EPTEU3 Succession game - Page 15
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Simberto
Germany11911 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
26 traders per year or gtfo even if u are going mercentile for the spies (lolusobad) you have no reason to actively destroy cots other people make. On November 27 2011 12:05 Caller wrote: i have another idea, why don't we play different countries for a 20 year span, i.e. go from say France to Ottomans to Japanese daimyo to HRE OPM to Russia to Portugal, etc. so your idea is to try and build someone up, then change country and smash them down? the problem with that is you can just play any country and war france asap and its the same situation ;/ | ||
|
deafhobbit
United States828 Posts
On November 27 2011 12:05 Caller wrote: i have another idea, why don't we play different countries for a 20 year span, i.e. go from say France to Ottomans to Japanese daimyo to HRE OPM to Russia to Portugal, etc. Honestly, you could do a decent story around this. I'm thinking something like an immortal Alvibiades moving from country to country. "During the course of the Peloponnesian War, Alcibiades changed his political allegiance on several occasions. In his native Athens in the early 410s BC, he advocated an aggressive foreign policy, and was a prominent proponent of the Sicilian Expedition, but fled to Sparta after his political enemies brought charges of sacrilege against him. In Sparta, he served as a strategic adviser, proposing or supervising several major campaigns against Athens. In Sparta too, however, Alcibiades soon made powerful enemies and was forced to defect to Persia. There he served as an adviser to the satrap Tissaphernes until his Athenian political allies brought about his recall. He then served as an Athenian General (Strategos) for several years, but his enemies eventually succeeded in exiling him a second time." | ||
|
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
On November 27 2011 11:39 turdburgler wrote: idd. we shouldnt do anything that requires nothing to happen for the first or last any amount of time. thats why i think world conquest will be good. managing infamy is a good thing to learn to do and it means we need to use all the mechanics to expand properly all through the game, even when we are dominating wars theres still excitement due to the race against time. does anyone know if its possible to WC without going over infamy limit? if we use a lot of PU's and holy war it must be possible? WC is just silly, as well IMO. It's fun to do once, but it's just cleanup after you handle Europe. Or Europe is your cleanup if you're elsewhere. That's the hilarious part about WC, infamy doesn't matter lol. Get a high infamy adviser, and at a point, doesn't matter if you get dishonorable scum -- no one is strong enough to kill you anyways even if they all attack you. The only issue is revolts, but you're making so much money from all your territory, you can just leave ~10-15 soldiers every couple months worth of traveling in provinces and you really don't have to worry about that either. At least that's what I did in my WC attempt, and I got all of Europe/Asia/Africa no prob. On November 27 2011 12:05 Caller wrote: i have another idea, why don't we play different countries for a 20 year span, i.e. go from say France to Ottomans to Japanese daimyo to HRE OPM to Russia to Portugal, etc. THIS is a good idea. | ||
|
fofa2000
Canada548 Posts
| ||
|
Stolat
Poland241 Posts
| ||
|
deafhobbit
United States828 Posts
| ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11911 Posts
On November 27 2011 12:14 turdburgler wrote: ive never understood the reasoning behind destroying cots. if you set sliders for trade you have 90+% compete chance in every cot in the world since ai is retard. then u gain 0.5 extra trader per year. so in 6 years (pretty sure home cots ignore infamy so they are stuck at 99% compete) a cot you conquer pays for itself in traders (assuming you had 0 in it to start with, which you didnt). this allows you to constantly have full 6 traders in every cot in the world. Because you can trade more effectively if the money is more concentrated. 6 Traders is not the maximum. If you have 6 traders in a CoT, you can send additional merchants there. You will not gain additional traders, but you will drive out others. This increases the money you get, since the total value of the CoT is divided between less merchants. If you compete out all but 1 or 2 (apparently, if you kick out all other merchants, the next one will not have to compete against your chance, so it is best to leave 1 or 2 in there), this means that you get basically nearly the whole value of the CoT, instead of having to give some of the money to others. Of course, this requires some management since the AI will not autosend more then a single monopoly of merchants, and when your monopoly breaks all of the empty spots will be filled up pretty fastly. You can effectively keep up such a nearly complete monopoly at about 2-4 CoTs at a time. So if you manage to get a lot of the trade concentrated in as few CoTs as possible, you get rich. And not only simply rich, you get filthy rich. This is a far more effective strategy then trying to keep single monopolies in absurd amounts of 500 value CoTs. Anyway, on an completey other topic, the next AAR should hopefully come in soon, the three days are nearly over. | ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On November 28 2011 05:57 Simberto wrote: Because you can trade more effectively if the money is more concentrated. 