Clash of Gods! - RECRUITING!

[Myth]

I have two problems with SS 6.4

One is that with real recruitment on everyone plays with spear militia armies for the first 200 years and that is very very boring.

The second one is that Heretics are absurdly strong and they completely mess up AI controlled regions.

[slysnake]

Why not try 6.2? That's a pretty popular release of the Stainless Steel mod which we use for the Dogs of War Hotseat which has been going on for a looooong time now with no such problems like those which you have mentioned ^^

[Myth]

Sure I'm open to what the majority prefers. Still low interest in this game which is strange for me. Perhaps the regulars here are in too many games as it is?

[phonicsmonkey]

You might find some people are at capacity, I know I am and I have a very busy period in RL coming up. Persist, recruit around other forums a bit and you should be able to get this off the ground. I'll help by advertising it in the TWC forum and elsewhere.

slysnake was considering starting a game a while back, he might be willing to admin this for you?

I would suggest two things:

- Maybe limit it to 6 players, 3 on each team? Then you don't have to find so many players.

- We tried VCs a bit like these in the WotK game and they worked ok, but have you considered making this a team deathmatch like WWC? You could just let the game go on until one side is eradicated. Then that takes away the issues of balance around which cities you pick etc.

- I would suggest, if you are considering an AR-only game, that you use KGCM with the hotseat patch for this. The AR results have been rebalanced in that patch to give better results to heavy cavalry which are usually under-rated. This would help out the cavalry-heavy eastern nations which usually suffer in AR games.

[Zim]

I'm interested, but have to admit being pretty close to capacity for games. Still, Norway looks none too healthy in the Teutonic Hotseat, so I could likely join this one.

Sure I'm open to what the majority prefers. Still low interest in this game which is strange for me. Perhaps the regulars here are in too many games as it is?

[Nightbringer]

I have to say I am at capacity with 7 hotseats, a mafia game, and the v&v thing all on my plate, otherwise I would be interested though.

[Myth]

KGCM sounds best then, especially if auto resolve has been rebalanced. I wanted to go with cities rather than a deathmatch for several reasons. One is that historically the crusaders wanted free access to (and later control over) the Holy Lands, they did not seek to actively slaughter every Muslim nation and wipe them out. Similarly then, it makes sense for the game to focus around key settlements and their religious conversion. This will allow Turkey for example to expand to the North and East without fear of molestation by player controlled nations, as they care about the targets down south.

The capture of Rome and the conquest and muslimification of major Western cities is similarly set to simulate the ultimate Muslim goal of bringing Islam to all the countries in the world.

Victory is attained when all targets are secured, the invaders repelled and the enemy religion removed form both your own lands and the target regions. This means that alongside the battle of troops and siege engines, there will be a battle of priests and assassins. There will also be the need to consider who picks what nation. Cordoba is a target for the Western nations - will a player get the Moors and risk being swarmed within 5 turns or will they abandon it to the AI and then do a team assault on Rome in retaliation?

Attack planning, defense planning and key use of Crusades/Jihads will be more important than simply grabbing all your stacks and right clicking until someone has no more provinces left.

Naval warfare will also be important, as well as logistics - England, Scotland, Denmark etc. are all far removed from the action. Dare they tech up to better troops whilst their allies in Central and Southern Europe try to hold their ground?

Do the Muslim factions want to consolidate their own positions and grab land from the AI, and to a slow conversion towards Europe, guaranteeing defensive Jihads on newly conquered territories?

This concept has potential if both teams want to take it as more than "meet here, bring all your troops and we fight to the death"

[Myth]

Reworked the victory conditions and some of the rules. Anyone interested?

[Quirl]

Sure I'm open to what the majority prefers. Still low interest in this game which is strange for me. Perhaps the regulars here are in too many games as it is?

Can't join this hotseat, but I can help you advertise. Click the "Content Manager" hyperlink in my sig if you want to see additional services.

