Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Rush of Titans

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.
unmerged(30948)

unmerged(30948)

All life with EU II
Jun 22, 2004
1.967
0
RUSH OF TITANS
Classical spirit, different weapons

Introduction
In ancient Hellas, the Titans (monstrous giants, the word means overreachers) sprang forth when the blood of Uranus fell upon the Earth. They attacked Zeus later and the Olympian gods; to reach their abode they stacked two mountain ranges of Thessaly (Pelion and Ossa) on top of each other. The Gods asked Heracles for help and together they were able to defeat them; the Titans were subsequently buried underneath volcanoes all over the world.
Ovidius I, 151​

titansvszeus5cj.gif

Game
From the borders of (known in that time) world, since that moment everyone had to build a nation by himself there and to show own qualities as leader of people. Only after expansion through own continent, they could return on Mount Olympus and receive the best reward (the Golden Apple), defending it later by attacks of other approaching players.
Winner is who has control of Hellas prov at the end.
 
Last edited:
Game panel

The Titans were considered the personifications of the forces of the nature, so we define as:
Lord of Snows Iapetos in North Europe (Novgorod) is Sir Sher
Lord of Stones Atlas in Central Europe (Austria) is Salam
Lord of Trees Koios in South Europe (Granada) is Fnuco
Lord of Mines Prometheus in North Africa (Songhai) is Elio Vasa
Lord of Sands Epimetheus in Middle East (Oman) is Lord Jarski
Lord of Rains Hyperion in India (Timurids) is Mephisto
Lord of Winds Kreios in Central Asia (Sibir) is Dr Bob
Lord of Waves Okeanos in West Europe (Irish E.) is Urko
Lord of Stars Astraios in East Africa (Ethiopia) is Robin

Semi-god friends of Titans invited in the fight are:
Hercules from France (Daniel A)
Jason from Italy (Dud)

Days/hour: on fridays night since 19:30 CET in V-net
last call at 20:00 CET (subbed or AI)
GM/host/editor is Elio Vasa
scenario: Elio GC, edited here with fixed monarchs and random leaders
 
Last edited:
Rules panel

Respect rules
Obey the loud GM, don’t offend players, play long term.
6 present (upon 11) players make a session regular. Inform GM about an absence at least 24h in advance. Rehost if the player is at war, otherwise on following January.
Year save, maybe playing 4h or 20y for session. Latest beta patch used.
Immoral behaviours (vile aggression, backstabbing, lies, devastations, war fierceness, quarrelling) will be considered by GM after session with edits. Accepted badboy till 50 or inflation till 35 % after the session.

Scenario
No random event, no random religious event, not all historical events, not all historical leaders, added random leaders, added fixed monarchs and leaders. Slept inheritages of Bohemia, Hungary, Burgundy. NL in 1419 as GEL.
Edited fortress in Hellas (in 1419 minimal at least, in 1469 small at least, in 1519 medium at least, in 1569 large at least, so on). Added culture as state culture after the annexion of its every prov (max 3 state cultures in 1419), prov becomes core after 30y possession, deleted cores to lost provs during the session, everyone has core on Hellas. Spain and Portugal respect ToT (deadline in Amapa). No map trading till 1820.

Wars
No human MA, but possible agreed wars even if 1 vs 1 war is favourite; max 3 provs in peace offers between humans and with AI in Europe (if colony or TP count ½, with CoT 2). Claim provs before DoWing humans, NAP (max 25y) and fixed borders must be declared. Human player MUST accept GM peace offer at stab -3 with 100% WS. 5y needed to cancel forced vassalizations.
 
Last edited:
You seem determined to punish players. Why?

No White Peace? And yet you punish "vile aggression" and "war fierceness", without defining what you mean by those terms.

Sorry, you appear to want too much control as GM.
 
Also, you talk about Austria and Burgundy as if they are going to be played, but they are not on your roster.

I see Helvetia crushing everyone eventually. They are almost unopposed.
 
For Ryo

I read your essay about strategies, behaviour and diplomacy for Dago.
Max respect for You as creator of scenario and as player by me
(even if never met in a MP game), but this game is different.
Strong players know exactly what my words mean.
For example, there are single wars (then I would prefer 1 vs 1 ) and alliance (programed and agreed) war ... about relations with allies.

Victory plus morale behaviour is always more accepted by other players.
If we succeed in creating friendships among us mocking with chats, caricatures and descriptions of our lives, why we need evil too?
 