6 Traders is not the maximum. If you have 6 traders in a CoT, you can send additional merchants there. You will not gain additional traders, but you will drive out others. This increases the money you get, since the total value of the CoT is divided between less merchants. If you compete out all but 1 or 2 (apparently, if you kick out all other merchants, the next one will not have to compete against your chance, so it is best to leave 1 or 2 in there), this means that you get basically nearly the whole value of the CoT, instead of having to give some of the money to others. Of course, this requires some management since the AI will not autosend more then a single monopoly of merchants, and when your monopoly breaks all of the empty spots will be filled up pretty fastly. You can effectively keep up such a nearly complete monopoly at about 2-4 CoTs at a time. So if you manage to get a lot of the trade concentrated in as few CoTs as possible, you get rich. And not only simply rich, you get filthy rich. This is a far more effective strategy then trying to keep single monopolies in absurd amounts of 500 value CoTs. Anyway, on an completey other topic, the next AAR should hopefully come in soon, the three days are nearly over. but doesnt kicking everyone else out cause stagnation or am i wrong? | ||
|
sakhi20
Denmark42 Posts
Sorry about the late upload. I'll edit this post later with the complete chronichles of my rule | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11911 Posts
On November 28 2011 17:13 turdburgler wrote: but doesnt kicking everyone else out cause stagnation or am i wrong? No, at least i have never had that happen at a big CoT. Probably because the others still try to get in, or just because it is that big. Next in Line is Pewt, please claim your spot. Looking at that game, Hansa is so funny. They have random 2-3 provinces everywhere. Oh, an we need more ships to get all of our tariffs. I think Bohemia might be on the brink of collapsing, they somehow managed to get 15 WE and now have absurd revolt risks all over the place. | ||
|
3Form
United Kingdom389 Posts
I'd love to take part in this succession game but I'm unable to play until the 10th or so!!!  | ||
|
Tewks44
United States2032 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11911 Posts
| ||
|
Monsen
Germany2548 Posts
On November 27 2011 12:05 Caller wrote: i have another idea, why don't we play different countries for a 20 year span, i.e. go from say France to Ottomans to Japanese daimyo to HRE OPM to Russia to Portugal, etc. I don't like this idea too much. The fun, to me at least, is in watching our empire develope over the years and the writing of the different users. Some humor, some roleplay and the insight into each players strategic decisions. I feel like the continuity would be missing and severely reduce the enjoyment (at least on the part of the readers). I feel like you guys are going in the wrong direction with this. Because the current game (with the unspoken goal of getting as big/powerful as possible) was too easy, you're searching for handicaps to impose on yourself because challenge = fun. I think nttea mentioned something more along my own lines of thought. More roleplay, better aar'ing and less bland goals. So here are some ideas that at least somewhat coincide with what you guys seem to prefer: 1. The previous user gives the next user a "mission". To spice it up we could even make up some kind of voting during/after the game on which player fullfilled his given goal the most/best/funniest. 2. Poll in this thread for new goal/direction/mission every X years. 3. Pick a streamed Bw/Sc2 game, declare a set mission/goal and link it to each player/team- let the Starcraft gods decide which way we go. I.E. some GSL game HuK vs some Korean: Huk wins = all out war on france (because you know, Canada  ) Korean win = invade Asia. Probably best to set up a poll for this too. (The goals don't have to have a connection to the players obviously  ) | ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
1. The previous user gives the next user a "mission". To spice it up we could even make up some kind of voting during/after the game on which player fullfilled his given goal the most/best/funniest. Could be fun ! This was our first succession game and we have learned a lot, I know I have ! Next time I feel like I can make an even better AAR and I agree that ½ the fun in this is reading others AAR's | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11911 Posts
I think a good idea might be to simply emphasize the importance of the AAR, and maybe encourage the players to give their rule a personality and certain goals they choose, which might not even give any actual benefit in terms of strength in game. Note that this does not mean that this here was not fun, just that doing the exact same thing again and again will probably get stale at some point, so i am interested in evolving the game a bit each time. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11911 Posts
Sakhi20, i am interested in you AAR, i hope that it did not get lost in Limbo somehow. | ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
On November 30 2011 01:18 Simberto wrote: Sakhi20, i am interested in you AAR, i hope that it did not get lost in Limbo somehow. I am interested too! | ||
| ||
