Age of Discovery Democracy Game - Page 2

joncnunn · January 28, 2004, 19:47

Maybe, but there were wars going on in europe at the same time frame as well.

1. Spanish Armada

2. The one hundred years war.

Following is a partual list of border changes that occured on the map during this time frame.

1. The Netherlands under the leadership of Holland revolts successfuly from Spanish empire, while Belgium remains part of the Spainish crown

2. Scotland and England's crowns merged, adding Scotland to the English empire.

3. Protogese and Spanish crowns merged, adding Protegual to the Spanish empire.

4. War between France and Spain nets France a few towns from the Spainish with both countries paying a heavy cost.

5. Protogese and Catalona provinces revolt against Spain due to the high taxes. Protegual is granted indepedence. The Catalonain revolt was put down and Catalona remained part of Spain.

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
Possibly. But its embraces the spirit of the Age of Discovery concept more.

GhengisFarb™ · January 29, 2004, 00:08

Well, conmcb25 was the only one besides me who supported no war in Europe and since he's not posting any desire to join I guess we won't worry about that rule.

joncnunn · January 29, 2004, 12:48

Cool

As I see it the least likely war to repeat would be the pointless French-Spainish war.

Highest probablity land wars in Europe:

1. England - France : limited English objective : Scotland

2. Spain - Protrogual: total war for control of Iberian penisula

3. France - Dutch: total war for control of fertile northern mainland europe.

GhengisFarb™ · January 29, 2004, 13:57

So we would be looking at England, France, and Spain as the Euros.

If the Natives would join the three Euro teams we could conceivibly start and post screenshots as in a single public thread to draw interest until the teams got a bit larger and then move into private forums.

ZargonX · January 29, 2004, 15:33

I still support no war in Europe

GhengisFarb™ · January 29, 2004, 17:59

Quote:

Originally posted by ZargonX
I still support no war in Europe

If you joined a civ you could vote to allow No wars in Europe, although the rule could be modified to allow no wars amongst the human teams in Europe.

GodKing · January 29, 2004, 19:04

Baaaa. I will gladly join a team in europe if there are no native teams. Also, I think war in europe, with open forums would be fun. Take that you infidel. I would leand towards either english or spanish.

Paddy · January 29, 2004, 19:41

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

If you joined a civ you could vote to allow No wars in Europe, although the rule could be modified to allow no wars amongst the human teams in Europe.

How many European nations ar in th scenario?

GhengisFarb™ · January 29, 2004, 19:43

There are five, but we are trying to keep the human played civs to three. Portugal and the Netherlands are smaller than the other three.

Beta · January 29, 2004, 23:16

I will only join if Greece is included.

Actually - my preference would be for 5 teams for the 5 European civs, and no wars in Europe. A race to the new world and Duke it out there.

Then again - I am pretty stressed for play and chat time as it is.

Beta · January 29, 2004, 23:20

Aw - wtf - if we are sticking with the three Eropean civ model - then I respectfully request to join borc and Paddy on the English team.

(and I still say no fighting in Europe. The Europe map is so Mickey Mouse. Heck - if you look close enough you can even see Euro-Disney.)

Paddy · January 30, 2004, 02:46

haahahaha Euro Disney, is there any body in there today?

Yeah, I agree - no fighting in Europe

Lets burn the New world

Gramphos · January 30, 2004, 04:14

Sounds actually very interesting. Someway this remembers me of how I and a friend of me used to play Civ2 single players together sometimes.

I'll try and see if I can adjust my scudle to fit in sush a game.

GhengisFarb™ · January 30, 2004, 10:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Beta
Then again - I am pretty stressed for play and chat time as it is.

That just comes with being a hair obsessed monkey.

Nature did NOT intend for Monkeys to use hairstylists and mousse.

Your avatar looks like the Fabio of monkeys.
"I con't bulieve it's not Banana!"

Darekill · January 30, 2004, 13:42

If I'm not a nativ indian then I'd be british...

GhengisFarb™ · January 30, 2004, 14:09

OK, updated the member list in the first post.

GhengisFarb™ · January 30, 2004, 18:05

OK following options. Post your feelings and I will tally the results.

1) No war in Europe. Period.
2) No war in Europe between human Players, but you can attack AI civs.
3) No war in Europe until we finish researching the first Era of researchible techs, thus we would have a period to establish colonies and defenses before war was allowed.

joncnunn · January 30, 2004, 18:47

My problem with #1 is possibily of AI declaring war on us which will result in AI attempting to cross the border in both Europe and elsewhere to attack us which would violate the rules. Also anyone declaring war with a European AI over colonies in the new world would get a European land war because of AI behavior as well.

Spanish Civ is mostly likely to have this problem, given that the Protogeuese are initally much stronger than the Dutch because of their starting in a GA combined with the Dutch UU being defensive.

#2 seems to open a blank check for Spain and France to evenually enlarge their European holdings around midway thru the first era if the AI doesn't build enough units in Europe. France would be a stronger benificary again because the Protegese start stronger than the Dutch.

#3 We all start in the 3rd era except for the Natives, so I think you mean entering the 4th era. Is this all human players are just the one that wants to initate the european land war?

Beta · January 30, 2004, 22:56

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

That just comes with being a hair obsessed monkey.

Nature did NOT intend for Monkeys to use hairstylists and mousse.

Your avatar looks like the Fabio of monkeys.
"I con't bulieve it's not Banana!"

Beta the Macaque pukes up his lunch in his hand and picks though the good pieces - all the while completely disregarding the comments from the peanut gallery - although peanuts would be more than welcome.

(And btw - no mousse - I'm a naturally good looking simian.

)

Beta · January 30, 2004, 23:04

Hmmm.. I still like no war at all in Europe - but I see the quandry. And jon has laid out the issues with #2 and #3 quite well.

Do we want 5 human teams for the Europeans - the only problem being of course that two are much weaker. But then the greater challenge as well. And it would slow the game down.

A full 8 teams would be a hoot - with no wars in Europe - but I think that expands the game more than GF originally envisioned.

I say 5 teams - all European with AI's for the new world teams - or a full slate of 8 teams. With a bit of recruitment we can get it done. We only need 3 or 4 players per team.

Darekill · January 31, 2004, 10:21

How about changing sides complete and defeat as Native tribes the eropean AI.
Three Teams playing as Inka, Iroquis und Maya.

GhengisFarb™ · January 31, 2004, 13:29

But I want to be able to build Privateers and loot Beta's stuff.

joncnunn · January 31, 2004, 17:01

Darekill, that wouldn't be a challenge at all.

In fact if the game had about 50% more turns and the natives refrained from building the wonders, I would beat on a colition of human played natives conquering large sections of Europe.

Darekill · February 1, 2004, 03:35

I did not say, that the natives would have to play peacefully together. They could fight each other too so that would make some differende don't you think?

GhengisFarb™ · February 1, 2004, 12:34

Considering how few people we have we could also assign old world cities to them, say one of the British members could be the Duke of York and what not. I don't necessarily see why we would need all the Euro civs to be teams, that way I see it the fewer teams the faster the game.

Paddy · February 1, 2004, 13:49

This sounds an interesting approach

GhengisFarb™ · February 4, 2004, 12:22

Wow, this idea died quick.

Paddy · February 5, 2004, 00:11

still lurking

conmcb25 · February 5, 2004, 00:51

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
Well, conmcb25 was the only one besides me who supported no war in Europe and since he's not posting any desire to join I guess we won't worry about that rule.

Well thats good because I was wondering if I should do this or not due to lack of time. But ALLOWING war in Europe is the straw that breaks the back for me.

Its just to easy to get an earliy advantage by attacking a weak Euro Civ at hime.

GhengisFarb™ · February 5, 2004, 11:25

How about we just decide on settings and play a Feudal/Minigame Democracy game the old fashioned way with everyone bidding and owning tiles?

I would be up for starting and playing through the first turns in a turnchat this weekend. Anyone else up for it?