-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Well, we play at 17.00 CET Sundays. That has been decided long ago. Which Sunday was recently decided to be the nextcoming Sunday, i.e. in 5 days if I have not misunderstood anything. But Slargos has not yet made all the descisions on the scenario I believe.
However, as I am Portugal, protected by my mighty friend in Madrid I pay little attention to the details of the East. I focus on colonisation and trading as that is my favourite things. (When Slargos reads this paragraph his blood pressure will rise to a life threatening level, this is exactly the attitude he does not want in this game, he wants blood, much blood...
- Thus I will join any nation who is about to win a war - that will give me much MT points for little work).
However, as I am Portugal, protected by my mighty friend in Madrid I pay little attention to the details of the East. I focus on colonisation and trading as that is my favourite things. (When Slargos reads this paragraph his blood pressure will rise to a life threatening level, this is exactly the attitude he does not want in this game, he wants blood, much blood...
- Thus I will join any nation who is about to win a war - that will give me much MT points for little work).
FAL said:I just realised the bitter opponents Daniel and DSQ are Spain and Portugal
Yes I have promised to work on our relationship
Daniel A said:
I guessed so much, but I could not find it in stone anywhere.
I am going to play an extremely peaceful Sweden myself too. Trading, colonising, friendly relations with everyone...lovely.
Unless I get German culture of course. Then I have to annex Tonio together with Damocles.
FAL said:
can he sub me as well ? While there is only 3 bra provinces, he can build other 5 manus in neighbor provinces.
Last edited:
Slargos said:3. I will expect everyone to respect and abide by the very simple call to behave. If you are determined to cheat, I don't understand why you'd play regardless. Grow up.
In case you are referring to me Sir, I will just say that I never cheat in games. However, I always "abuse", that is do everything possible within the rules to improve my standings in a game. Further more, I do not respect people that don't, I usually recommend them to play with dolls or do other noncompetitive recreational activities. I certainly avoid playing games with them as their participation destroys my pleasure from playing.
I want to play vs players who are determined to do, within the limits of the rules, their best to win the game and if that is not possible, to try and achieve as good a result as possible. And that they fight until the very end of the game with the same spirit.
Death to all quitters!
Yours sincerely
Daniel
King of Portugal
Last edited:
Please, get as much players in the east as possible. Why not move Spain and France to Crimea and Georgia? And ban NL and Porto. I promise England will join the continental wars around 1700.
Ozzeh said:
Ah, an excellent English tactic. Incidentally King John once characterised it as the one he hated the most in EU MP.... Since it is so effective...
Taking the hint from from Chill2, are you Ozzeh
Daniel A said:Ah, an excellent English tactic. Incidentally King John once characterised it as the one he hated the most in EU MP.... Since it is so effective...
Kinda yeh
I wanted to play the other side for a change. I haven't had one MP game (except one where I played Russia) yet where England wasn't a big pain in the ass to me at some point. And I like being a pain in the ass.
If you wish to be a pain in the ass, don't yield up Calais.
However, I am certain my good friend Wonko in Paris will want you to be a bit less of a pain for a while.
However, I am certain my good friend Wonko in Paris will want you to be a bit less of a pain for a while.
Well looks like I'll be playing Poland after all - nice.
Just to clarify - we will start with all European provinces having goveners (it still states infra 5 for all at the start)? And when does this campaign actually start?
Just to clarify - we will start with all European provinces having goveners (it still states infra 5 for all at the start)? And when does this campaign actually start?
We start this sunday. 1700 Sharp. Anyone who isn't there at 1700 ON THE SECOND will get to start with +10 inflation.
Counting as there will be IN VALKYRIENET OR IN ACTIVE CONVERSATION WITH ME ON ICQ.
Starting scenario is 1520. I will hopefully be able to iron out all details before sunday since I'm only working 12 hour days now. -_-
Re: Abuse.
There are several ways to abuse this game that aren't accepted, Daniel. Pirate spamming against landings. Pausing to be able to retreat more effectively. Granted, the latter is done regardless... but if you have the attitude that anything that is possible goes.. I just don't see the fun. There will always be loopholes regardless of the size of the rules.
I'm going to make it easy on everyone.
We won't do random leaders. Sweden and Holland will still get random explorers generated but MT is simply out. I clearly can't trust you, Daniel, to abide by the simple request to play the game rather than the rules. And given that you're our only available host, I can't just kick you either. There you have it.
I believe that answers all pending questions.
Counting as there will be IN VALKYRIENET OR IN ACTIVE CONVERSATION WITH ME ON ICQ.
Starting scenario is 1520. I will hopefully be able to iron out all details before sunday since I'm only working 12 hour days now. -_-
Re: Abuse.
There are several ways to abuse this game that aren't accepted, Daniel. Pirate spamming against landings. Pausing to be able to retreat more effectively. Granted, the latter is done regardless... but if you have the attitude that anything that is possible goes.. I just don't see the fun. There will always be loopholes regardless of the size of the rules.
I'm going to make it easy on everyone.
We won't do random leaders. Sweden and Holland will still get random explorers generated but MT is simply out. I clearly can't trust you, Daniel, to abide by the simple request to play the game rather than the rules. And given that you're our only available host, I can't just kick you either. There you have it.
