New Kingdoms Britannia hotseat signup (FULL)

I do it a lot in single player so I have a nice border of castles, with mostly cities on the inside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey

I almost never do this in hotseats anyway because the time and expense makes it pointless. The increased income from a city will almost never pay off the cost of converting it and redeveloping it (and most mods increase the cost significantly from vanilla), and if you need a recruitment center it's much easier to go capture one!

---

In longer, slower games you can make quite a bit of profit doing this with certain settlements. Guides for Sicily used to suggest turning Palermo into a city because it ends up being so wealthy (the settlement in Norway is another that makes a ton of money as a developed city, and even a decent amount as a castle).

So there's hardly any ai settlements to speak of in the Britannia campaign. I'm thinking instead of specifically having a rule to use autoresolve against players that we make it part of the settings and actually set the game to autoresolve. The campaign also has no crusades or jihads (although England gets some special events, troops returned from the "crusade") so we porbably don't need to list that rule.

Are we all agreed upon for the rules? I can get the game started up any time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zim

In longer, slower games you can make quite a bit of profit doing this with certain settlements. Guides for Sicily used to suggest turning Palermo into a city because it ends up being so wealthy (the settlement in Norway is another that makes a ton of money as a developed city, and even a decent amount as a castle).

---

Yes, it can definitely be worth it, it just depends largely on your time horizon and how much it costs to convert vs the incremental increase. I haven't yet been able to work out an appropriate discount rate to model the economy in TW games, but one day I'll do it and you can all have my spreadsheet!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zim

So there's hardly any ai settlements to speak of in the Britannia campaign. I'm thinking instead of specifically having a rule to use autoresolve against players that we make it part of the settings and actually set the game to autoresolve. The campaign also has no crusades or jihads (although England gets some special events, troops returned from the "crusade") so we porbably don't need to list that rule.

Are we all agreed upon for the rules? I can get the game started up any time.

---

All fine by me mate. If you're looking for name suggestions I thought of either 'This Sceptered Isle' for an epic feel, or for something with more comedy value how about 'Anarchy in the UK'?

Why, back in my day we had names like "Teutonic Hotseat" and "Grand Campaign Hotseat 2". And we walked uphill in the snow to our computers to play our turn...mumble...mumble.

Of those two I'm thinking of going ith the first, although I even more favor my rather optimistic for Norway name of "Viking Invasion 2". :clown:

Someday I'm also thinking of naming a hotseat "The Rise of Kings", although considering the goal of most hotseats maybe that last word should be singular. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zim

And we walked uphill in the snow to our computers to play our turn...mumble...mumble.

---

That would be your fault for keeping them on the snowy hilltop!

I like that, 'The Rise of Kings'....TRoK is a good acronym too :clown:

Along the same lines, something like 'Forge of Empires' could work.

How about Hammer of the Scots?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

How about Hammer of the Scots?

---

Puts a lot of pressure on the Scots to either get hammered or do some hammering.. :clown:

Considering that there is unification in the works here, instead of empire forging (well unification trough the sword has been used abundantly in history), I would say the Unification of Britannia. Forced autoresolve is fine by me as are all the other rules.

I did some playtesting versus the AI last night (seeing as i have not played actually as England in the Britannia campaign) - little o'l Shrewsburry, when left to rebel, spawns Armoured Swordsmen, Armoured Sergeants, Longbowmen and billmen! Talk about buffed up rebels! I'm scared to think what will happen if I let something like Nottingham rebel.

In other news, if anyone wants to give me some friendly advice for England it would be appreciated. I discovered that sans any dismissing of troops and with the maximum usage of forts, one can still get to about turn 3 before he is flat broke - seeing as how I played on VH/VH and I started with 10k gold only. I imagine that Wales with it's mesely 3 towns and the hordes of free troops will likewise be forced to either fight or disband. I know it to be the case for Norway.

Spear militia seem very expensive for what you get, and Dism. Feudal Knights cost as much as a fleet on their own!

I also noticed how frequently stacks rebelled when they were not lead by a named general. Also, will it be considered an exploit if I want to keep a low-loyalty general in a settlement that is strategically advantageous for me to have spawn as the Baron's Alliance? Be it give phonicsmonkey a good start, or a very poor one (some backwater place on the end of nowhere).

Our noble rivals from .net seem to think it easy to keep one's loyalty so high as to never have the BA spawn at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth

Considering that there is unification in the works here, instead of empire forging (well unification trough the sword has been used abundantly in history), I would say the Unification of Britannia. Forced autoresolve is fine by me as are all the other rules.

I did some playtesting versus the AI last night (seeing as i have not played actually as England in the Britannia campaign) - little o'l Shrewsburry, when left to rebel, spawns Armoured Swordsmen, Armoured Sergeants, Longbowmen and billmen! Talk about buffed up rebels! I'm scared to think what will happen if I let something like Nottingham rebel.

In other news, if anyone wants to give me some friendly advice for England it would be appreciated. I discovered that sans any dismissing of troops and with the maximum usage of forts, one can still get to about turn 3 before he is flat broke - seeing as how I played on VH/VH and I started with 10k gold only. I imagine that Wales with it's mesely 3 towns and the hordes of free troops will likewise be forced to either fight or disband. I know it to be the case for Norway.

Spear militia seem very expensive for what you get, and Dism. Feudal Knights cost as much as a fleet on their own!

I also noticed how frequently stacks rebelled when they were not lead by a named general. Also, will it be considered an exploit if I want to keep a low-loyalty general in a settlement that is strategically advantageous for me to have spawn as the Baron's Alliance? Be it give phonicsmonkey a good start, or a very poor one (some backwater place on the end of nowhere).

Our noble rivals from .net seem to think it easy to keep one's loyalty so high as to never have the BA spawn at all.

---

The best advice is to come to an accommodation with Wales early - leave it too late and you're gone.

I like the unification theme, although I wonder if there's a synonym that's more evocative. Also maybe change Britannia to the Isles? No need to leave Ireland out after all. :clown:

I'll get the game set up and the first save out tonight. I'll also put together a diplomacy thread.