[SilverShield]

im always interested in a good block war

wuuud? Quirl?? u is still alive bro? hows it going man? u still with the Marine girl or was she chopping ur balls already...

[Nightbringer]

I am interested in this game now as my load has decreased somewhat, My only concern is the imbalance between Christian and muslim factions inherent in all versions of the game. Christian factions outnumber muslim ones ~5-1 and generally have superior troops. Their also tend to be many more regions in Christian areas of the map. I would prefer to avoid KGCM as I feel England has been boosted beyond balance due to the number of factions and regions bunched into that zone. This would be a particular issue in a game such as this where there would be little danger of england being attacked by enemy factions. They could easily grab the 28 BI regions and then just spam troops to send across the map.

I don't want to sound too negative as I want to play and it is a fun concept, I would just want to make sure people felt they were on a level playing ground in order to avoid any resentment / bad feelings about the game.

[Quirl]

im always interested in a good block war

wuuud? Quirl?? u is still alive bro? hows it going man? u still with the Marine girl or was she chopping ur balls already...

lol. Hey, man. Her and I are still together. Things are going so-so (although I did have to correct her today on calling me "a woman" in front of the cashier at Orange Leaf. Ooh-rah. ).

I'm playing The Levantine Struggle hotseat here at the throne room, but that's about it. RL's been tough and I don't have much time for anything else... but it's good to be back.

PM me sometime. We'll catch up, man.

[Nightbringer]

I'm sure this isn't what you meant but saying you correct her just makes me think of the shining.

[SilverShield]

Can't join this hotseat, but I can help you advertise. Click the "Content Manager" hyperlink in my sig if you want to see additional services.

i kinda was just remembering that epic map u had going in lords of the east. u know that thing with all those overlapping colors according to the territories each faction was having. that was cool. if u were coming up with such a map later in the game that was pretty cool then man

[Myth]

Stainless Steel 6.4 with toned down heretics (I'll give you guys the appropriate file to copy over), because if you haven't played SS 6.4 trust me heretics have been made so much stronger they practically ruin the AI nations. I also warn you that the autoresolve for SS is unfair towards cav and HA armies however. A stack of dism. chivalric knights and armoured sergeants will punish a full 20 horse archers stack in autoresolve, where as if you lead the HA in a battle you will reduce the foot soldiers to so much minced meat, probably beat them wtih 0 casualties.

The best way to go about it will be allowing battles to be lead but I still haven't heard yay or nay on that.

SilverShield, if you want to see what KGCM and the Hotseat patch do, you can read here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369925

I myself haven't played it either, but some of the .org hotseat vets have and they're happy with it.

[SilverShield]

Stainless Steel 6.4 with toned down heretics (I'll give you guys the appropriate file to copy over), because if you haven't played SS 6.4 trust me heretics have been made so much stronger they practically ruin the AI nations. I also warn you that the autoresolve for SS is unfair towards cav and HA armies however. A stack of dism. chivalric knights and armoured sergeants will punish a full 20 horse archers stack in autoresolve, where as if you lead the HA in a battle you will reduce the foot soldiers to so much minced meat, probably beat them wtih 0 casualties.

The best way to go about it will be allowing battles to be lead but I still haven't heard yay or nay on that.

SilverShield, if you want to see what KGCM and the Hotseat patch do, you can read here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369925

I myself haven't played it either, but some of the .org hotseat vets have and they're happy with it.

just reading about this is like reading about sports or sex or anything practical. unless u are doing it ur knowledge is still somewhat limited so if we are really pulling this off im for ss 6.4.
auto resolving always favors infantry over cav except broken crescent maybe. but if one knows about it adjusting strategy from beginning solves that. theres always pros and cons to human vs human battles fought on the field. if they are fought on the field even someone already doomed is still capable of making a comeback. 2 generals already are capable of making the difference taking out a bigger army. battles fought on the field definitely is more challenging which always is a good thing. but there is always complaints and stuff about certain things being unrealistic or whatever and i aint up for senseless discussion and stuff so... pros and cons