Greetings, PerfectOne. Thanks for solving our AI faction problem.:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by PerfectOne
Printable View
Greetings, PerfectOne. Thanks for solving our AI faction problem.:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by PerfectOne
Don't worry, I don't think many of us are veterans at hotseat campaigns. At least, this is my first... :sweatdrop:
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerfectOne
Welcome PerfectOne...
Don't worry, nobody here can be called a vet... Even taking part in 3 PBM and with years of playing TW titles behind me, I can still learn a few tricks...
Sorry to bog down everybody but my gaming PC is in the room where my 2-weeks old daughter is sleeping...(or trying to...~:mecry: )
I think I'll be able to post the save by the end of the afternoon Sunday...
I'll keep you posted if otherwise...
Not only, I risk to be the sacrificial goat but I get to play the first turn so totally blind to what you have in store for me...
Nevermind, an OrdenRitter is afraid of nothing or no-one...
We will bring the light of the Church to the darkness of the North...
@ King Knud : Brave words... But will you have power enough to enforce your policy ?
Only God is your bond...
Some things are more important than gaming. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
Plus, I wanted extra time for diplomacy anyways so this works out fine. ^_^
Only time will tell. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
:2thumbsup: One more day until the first turn starts!!
Shouldn't we set some victory conditions for the Mongol player ?
It being a non-playable faction, it has no victory conditions, nor objectives ?
So, MOSH007 has no way to be considered a winner except with total annihilation of us all... Bit harsh on him...
We could set up something along the lines of :
Hold 45 provinces
Destroy either Poland, Lithuania or Novgorod (those being the more eastern and steppe-like factions)
I would advocate Novgorod but any other will do
Hold settlements : Kiev, Poznan and any other you think should do.
What do you think ?
:birthday2:
TA-DAH !!!
I hereby announce that the Teutonic Campaign is now officially started
Play and have fun...
Save is here
:birthday2:
I like your ideas regarding the Mongol victory conditions. I didn't realize that he didn't have any.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
Holding 45 seems good since it's what we all have.
Destroying Novograd would seem like the more logical of the three options. Anyone else have any thoughts on this? My history of this area and time period is very deficient.
Holding Kiev makes a lot of sense. Poznan is a good candidate for a second. Maybe Vilnius or Novograd for a 3rd?
Destroy Novgorod? Is this pick on the Russians day? :clown:
Does anyone know the full extent of the Mongol conquests in the region? That would help picking the required cities.
lol
It may have been better if we decided this before the game started. But, we should probably figure it out now.
I don't think there does not necessarily have to be a "destroy faction X" goal for the Mongols. Not all of us have them. They seemed more into conquest and didn't seem too picky on who it was.
Maybe just hold a couple cities. The city of Novograd makes sense because the Mongols did get pretty far into Russia. Maybe Smolensk instead but that almost seems too easy.
Or maybe even consider just giving him the goal of "45 territories". He is landlocked and in some ways in a kind of weak position. Also, that would let him pick his own enemies and strategy.
I dunno. I'm kind of brainfarting on how to make it fair. Maybe we could just pass the decision off to EF and have him make an executive GM decision. ^_^
I don't really care if he has "Destroy Novgorod" as a faction goal. :clown:
Personally if it were me, my goal as the Mongols would be conquering the whole map. :whip:
Just out of curiosity, what kind of play styles do you guys hav concerning winning? This and the Crusades campaign are my first(and the Crusades campaign has nearly impossible goals for the Byz, spanning the whole map). I'm taking both games kind of like I do in Europa Universalis. I want my country to survive, and become strong if possible, and to influence events in the game. I don't think much about the victory conditions.
What about you guys?
Same here, I'm not gonna worry about the games victory conditions, I have my own plans and don't really care what the game has to say :)
EF: Seeing as HRE's goals are to "destroy the Danes", I am very happy to hear you say that. :clown:
But on a more serious note, I don't take the victory conditions too seriously. For me they are "glorious achievements". Things to shoot for if I can't think of any original goals for Denmark. I just want to play and have fun. If I happen to hit the goals, cool. If not, I don't care. The only thing the victory conditions help with is in learning the history of the area. And it influences my diplomacy. But I won't stick to it too strictly. If I'm having fun and have a great alliance with "faction X", then I'm not going to attack them all because my goals say to.
2Teutonic-1-3 is up.
Are we continuing the policy of informing each other of what happens to the other? Tristan and Doug seemed to have worked out a good compromise in the Crusade thread.
Here is what I will do. After I finish my turn, I will PM a person OOC and tell them what they would find out in a SP game. I will tell them if my agents succeed or fail against them. And if I besiege or take a city. If I occupy, sack, or exterminate their city. If I attack their armies. If I attack their ships or blockade their ports.
In my opinion, this is stuff they should know anyways but the MP format puts the burden on us instead of the game. That way, they can immediatly react and have updates on their faction. But it keeps it secret from the rest of the game which one or both of the people involved might want.
