Weekly Friday Nite NA EU2 Gaming Group

[Hyzhenhok]

It's better to rely on subs the minimal. We should rehost at 10.


And Panzeh, even if you lack good writing skills, you can still do an AAR. Just remember to worship Austria for the gifts of cash...

 

[unmerged(1104)]

Okey Dokey - I will be ready at 10pm CDT.

Staff gets a fresh beating on Monday!

Will advise sub soon - and give them advice

 

[unmerged(16832)]

You pedophile!! how many of my daughters do you want!?!?

 

[Prince Eugene]

Lotus Lo can sub you. I had already designated a sub at the time you requested it, Lotus, maybe some other time.

 

[daedalus]

PE, Who is your substitute? We need to know to let him play ....

 

[Prince Eugene]

Most likely Constantine or Ryoken.. both of them said maybe. I'm still looking for a definite answer.

 

[daedalus]

The religion question

At the beggining, we all agree to make religion important part of our game. However, looking more deeply into our situation, I worried about the unbalance we have regarding player distribution. As it is now, from 9 players, 5 of then are very likely to stay catholic (spain, portugal,france, austria, poland) One of the is muslim (OE), one ortodox (Russia) and 2 protestant/reformed (England,Sweden). How far are we going to carry the religion differences? Certanly the reformed/protestant blok is greatly outpowered by the catholic counterpart, and historically, the religion wars did not extend to fully involve england/sweden.

 

[unmerged(16832)]

I am worried. One good thing, though, is that England can hear me, so when religion becomes a factor, i won't be forced to use France as a diplomatic channel.

 

[Taelyn]

Religion

Let's see how things evolve. I find it highly unlikely that all the Catholic countries will ever fight together. Can you see Spain and France working together after that fight? I imagine it'll all work out, as long as Russia and the Ottomans reach their usual powerful positions (which they look like they'll easily manage).

 

[unmerged(1104)]

Re: Religion

Remember that within the Catholic community there are natural enemies. France is generally hostile towards Austria and/or Spain. Poland may, at times, may feel threatened by Austria (or an aggresive HRE Spain.) Portugal may, again at times, feel Spain is too influental towards Portuguese affairs.

Religion should be a factor in a country's strategy or policies. Religion is not the sole factor in the same vein, and as the game progresses possibly less a factor (Edict of Tolerance etc.)

OE and Russia at some point should be able to hold their own against "religious aggression." Protestants shouldn't expect the whole Catholic world to come down on them at once (unless said country had gone on a warmongering spree.)

Areas of conflict, where spheres of hegemony overlap, such as Italy, the Balkans, North Germany and the Lowlands -could easily justify religion being overlooked. However, OE gunning for Skane or Pommern may be looked unkindly by all (and VERY unlikely on my part.)

It is sort of murky - but I think it's meant to offer some degree of justification in our policy and diplomacy. This is my take on it and I may be way off .

 

[Hyzhenhok]

In the first session, I sent messages to Moscow that aggression against Lithuania or Sweden would be something Austria would no approve of. The same was sent to the Ottomans concerning Christian states. I'm not sure if the players got the messages, but at any rate, thats as far as I can go religiously right now.


Who knows, to spice things up perhaps Austria will go Protestant

 

[unmerged(1104)]

Originally posted by Hyzhenhok
In the first session, I sent messages to Moscow that aggression against Lithuania or Sweden would be something Austria would no approve of. The same was sent to the Ottomans concerning Christian states. I'm not sure if the players got the messages, but at any rate, thats as far as I can go religiously right now.


Who knows, to spice things up perhaps Austria will go Protestant

OE received the message

 

[unmerged(16832)]

I have no interests in player countries at all right now, i need to get Denmark off of my back.

 

[daedalus]

Originally posted by Panzeh
I have no interests in player countries at all right now, i need to get Denmark off of my back.

Which pretty much has england's support. We need a strong sweden to be able to play an important part in case of religious conflict

 

[unmerged(334)]

Originally posted by Hyzhenhok
In the first session, I sent messages to Moscow that aggression against Lithuania or Sweden would be something Austria would no approve of. The same was sent to the Ottomans concerning Christian states. I'm not sure if the players got the messages, but at any rate, thats as far as I can go religiously right now.


Who knows, to spice things up perhaps Austria will go Protestant

Russia recived and ignored your request. I think that Austria thinks too much about itself by geting involved all the way in Russia. Russia will retake all provincess that are populated by Russian people! No mater what Austria thinks or likes.

btw. Great Tsar will be very angry if Austria includes any Bohemian, Polish, Croat provincess

 

[WhiteHojo]

re: religion... I think Hab's has the right idea on it - it's a factor but not THE factor, there are several other factors that also play into decisions - past in game history b/t nations, current politic climate (is one catholic nation poised to become uber-strong unless other catholics join w/protestant/muslim to stop him, etc), etc... like all rules and intents in the game, 'reasonable' is the watchword. I think all players have a grasp of what we all want from the game.

next topic: Warfare - we all agree total war is a no no... as is land grabing... but there are some areas w/in that concept we need to address (UK brought it up in his AAR as well) - the all cavalry army (ACA)... should they be allowed? do they violate the spirit of the game as we meant it when we started? I'm torn on this one myself. one one hand I can see the arguement of 'hey, it's my nation why should I hammper myseff w/inf'y if I don't wanna and I know all cav is stronger".... I can also see the counter "it just smacks of gamey tactics"...

now the problem is how do you fix it (if you decide it's broken)... what's to stop someone from sticking 1000 inf w/50,000 cav and saying look it's not all cav... lots of ideas but getting bogged down in micro manageing other players military actions is not how we wanna go in the game I would think.

perhaps a simple rule of 1) all armies must have the same number or more than the number of cavalry AND 2) all cav armies of (random number) 5,000 are allowed (raiding parties)

now as I stated, I'm torn on this issue - it may not be something that the rest of you even wish to mess with (and as Spain I can afford to build all Cav armies at will unlike some of the other nations) but it just strikes me as, well, gamey... so if the rest of you don't see it as an issue I won't waste time with it either.

next topic: Changing Peace Offers... (now just because all this comes from the 1st war involving france don't take it personally, it's just that a) we're all newbies here mostly and b) it's the 1st episode where human v human war was seen in game so it's the only laboratory from which to draw our ideas so far) should this be an issue for us to discuss/address?

also, if anyone has any concerns/issues/ideas from the game feel free to bring em up - we're all adults here (I hope) who simply wish to make our 3-4 hour Friday nite investment as enjoyable for all as possible. nobody should take anything personally or get insulted/mad over this stuff.

 

[unmerged(334)]

The Cav limit will not work. Infantry gets killed faster than Cav specialy in early years of the game. So a player can start a war with 50/50 Inf/Cav and after one battle he will be left with 10/90 Inf/Cav. What you expect him to do then? Stop the war?

 

[WhiteHojo]

Originally posted by Pomerania Prince
The Cav limit will not work. Infantry gets killed faster than Cav specialy in early years of the game. So a player can start a war with 50/50 Inf/Cav and after one battle he will be left with 10/90 Inf/Cav. What you expect him to do then? Stop the war?

these are the things to discuss... yep - that would cause a problem... but what are your thoughts on a all cav armies?

 

[Hyzhenhok]

I think All-Cav armies should be allowed, as I don't see them as 'gamey', but actually quite stupid in certain situations. Once assaulting becomes more efficient, they will be useless in that area, and they NEED equal or more numbers of infantry support in some terrain, because they get penalties.

 

[Taelyn]

ACA

I'd have to say that its my opinion that regulation wouldn't work well. Regulating army consistency is about as gamey as the ACA's themselves. In light of this, and since we can all field ACA's (except maybe poor Sweden, Porgugal, and myself), let it be. In a few decades cavalry will lose their dominance in rough terrain and will remain useless in assaults. It'll work out in the end, but its best to make everyone aware of it so that we're all playing by the same rules.

I have a further question that may in the future come up at some point. Are we allowing game file edits for things like exchanging territories? I'd like to say no editing purely for game balance, but editting to allow treaties and so forth may be valid. Anyway, its something to discuss ahead of time.