Minor Europe's Golden Age: A teaser for EGA7

[EarendilHE]

same leaders for NL: 1 admiral and 1 general. MAke them decent ones this time!

edit: except if we get random explorers, then i want one of those and a general. good ones!

no random explorers this session! this is the only advantage i have...

 

[unmerged(41172)]

Hullo.
I still lack Alexidze´s, Nab´s, Van Engel´s and Sid´s ICQ-Contact.

Please add me. My number is 337767705.

If it wasn't in my signature...

 

[Ampoliros]

If it wasn't in my signature...

I´ve tried to add several of you before but there was no reaction - probably I was taken as Spam.

Hihihi....that´s why I posted this...

 

[unmerged(34338)]

I´ve tried to add several of you before but there was no reaction - probably I was taken as Spam.

Hihihi....that´s why I posted this...

Well, 'Commander Ebola' doesn't really sound like Ampo...

 

[Ampoliros]

Well, 'Commander Ebola' doesn't really sound like Ampo...

True that. But it´s still worth it.

 

[Seen]

no random explorers this session! this is the only advantage i have...

Yes, England is known to plunch into poverty after 1600 if they get colonial competition early on

 

[BurningEGO]

Yes, England is known to plunch into poverty after 1600 if they get colonial competition early on

Not true. I remember seeing Cobjor's or SMN's England (cant remember who was it), owning the Aztecs, and richer then everyone else.

 

[EarendilHE]

Yes, England is known to plunch into poverty after 1600 if they get colonial competition early on

the rule should have been implented before we choose our nations, because it has a big effect on the game...but of course nabu as gm and swedish player wants to have this rule...right nabu?

 

[EarendilHE]

Not true. I remember seeing Cobjor's or SMN's England (cant remember who was it), owning the Aztecs, and richer then everyone else.

i wont give you an answer because you just picked out random games and you arent a player in our game...

 

[Ampoliros]

Meh.

As if England was ever in any jeopardy of not getting a vast and gigantic colonial empire.

It´s us poor secondrate countries that want to have a chance as well.

And it´s not bad at all, imo. Watk is such a huge map, there is room for everyone. And more colonial players mean more colonial action i.e. more fun.

I find we should allow for chance and randomness and the fact that sometimes explorers and conqs arrive in other countries besides the friggin usual suspects.

 

[EarendilHE]

Meh.

As if England was ever in any jeopardy of not getting a vast and gigantic colonial empire.

It´s us poor secondrate countries that want to have a chance as well.

And it´s not bad at all, imo. Watk is such a huge map, there is room for everyone. And more colonial players mean more colonial action i.e. more fun.

I find we should allow for chance and randomness and the fact that sometimes explorers and conqs arrive in other countries besides the friggin usual suspects.

i accept, but not for the next session! and just because you are german...i mean because i like you!

 

[unmerged(40258)]

usually random explorers and conquerors are given post 1550 or 1575, dont remember correctly.

This has no effect on me as the NL, since about the late 1500s i get my historical uber explorers and conqs, but i am all FOR introducing them. However, its up to the GMs to decide it.

 

[Aleksidze]

I don't mind colonizing a few vacation spots in the caribbean for ze Margrave.

 

[Seen]

the rule should have been implented before we choose our nations, because it has a big effect on the game...but of course nabu as gm and swedish player wants to have this rule...right nabu?

My comment was clearly ironic , but at least you got that

 

[unmerged(41172)]

the rule should have been implented before we choose our nations, because it has a big effect on the game...but of course nabu as gm and swedish player wants to have this rule...right nabu?

Yeah, it should have been implemented before. Now its too late as you noticed.

But if we voted about that I would vote 'yes' for unhistorical exp and conq. What about all of you?

 

[EarendilHE]

Yeah, it should have been implemented before. Now its too late as you noticed.

But if we voted about that I would vote 'yes' for unhistorical exp and conq. What about all of you?

i vote "yes" for random conqs and explorers after 1575!
and its just for your fun!

 

[unmerged(40258)]

i vote yes after 1550.

how about a vote between yes after 1550, yes after 1575 and no?

if no wins, then there are no randoms. IF yes wins, then the year with most votes passes.

 

[unmerged(49182)]

Yes after 1550, or perhaps I should vote on the alternative noone else votes on, I shalt need to think a bit about this.

 

[Ampoliros]

Yes after 1550

 

[Joohoo]

After 1550 please.