Kingdoms Britannia Hotseat: These Sceptred Isles (completed, Nightbringer+ Myth won)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey

NB, stop fooling - we know about your pre-game deal with Ireland

---

Whats this now?
Who told you such rot?

It doesn't matter this game is won for us regardless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth

It doesn't matter this game is won for us regardless.

---

I hope the god of hotseats punishes you for your arrogance

Given the lack of assurances from the king of scotland, england has had no choice but to take these events to mean they have joined forces with Norway. England has laid siege to Newcastle-upon tyre.

ireland up!
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/local...id=205&id=9899

The three Norwegian armies, plainly in view of our spies who have long since been occupying Glasgow and had even instigated a revolt versus the Norse oppressors, have been met with steel and subsequent nightly attacks by King Brian. In one moonless night the elite of Haakon's armies has been butchered, the battered remnants retreating back to the impoverished city of Glasgow.

Meanwhile, up in the north, while scouring the waters for any cunning Norse invaders, the capable admiral Cobthach has stormed and sunk the rag-tag fleet of fifty ships Scotland had mustered, with his own 350 cogs. Aboard the paltry Scottish fleet were their King accompanied with a ragged band of desparate men, no doubt aiming to sail for Ireland thinking her shores undefended and ripe for the plucking.

We warn you now that such thoughts are baseless, as our navies are strong and Ireland can spring up armies on a whim, all of which better armed and trained than yours. The Scottish King is now free to invade the Fomorii with his drowned army.

Scotland is up.

Ouch.

Really sorry guys that I haven't gotten to this yet, but I think it's pretty clear that we never stood a chance. Should I continue or should we just declare NB and Myth winners?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

Really sorry guys that I haven't gotten to this yet, but I think it's pretty clear that we never stood a chance. Should I continue or should we just declare NB and Myth winners?

---

I have never heard such rank defeatism! Why don't we just work out our alliances before the game and then decide the winners without even fighting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey

I have never heard such rank defeatism! Why don't we just work out our alliances before the game and then decide the winners without even fighting?

---

Sorry, but it does get to that point sometimes in the Britannia campaign. You ought to know that I'm normally the last person to lay down my arms. I can certainly get cracking on it.

Edit: I guess I'm just a bit sour at how no matter how well I negotiated in good faith with England that there was a secret deal from the beginning of the game for Ireland and England basically to team up and not even declare it in game. But that's diplomacy, and it happens, so I've got no hard feelings - just feeling a little less enthusiastic about fighting to the bitter end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

Edit: I guess I'm just a bit sour at how no matter how well I negotiated in good faith with England that there was a secret deal from the beginning of the game for Ireland and England basically to team up and not even declare it in game. But that's diplomacy, and it happens, so I've got no hard feelings - just feeling a little less enthusiastic about fighting to the bitter end.

---

Yeah I'm sore about it too! We got hustled only knowing half the game.

Fair play to them, they locked it in good. Infuriating as it is, you have to love the secret deal. God knows i've made enough of them in my hotseat career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey

Yeah I'm sore about it too! We got hustled only knowing half the game.

Fair play to them, they locked it in good. Infuriating as it is, you have to love the secret deal. God knows i've made enough of the in my hotseat career.

---

They are very effective, but they can sometimes fall apart when it really comes down to it. Who knows, Myth might try to stab me in the back before things are done. I am fine with continuing or not though, as I think it is pretty clear that Myth and I's alliance has the upper-hand.

Concerning the Britannia campaign, from my two games I have played this kind of situation seems to be the inevitable result. An alliance of jsut two factinos that is indivisible is extremely powerful with such a small number of players, especially when england is one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nightbringer

Concerning the Britannia campaign, from my two games I have played this kind of situation seems to be the inevitable result. An alliance of jsut two factinos that is indivisible is extremely powerful with such a small number of players, especially when england is one of them.

---

Maybe we should ban allied victories in these smaller games. In the three Britannia campaigns we've had so far it's been England-Ireland, England-Norway and it looks like England-Ireland again.

Well I realized pretty early in my (relatively modest) HS career that alliances make or break your game. I do my diplomacy well before hand, and this is not my first alliance that started before the game began. I don't backstab when I declare an alliance in earnest, especially if I do so OOC, which I think is why NB chose to trust me with this. As I said in the guide. learning who the player is and how he behaves is as important as knowing his faction.

Banning allied victories could work for Britannia, though that would certainly make the last part of the game a very lengthy affair, since the way recruitment and AR works, sufficiently rich nations can stalemate invaders for ages. See the last game for example. In this one I have three maxed out castles in Ireland with smithy upgrades and high tier barracks. Though England's roster is superior, it will take NB quite a bit of time to conquer the island, even with Trebs/Canons. Similarly, last game, it would have taken me ages to beat Zim's Norway (or vice-versa), since moving in the area where the enemy has 3 castles with 4 recruitment slots each severely disfavors you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

I can certainly get cracking on it.

---

are you gonna?

BUMP again! Let's finish it off

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

Edit: I guess I'm just a bit sour at how no matter how well I negotiated in good faith with England that there was a secret deal from the beginning of the game for Ireland and England basically to team up and not even declare it in game.

---

Are you surprised after how they dealt with me? :)

Bah, give me a nudge next time you take a swing at it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

Sorry, but it does get to that point sometimes in the Britannia campaign. You ought to know that I'm normally the last person to lay down my arms. I can certainly get cracking on it.

Edit: I guess I'm just a bit sour at how no matter how well I negotiated in good faith with England that there was a secret deal from the beginning of the game for Ireland and England basically to team up and not even declare it in game. But that's diplomacy, and it happens, so I've got no hard feelings - just feeling a little less enthusiastic about fighting to the bitter end.

---

Since it appears we aren't continuing this game, I can say I had decided that I wasn't going to attack you until you sided with Norway. My hoep was that you could live on as a small faction while I got a good chunk of Scotland off Norway.

I think Igno is away, he hasn't responded in any game recently. If the enemy team concedes we can claim victory and start the next Britannia game however.

I only read through the last page of this thread regarding the alliance discussion, but I get the impression that it may be a good idea to try the Britannia campaign with different rules. I can see how disallowing alliaces can make the end game really long winded. Perhaps make it a rule that England has to be AI (all previous alliance victories seemed to have England in them, which suggests that choosing England seems to be a sure win).

Or you can make it a "Celts vs. England" game and let the Baron Alliance be an AI faction (but that could be very hard on the England player).

Hi Nigel, glad you popped by.

AI England means a land grab for Wales primarily, and the Norse/Scotts as well.

Celts vs England means Wales/Ireland/Scotland rip England a new one. No one is surviving that, I don't care if they're the God of hotseats himself.

Then there's the whole "What does Norway do" issue.

How about we use a unique setup for Britannia games. Each nation gets a randomly assigned ally they can win with, secretly. This is done by the Admin. They are still free to ally and do diplomacy with anyone, but in order to win they must do it either solo or with their designated ally. This will stir things up a bit for sure.


@Ignoramus you're up.

Ok I'm going to call this one over with England and Ireland joint winners.

It's a shame that the ending is so anti-climactic but I enjoyed playing the Norse and invading Scotland. I probably won't play in any more Britannia hotseats unless we find a way to avoid the inevitable England-plus-one-other ending.

Cheers for the game and well played everyone!

Did you see my suggestion? I think it might have been missed since it's at the very bottom of the previous page.

Quote:

---

How about we use a unique setup for Britannia games. Each nation gets a randomly assigned ally they can win with, secretly. This is done by the Admin. They are still free to ally and do diplomacy with anyone, but in order to win they must do it either solo or with their designated ally. This will stir things up a bit for sure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth

Did you see my suggestion? I think it might have been missed since it's at the very bottom of the previous page.

---

I did see that and thanks for the suggestion. I still think that England will win with whichever ally they are assigned and that the other factions will actually suffer in this scenario for not being able to discover the identity of England's ally.

Let me know if I've misunderstood. Anyway feel free to start a new Britannia game under any ruleset you like - I will probably not join the next one anyway, whatever you end up doing. The setting doesn't interest me that much.

How about making it a team battle from the start then? England+Norway vs. Wales, Ireland and Scotland? Being allied from the very start of the game and knowing you can trust the other celtic nations is very different from just a regular game where everyone is tempted to leave England for later (except for Wales) and ally with them or at least be neutral at the start.

But that won't work with an inexperienced player for England. Just banning allied victories for Britannia makes more sense after all.

A team battle would work with the right players, for sure