinces he wants in peace treaty, even from AI.
(the prime example beign Russia against Khanates, or Ottomans against Mameluks and Hungary)
Also, i assume it doesn't apply to human vs human wars?
I'm indifferent... this would leave only war as the way to conquer their colonial empires. But it indeed would be innacurate when they would break off (which is unlikely, though, only prolonged war, fall of government?)
Agreed. Unless someone can think of a decent rule for this then common sense would have to prevail.
The stealing seige bit i understand now and your point holds. However, if one was to implement this rule it would only encourage players to AI bash more. There would be greater motivation to conquer the AI, as opposed to vassalise it or ally with it, before someone else got in there. But more importantly it would remove the potential for wars with real CBs between players. This rule wouldnt allow 'real wars' to break out between players over territory. I would suggest that if anyone does steal your seiges that you issue a strong warning followed by a declaration of war on them!
Which is why I say European only. But as you point out the khanates and hungary are interesting exceptions. Perhaps the rule should only come into force after 1530?
Correct assumption. Human players ought to know when to intervene if one player is getting crucified.
Well you would recieve the colonies trade as part of the vassalage. In my current GC I have seen 4 player government collapses- all different players through prolonged wars and 1 player government collapse through civil war so I dont think its so unlikely. Effectively it only really includes Holland and Portugal.
Some remarks,
Personally I don`t think it is a very bad idea to have some general mp-rules but I can imagine other players (for example those not-to-experienced) do mind more about some of the proposed. IMO it is still the best way to confirm the game-rules at the start of game as for some type games thoise rules work less fine. My mayor objections are against the rules:
-siege stealing: I don`t see why not, AI is exploiting this as well, and sometimes it has as reason to prevent other players to get too much power or just to protect your own interests in the territory.
-quantity of provinces asked: It`s perhaps ok for long-term games as gc but for short scenario`s this rule doesn`t work well imo. Personally I don`t like the rule anyway, surely not on core-provinces. I would say that at least the amount of received colonial provinces should be free. AI is usually offering a lot of them anyway. It`s stupid to deny it all the time only because you`re receiving 7 while you can take only 6.
Personally I don`t think it is a very bad idea to have some general mp-rules but I can imagine other players (for example those not-to-experienced) do mind more about some of the proposed. IMO it is still the best way to confirm the game-rules at the start of game as for some type games thoise rules work less fine. My mayor objections are against the rules:
-siege stealing: I don`t see why not, AI is exploiting this as well, and sometimes it has as reason to prevent other players to get too much power or just to protect your own interests in the territory.
-quantity of provinces asked: It`s perhaps ok for long-term games as gc but for short scenario`s this rule doesn`t work well imo. Personally I don`t like the rule anyway, surely not on core-provinces. I would say that at least the amount of received colonial provinces should be free. AI is usually offering a lot of them anyway. It`s stupid to deny it all the time only because you`re receiving 7 while you can take only 6.
I guess I didn’t have short-term scenarios in mind when I was thinking of max province grab rules. Effectively the rule is there to discourage SP gaming in MP, which is just so boring. 6 colonial Provinces is a lot to take of the AI even in SP, and with war available after 5 years then you can take another 6. A remarkably short time historically to break down an overseas empire I think.
With regards to newer players, the problem is that they object to rules and regulations because they have no experience of what makes a good MP game, after all this is what this topic is really about- how to improve MP games. I’m currently starting a GC for predominantly newer players at the moment, bringing the experience I have of making mistakes in running my other games. After so long playing with very experienced players one forgets about dealing with all the rubbish one dealt with at the beginning, but hopefully I can convince enough of them so that we can get on and have an enjoyable game that suits and meets the expectations of all the different sorts of EU players.
With regards to newer players, the problem is that they object to rules and regulations because they have no experience of what makes a good MP game, after all this is what this topic is really about- how to improve MP games. I’m currently starting a GC for predominantly newer players at the moment, bringing the experience I have of making mistakes in running my other games. After so long playing with very experienced players one forgets about dealing with all the rubbish one dealt with at the beginning, but hopefully I can convince enough of them so that we can get on and have an enjoyable game that suits and meets the expectations of all the different sorts of EU players.