Nation setup

[Johan]

Originally posted by Mowers
If you can get it ready for early tomorrow morning you could find fans encamped on your lawn.....

I think an 11 player set up would be just fine.

11 -player set up

1492

ENG, FRA, AUS, SPA, POR, OTT, MAM, VEN, POL, SWE, RUS

1620

ENG, FRA, AUS, SPA, HOL, OTT, PER, BRA, POL, SWE, RUS

I think 12 would be needed in 1492..

DEN is vital for the balance...

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by Mowers
I actually have DEN on my orginal desktop version, but then I thought I would get howls from the masses if I posted that and deleted it.

Well... Russia and Poland will divide Lithuania and Hordes between them and be at odds with each other..

Sweden can focus on gobbling up Denmark if its AI... A Danish player means Sweden has less expansion possibilities, and Sweden can't put pressure on the English.. So England has its back free to mess with the French.. etc..

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by Mowers
Oh, I totally agree.

Although I doubt Poland will allow or join in an attack on Lithunia. They would be better off maintaining it until they can inherit it no?

Probably.. But the easternmost provinces are a drain on the Polish economy..


I see Russia and Poland as future enemies... Poland and Sweden should be natural allies...

 

[Johan]

if 13.. Hungary...


If there are 12 players, I can definitely see one or two being eliminated... Then perhaps a rule to let them take over "new" countries..


Persia, Holland, Pru-Brandenburg would definitely be nations that would need players..

 

[Johan]

Well, Mamelukes will be eliminated early.... probably Hungary as well if they are in.

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by DarthMaur
And, while we are at it, what do you guys think about turboannexation (ie:fall of governemnt)? Without BB wars in MP, it wasn't that bad, now it becomes the worst nightmare, allowing countries (especially Spain, which doesn't have any revolters in America), just to say "no" to every peace offer. France would probably want NOT to control any Spanish provinces in such case, 3BB is very high price.

Easily fixed down to +2 for each !core...

 

[Johan]

! = non

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by Mowers
That would provide for very interesting play.

I think that was what Mr.Ebbesen was setting up.

 

[Johan]

Here's a 1492 scenario with 24 players...

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by DarthMaur
Well, i've played 3 games.

In one, MAM and TUR were humans, and MAM were conquered only after they were dropped, with one undecisive war.

Second, MAM and TUR were human, and MAM trashed TUR badly.

Third, MAM, TUR and PER were human, and TUR got killed basically.


In short, i think Mamelukes are cool if you want not to have Turkey at all in the game.

Mamelukes are basically the best friend of Hungary, Venice and anyone else who fear the Ottomans..

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by Mowers
I strongly disagree with some of you about this setup issue with ottomans/ persians/ mameluks.

I think they should all be in. There is no reason why the Ottomans will go down, indeed, any of the 3 could go down. With a Mughal player as well then there are multiple possibilities. Add Algiers and things could go any number of ways. As happened.

I've seen the Ottomans being played well and I've seen them being played badly, nothing to me suggests that they should be the only country that doesnt, for some reason, have to face equal competition like everyone else. They still have a significant advantage with leaders and events.

Now there are all powers then its just a case of how many regions can be filled up properly. The Ottomans always used to have it really easy under setup that many of you used. Now they dont.

I think the key is to not allow a human Hungary if there is a human Mamelukes+Persia.

Hungary can focus completely on OE, as Austria is friendly, and Venice gains nothing from an anti-hungarian war.

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by Mowers
Hungarians have to deal with the Poles and French, the Persians the Mughals, the Mameluks the Algerians and the Venetians the Austrians and the French and other Italian players.

I don't agree on this analysis.

Venice, Hungary and Austria gain nothing by fighting each other in the beginning, and are natural allies.

Austria will always be an enemy to France, and Venice's interests are most likely in Italy or the mediterranean, which comes into conflict with France or Turkey.

Hungary has nothing to fear from France. She'd only get into a war with France if France and Austria fights, and thats not really needed if Spain is smart.

Poland could theoretically go to war with Hungary, but the gains possible outweigh the costs. Its more cost-effective for them to consolidate holdings on the Baltic before the Swedes does it.

ergo, in most cases, Hungary have nothing to worry about.

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by DarthMaur
My gripe with that is-Ottomans are no threat to Austria, which can inherit Hungary unopposed (when such inheritance would never happen in that case IRL)

That event should only trigger if TUR have taken some part of Hungary...

Any suggestion for a trigger?

 

[Johan]

Originally posted by Mowers
In three games in a row I have seen Venetian-Austrian tension. (that includes this game- note- your taking of Venetian port)

There was no tension at all between us. Istria was traded to Austria.