Last edited:
You didnt clearly define moral behavior and you included lying. NO LYING? I have never seen a single game ever with no lying. My essay talked about embracing these things, yes. But they are a vital part of every strategy. If I cannot lie, then people can ask me; When are you going to attack me? and I have to give a truthful answer?

Anyone who says they dont lie in EU2 is lying.


I didnt say how were you going to maintain Burgundy, I said why is that going to be an issue if your only nearby players are Helvetia and Eire?
 
ryoken69 said:
I see Helvetia crushing everyone eventually. They are almost unopposed.
Click to expand...

I played HEL in SP to test the scenario for 50y after the start: I succeeded in gaining Wurtemberg from Bavaria and Sachsen!
Lithuania has orthodox faith, OE belongs to muslim group, Burgundy can diploannex NL, Novgorod and Moscowy are russian brothers ...
 
Elio Vasa said:
Every immoral behaviour (vile aggression, backstabbing, lies, devastations, war fierceness) will be surely punished by GM’s decision after session by edits.
Click to expand...

I as well find this paragraph
- difficult to understand what exactly it means
- strange, since it punishes what I see as normal game play

A basic principle of law is that those governed by the law shall be able to predict to a high degree what the legal consequences of their actions are (and that these consequences are in accordance with the law, but this is irrelevant in this case). In Swedish we call it "rättssäkerhet", i.e. "right-security" or better "security of rights", my dictionary translates it to "rule of law". Anyhow Elio, your proposed rule does not meet that standard.

Just an example: if I were to first DOW nation A and then make peace with them and then 10 days later DOW nation B; would that constitute "war fierceness" or "vile aggression", regardless of circumstances? I cannot predict with any certainty at all :confused:
 
Elio Vasa said:
Every immoral behaviour (vile aggression, backstabbing, lies, devastations, war fierceness) will be surely punished by GM’s decision after session by edits.
Click to expand...


:confused:
what do u mean for devastation and war fierceness?
and why punish aggressions and backstabbing?i dont think i m a backstabber,but one thing is desire to revenge,other is ban this by the game
 
Elio Vasa said:
Every immoral behaviour (vile aggression, backstabbing, lies, devastations, war fierceness) will be surely punished by GM’s decision after session by edits.
Click to expand...
Unfortunatly I don't see how this could work. It is human nature not to play nice, you could try and limit this but backstabbing is an important part and it you backstabbed it shows your lack of diplomacy not your lack of fluffiness.

Also 1419 starts are always unbalaced and I can see in this scenario France turning into a powerhouse and overrunning England easily without English Holdings. Burgundy should be pushed into the Netherlands instead of Germany and France and Austria needs those Hungarian and Bohemian events to stop being overrun by Poland and OE easily...

On the otherhand Genoa does look playable for more than 50 years... ;) :)
 
This thread is for game's discussion, not about EU II strategies.
Everyone can play games as he wants.
Anyway it's GM's duty to define rules better:
War fierceness (in my opinion and in this game only) is keeping on
a war after reaching 100 % needed warscore for own peace offer by battles.
In that moment the enemy wants only to destroy Tps, colonies, manus,
armies, ships not to gain provs but to damage economy and a nation.
So after stab hitting, he must retire armies or ships and
with no agreement the GM purposes an adequate peace offer to end this behaviour and save a nation only for the contests of the game.

Btw I'm looking for players, none is obliged if it's more than his skills.
Testing the scenario with only AI nations, all pickable countries sincerely go towards possible extinction ... (Gra by Spa, Eir by Eng, Kzk by Sib, Oma by Cal, Nvg by Rus, Guj by Mug, Mal by Por, Hel by Fra)
 
Last edited:
Elio Vasa said:
Day/hour: on Fridays at 19:30 last call at 20:00 (subbed or AI)
(unadviced for heartweak and inexperienced ones)
Game Master: Elio Vasa
Scenario: Elio GC (real adventure for me too)
contact me by ICQ for last save
5 present (upon 8) players make a session regular
The GM must be informed about an absence at least 24h in advance to avoid penalties.
Play long term. Year save. Latest beta patch used.

Respect rules
Obey the GM (or you’ll remember about it).
Don’t offend players, be polite!
Every immoral behaviour (vile aggression, backstabbing, lies, devastations, war fierceness) will be surely punished by GM’s decision after session by edits.
Click to expand...

if the day changes let me know , its a intresting change from ussual game but i can't play that specific day/time
 
hi, I think I'm free friday. I'll give this some thought and post suggestions soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back