I believe that answers all pending questions.
Can't we still have random (up to 4-4-4) leaders? It just add a bit of flavour to the game? Especially if you choose a level depending on whether you want generals and admirals.
Slargos said:
I am the kind of person whom you can have unlimited trust in.
To use pirates to stop landings etc is not an abuse, it is a a cheat, as in all games I have played it has been forbidden.
It is your task to make it forbidden. It is no easy burden to be a GM. If you do not forbid it I will use it (although I would vomit when I did it and curse your inability to make a good set of rules).
If your definition of what is permitted is vague then morally inclined people like myself are more constrained by these rules than the average man. Not the other way around as you seem to believe. We suffer from the vagueness when it ideally should be vice versa. You appear to have entirely misunderstood my attitude and my character. I am disappointed in you Slargos.
A suggestion for MT could simply be that you get X MT points for every province taken and minus X points for every province lost.
Hard to "abuse", easy to apply, and fairly fair (was this good English...?).
One could of course have a more complicated province value system, with COTs and gold provinces worth Y MT etc.
Hard to "abuse", easy to apply, and fairly fair (was this good English...?).
One could of course have a more complicated province value system, with COTs and gold provinces worth Y MT etc.
Daniel, in this you have reached the basis of the difference of opinion that you have with almost the whole of the MP community.Daniel A said:I am the kind of person whom you can have unlimited trust in.
To use pirates to stop landings etc is not an abuse, it is a a cheat, as in all games I have played it has been forbidden.
It is your task to make it forbidden. It is no easy burden to be a GM. If you do not forbid it I will use it (although I would vomit when I did it and curse your inability to make a good set of rules).
If your definition of what is permitted is vague then morally inclined people like myself are more constrained by these rules than the average man. Not the other way around as you seem to believe. We suffer from the vagueness when it ideally should be vice versa. You appear to have entirely misunderstood my attitude and my character. I am disappointed in you Slargos.
Most of us don't need specific rule sets to limit our behaviour. Some people take advantage of the lack of such "rules" to obtain an advatage, but the general community as a whole does not do so, or is willing to forgive (after endless argument, often) such transgressions.
You appear to enjoy the idea of strict regulation. I have spent my life dealing with strict regulation; it's my job, so to speak. In addition, I used to referee and run chess tournaments, and I'm a highly qualified football (soccer) referee. So it's not like I don't have some familiarity with rules and the like. But I much prefer to have people I play with who understand that there are things you don't do because they are "cheating" even without an explicit rule to that effect, things you don't do because they are likely to piss off most of the people you play with, things you won't do in a given game because they will upset the players of that game, and things you don't/won't do because they violate your own personal ethic code and/or sense of enjoyment.
That is the type of game this is. It does not preclude being an aggressive son-of-a-bitch to try and win the game. I look forward to your efforts in this regard. You want a game with specific rule sets? Go play chess. Want a fun game with lots of discussion and an intense flavor? Play EU2 with Slargos. Want to play EU2 with a massive rule set a la Dungeons and Dragons? Go GM your own game.
Besides, "to play the game rather than the rules" is merely a rethoric construction Slargos. The game is defined by its rules, they are not two separate entities.
Imagine Slargos the football player rushing towards the goal to reach the ball with Daniel the defender cleverly moving forward puting Slargos offside. The referee blows his whistle for a freekick to Daniel and Slargos approaches Daniel and says: hey Daniel, will you please play the game rather than the rules....
All games are played within the rules. It is our duty to consistently work on increasing the quality of the rules, eliminating loopholes as good as we can. It should not rest upon the shoulders of the competitors to define what is a loophole and what is not, what is intended with a rule and what is not, it should be on the lawgiver's.
Imagine Slargos the football player rushing towards the goal to reach the ball with Daniel the defender cleverly moving forward puting Slargos offside. The referee blows his whistle for a freekick to Daniel and Slargos approaches Daniel and says: hey Daniel, will you please play the game rather than the rules....
All games are played within the rules. It is our duty to consistently work on increasing the quality of the rules, eliminating loopholes as good as we can. It should not rest upon the shoulders of the competitors to define what is a loophole and what is not, what is intended with a rule and what is not, it should be on the lawgiver's.
DSY summed it up nicely.
While this is a competitive game, it is not a tournament game.
When playing football with your friends, I sincerely hope you don't kick their legs when the referee is not looking, Daniel.
While yes, that sort of play is to be expected in a cut-throat game of professional football, this is not it.
Using your football analogy, we're a group of friends getting together every sunday to play a bit of football. You're the guy who brings the International Football Association Handbook and insists on having a referee. The rest of us just want to play ball and have a bit of fun. :wacko:
While this is a competitive game, it is not a tournament game.
When playing football with your friends, I sincerely hope you don't kick their legs when the referee is not looking, Daniel.
While yes, that sort of play is to be expected in a cut-throat game of professional football, this is not it.
Using your football analogy, we're a group of friends getting together every sunday to play a bit of football. You're the guy who brings the International Football Association Handbook and insists on having a referee. The rest of us just want to play ball and have a bit of fun. :wacko: