Minor Europe's Golden Age: A teaser for EGA7

[unmerged(41172)]

Just wondering why? Surely for someone to 'waste' 100 ships sailing round asia in the 1500 deserves to do so?

If this has already been covered though I'll be quiet.

There is some bug with it though. It was proposed and I added it to rules. Someone explained me what is the issue about but I simply cant remember.

 

[BurningEGO]

Just wondering why? Surely for someone to 'waste' 100 ships sailing round asia in the 1500 deserves to do so?

If this has already been covered though I'll be quiet.

Suposing your galley cost is 10d, multiply that 100x times. 1000d if memory serves. Get an explorer and you will be able to get as far as Japan without loosing a single ship.

However like you, i cant understand if there was any need for a rule like that... It only makes the landlocked nations weaker and the typical colonial ones, stronger. Doing that smart tactic, even Poland (or austria!) can get to asia and start colonizing (before or at the same time as everyone)! :rofl:

But of course, since i am not playing the game my opinion is useless.

P.S. well all of that suposing they are lucky to get an explorer event, or they have random explorers added

 

[unmerged(41172)]

Doing that smart tactic, even Poland (or austria!) can get to asia and start colonizing (before or at the same time as everyone)! :rofl:

Historically, nor Austria nor Poland could use that bug.

 

[Van Engel]

Historically, nor Austria nor Poland could use that bug.

But the other tradition 'naval' nations can do it too and since everyone has their dp locked at land 5 there wouldn't be any advantage. :wacko:

 

[unmerged(60520)]

Suposing your galley cost is 10d, multiply that 100x times. 1000d if memory serves. Get an explorer and you will be able to get as far as Japan without loosing a single ship.

Not true because galleys sink when they reach to the open ocean, on the other hand if you use transport ships (15d each) or warships (60d each) then you can go around the globe without ever loosing a ship (supposing you are using an explorer) or landing in a port to resupply.

I wonder why you always explain this strategy with galleys, this is the second time I have to correct your explanation...

 

[BurningEGO]

If the game followed everything historical, why would everyone bother playing if we all knew England would be the supreme super power?

About that tactic - well i said to Japan, i didnt say to america (Galleys work fine, do not require NT 4 and are cheaper). You just need to stay on the coast and you can get as far as Japan without NT 4 without a single problem. You can even get to Australia and discover most of indonesia with Galleys.

Transports work even better (faster) but you need NT 4 as i stated. And some warships anyway since the AI will surely engage you with minor galley fleets (suposing you attack them, obviously).

 

[unmerged(60520)]

It would be helpful if the GM adds our ICQ numbers besides the roster.

 

[unmerged(41172)]

It would be helpful if the GM adds our ICQ numbers besides the roster.

I will (but not today or tommorow)

 

[unmerged(41172)]

If the game followed everything historical, why would everyone bother playing if we all knew England would be the supreme super power?

Or why wouldn't we have airplanes in 1419, if we don't need to adjust our game with historical facts? The fact here is that galleys haven't been able to go on such a long journey. Ships will have to wait for some centuries before doing that m8.

About that tactic - well i said to Japan, i didnt say to america (Galleys work fine, do not require NT 4 and are cheaper). You just need to stay on the coast and you can get as far as Japan without NT 4 without a single problem. You can even get to Australia and discover most of indonesia with Galleys.

Transports work even better (faster) but you need NT 4 as i stated. And some warships anyway since the AI will surely engage you with minor galley fleets (suposing you attack them, obviously).

...but I must admit that trick is brilliant

 

[unmerged(36826)]

Nab for gods sake, get rid of the locked land naval slider, I am sure I've brought that up and its thats been voted out so many times....

 

[Aleksidze]

I'm ok with getting rid of it, I proposed some flexibility too, but no one saw my proposal.

 

[Ampoliros]

I´m against getting rid of it.

Unlocked sliders generaly lead to a distinctive rift between naval and landnations which historicaly never happened this way. Also it thus limits the fun of the game.

Rarely do you, for example, see a navaly active France if sliders are unlocked. Nor Spain for that matter.

On the other extreme you have english, portuguese and dutch armies which aren´t worth a damn until the late game which is equaly unrealistic and needlessly constraining.

With locked sliders everything get´s more complex and interesting for then you normaly have far more powers building serious navies and using them.

Take "Defeat Before Dismemberment" as an example of this. This campaign may have been intense and ruthless but it was by no means boring. I say this was due to a considerable part to the locked sliders. Almost every nation was navaly active and had holdings in overseas. Even Austria though they soon lost all colonies again....which was, of course, most historical indeed.

Please do not remove this most vital of rules from this campaign.

 

[unmerged(60520)]

That’s true, but it’s also true that a free slider would make diplomacy more complex as naval and land powers would try to ally in order to get the benefits of each other’s specialty.

The way I see it:

. Locked: Gives more flexibility to nations at the same time it allows them to be more like “every man for him self” as no one really needs a partner to wage war.

. Free: Gives more diplomatic complexity as you have to consolidate and maintain good relationships with naval/land power in order to wage successful war.

There is also the trading and colonial factor, which gives more power to those nations that have less (potential also) regions in Europe. I don’t think that’s so bad anyway as bigger nations have more production income and they can wage war more easely.

 

[EarendilHE]

I´m against getting rid of it.

Unlocked sliders generaly lead to a distinctive rift between naval and landnations which historicaly never happened this way. Also it thus limits the fun of the game.

Rarely do you, for example, see a navaly active France if sliders are unlocked. Nor Spain for that matter.

On the other extreme you have english, portuguese and dutch armies which aren´t worth a damn until the late game which is equaly unrealistic and needlessly constraining.

With locked sliders everything get´s more complex and interesting for then you normaly have far more powers building serious navies and using them.

Take "Defeat Before Dismemberment" as an example of this. This campaign may have been intense and ruthless but it was by no means boring. I say this was due to a considerable part to the locked sliders. Almost every nation was navaly active and had holdings in overseas. Even Austria though they soon lost all colonies again....which was, of course, most historical indeed.

Please do not remove this most vital of rules from this campaign.

quite good arguments! dont remove it!

 

[Aleksidze]

I think it should be set free. That way nations like Brandenburg (ehem) or Poland could rely on it's Land power to survive, cuz they don't get too much oportunities on the colonial theater, same thing for Austria. o

 

[unmerged(49182)]

I think it should be set free. That way nations like Brandenburg (ehem) or Poland could rely on it's Land power to survive, cuz they don't get too much oportunities on the colonial theater, same thing for Austria. o

Pah! Brandenburg can surely enter the colonial theatre, I once annexed the Aztecs in an MP game as Brandenburg.

 

[Aleksidze]

Pah! Brandenburg can surely enter the colonial theatre, I once annexed the Aztecs in an MP game as Brandenburg.

Who was Spain? Joohoo? Semlan? :rofl:

 

[unmerged(36826)]

Land 5 sliders give even more advantages to the naval powers, England, Portugal and Holland will still get rich off trade and still build warships fleets that BB and Poland cannot match.

However the already massively rich traders now have parity with Austria and Poland in terms of morale and manpower, in return what do the land powers recieve? The ability to build undefendable colonies? The chance to try to build a warship fleet which cannot be afforded and will get crushed by any of the nations with admirals?

 

[Joohoo]

Russia is not interested in a fleet...

 

[Joohoo]

Who was Spain? Joohoo? Semlan? :rofl:

It was certainly not me