Any thoughts or suggestions? I'll do something like this no matter what. What you guys do is up to you but I would appreciate at least some news in private if something big happens to Denmark. :D
There's nothing much for me to report, Privateerkev. I took one rebel settlement because I could reach it.
No I mean if you did something to me (which you obviously didn't) then I'd like a PM about it. I definitly wasn't asking for people to report on things in public. ^_^
In fact, I don't want to know OOC about what else happens around the map. I rather find out in-character through allies or having my units snoop around. I just want to know in private what the game would tell me anyways at the beginning of a turn. :D
Is it my turn now? I'll pick up the save right away.
Could someone translate the numbers in the save file for me? So I know what to name mine when I put it up.
2Teutonic-1-3 is up=player 2, turn 1, for player 3?
Yep. So when you're done, post 2Teutonic-1-4Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim
The 2 in "2Teutonic" is to mean the 2nd Teutonic hotseat. So 2Teutonic-1-3 means: 2nd Teutonic game/ 1st turn/ ready for player 3.
2Teutonic-1-4 is uploaded and ready for Elite Ferret. :2thumbsup:
Nothing to report publicly or privately, as I did jack squat to other players this turn.
I agree with you about any military action undertaken against any other player, but this campaign starts differently than the Crusades one where Doug and I were enemies from the start...Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
In this present one, it is a free-for-all and some shady dealings might preferably remain so... I won't notify any player of any assassination I might succeed in nor any merchant buy-out, this is what spies are for...
I think it better to let the doubt stand on who was the perpetrator...
PO, please clear your inbox.
Tristan, well the game doesn't tell you who successfully assassinates you so I understand that. Maybe a general message from the GM after all turns are played for those kind of things. That way were informed that we lost an agent but don't know who did it.
As for acquisitions, the SP game would tell me about one and it would tell me who did it. Ironically you were the one that brought this up in the Crusade thread. I could try to keep track of all of my merchants but I would still appreciate a heads up. I figure you deserve to know what the SP game would tell you. Of course, since your merchant wouldn't be invisible like a spy or assassin, this isn't too big of an issue.
So, if you won't tell me about merchant take-overs, I'll just try to keep track of my merchants and keep an eye on things in my territory. I'll still tell you when I do it though because the SP game would tell you. ^_^
I'll tell people about merchant acquisitions, since the game normally does that in SP.
Assassinations, on the other hand, I might pm to EF so he can announce them (since the game normally tells you if you've lost a family member, but not to who). Sabotages don't seem worth the bother(I don't care if I'm told) but I can do the same for them if people think it's a good idea.
Of course, this assumes I succeed in doing any of these things, which is doubtful as I suck with agents.
Edit: Does this mean there won't be any story thread like for the Crusades campaign?
I'm all for starting a write-up thread and will do it ASAP...
EDIT : Write-up thread is up and running...
Link is here
But do not feel obliged to take part or anything... It is just that sometimes I like to boast...
@ PK : I know that I was the one that brought up the subject on Crusades but further thinking on my part (that is my problem I sometimes speak before I give full thought to the matter) led me to the statement I made in this thread... plus, the situation was really different...
And it was the sudden disappearance of one of my merchants (to a still-unknown hand) that led me to take such a position...
About hostile actions by agents, you would be notified in SP but without knowing who did it... The problem here is that you can't bring it to the player's attention without denouncing yourself... On merchant take-overs, they can be construed as hostile and therefore I think that they should be given the same treatment...
Btw forgive any shortcomings in my English... I'm the French here...
I think I'll do a writeup as well. I also have some faint idea of taking notes through the game and putting up a Russian AAR of the game to advertise hotseat campaigns(after the campaign ends).
Edit: Has anyone heard from MOSH or PO? Neither has been around the thread lately.
PO emptied his mailbox when I asked him to in here. We still haven't actually spoken over PM's but he has been around and he does read them (I think). ^_^
Tristan, in the SP games your told your merchant gets acquired and then your able to zoom to the spot. Which means you pretty much figured out who did it. I think you get the name of the offending merchant as well in your announcement. That's why I will tell you if my merchants get greedy. It's because I think you'd know about it. Then your King can react accordingly with rage and anger. :D
As for not knowing who did it, I'd be up for PM'ing EF if my assassins ever successfully killed or sabotaged. Then he could PM the victim before their next turn starts and just tell them that someone died and no one knows who did it. In SP, you know your agent was killed but not who the assassin belonged to.
Now if the agent action fails, I think you should definitely know about it because the game does tell you who tried to do it.
I'll give it some thought...
Moreover, like i said in the write-up thread, I really like to boast... So I maybe let some things slip...
playing my turn now :)
:2thumbsup: Woohoo!!!! Not too much longer and another turn bites the dust. :charge:Quote:
Originally Posted by Elite Ferret