Matrix Games Forums

I will be on vacation Aug 10th - 20th and no suitable Internet connection. Being Turkey, I will find a suitable country to take over my files during thisn absence so as not to hold up the game. So somebody will need to be a good friend of mine in more than one way...[;)]

Hummmmm. And now that I read Kingmaker's argument I understand his concerns. Now speaking "cross-game" (ie. Danish Too since many of us are involved in both) it makes more since to NOT allow the change in Danish Too since we didn't discuss it before game start.

For this game, I'm not sure. Guess we need to hash it out before gamestart.

[font="courier new"]Hey all[/font]
[font="courier new"] [/font]
[font="courier new"]I read your post, Peter, making the case against house rules, and although I generally agree that house rules is something to be avoided and only taken into use as a last measure to preserve game balance, I will in the following make the case why we do need a house rule against insurrections in another major powers territory, until WCS makes a patch.[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
[ol][*]
[font="courier new"]Its too easy to succeed an insurrection mission.[/font][/align][*]
[font="courier new"]The penalty for an unsuccessful insurrection mission is near non-existent. Minus 50 influence, any decent diplomat can charm that away in a month.[/font][/align][*]
[font="courier new"]Only counter-measure is other diplomats. Garrisons, National Morale, Glory, Buildings (Art and Courts for example) has no preventive effect.[/font][/align][*]
[font="courier new"]Success on the insurrection mission isn't influenced by anything but the "roll" of dice against the diplomat's statistics, the target nation's national morale, glory, empire status, buildings, potential garrisons, or even armies. The story about the 400.000 troops being kicked out of Bavaria, by 7.000 insurrectionists springs to my mind as an extreme example of how this game feature can spin out of control in a multiplayer environment.[/font][/align][*]
[font="courier new"]Moreover Pandora's box is now open. Now we all know, and would be fool's not too exploit this, supposing we play the game to win, besides the other aspects of diplomacy and logistics to mention some other great reasons to play PBEM.[/font][/align][*]
[font="courier new"]WCS acknowledges that there is a problem and talk about "I like the idea of only one insurrection per turn per minor -- it's just a little tricky to figure out which diplomat to allow to have that chance. I suppose we could search all the diplomats in the region and only allow the one with the best stats to have a roll. Remember there is a penalty of -50 attitude with every minor power in the game for a failed insurrection attempt. We've been talking about adding a glory penalty on top of this, and possibly of giving the attempt itself a monetary cost, or perhaps a chance of one. I think there's enough precedent in the period to justify diplomatically-motivated insurrections, though they shouldn't be as common as some people are describing on this thread -- I'd originally had in mind maybe 3 or 4 successful insurrections per game." End quote.[/font][/align][/ol]
[font="courier new"] [/font]
[font="courier new"]All in all this feature that works ok'ish in single player mode is overpowered in a multiplayer environment and therefore potentially a gamebreaker.[/font]
[font="courier new"] [/font]
[font="courier new"]My suggestion is that we go with the house rule for now, but I have faith in that WCS will address this exploit and once WCS fixes the exploit we return to normal rules and the use of diplomats as the game allows?[/font]
[font="courier new"][/font] 
[font="courier new"]Sincerely Chindits[/font]

ORIGINAL: Kingmaker

PS, from the 'No Frills thread, ... Though it places the peaceful non conquering Turkish peoples at a disadvantage in not being able to use this function! Monte raises a good point here in that it is again the smaller nations that get disadvantaged ie the complete opposite of what this game (No Frills)was trying to do, give the little guys a chance.

Disagree with that.

Its the richer nations that can afford to field the maximum number of allowed diplomats. IMO, this particular aspect of the game is so easily exploited that a player doing so to the best of their ability would make the flaws inherent in the current insurrection system self evident.

I DO like the idea about returning to the "organic" rules if WCS addresses the issue with a patch during the game.

HiHi

Chindits please see post on 'No Frills' thread, I'm buggered if I'm editing all that again! [:)]

Mus, I'm assuming Montes point was that at least the Small nations do at least get that option, but ... ?

All the Best
Peter

So when do we start?

In answer to the question, when do we start? I think France is waiting for us to hash out the answer to the houserule.

Honestly I think the biggest concern is actually finishing a multi-player PBEM like this in our lifetime...

Im kinda waiting on a house rule yes or no ruling and moreover I've PM'ed a bit with Evwalt about a game name and I've come up with a suggestion, that we are gonna use "Westphalian Discord"? Unless someone comes with a better idea I gonna use that game name rather then "New PBEM"

HiHi

Chindit while there's a delay on starting have you by any chance contacted Mccoy kyriakouvet@icqmail.com, GMT+2

As I've said before I am fine with stepping down to give a Newbie a chance if he wishes to take over Sweden, your call.

All the Best
Peter

Final call: Following house rule or not? I tally the votes one the first post of the thread. I am sure Kingmaker is a NO.

After listening to everyone, I think I will go with an ABSTAIN. Everyone else vote so we can get this rolling! and2 is waiting for the final decision before game start.

Abstain here also. Whatever gets the game going I will vote for. [:D]

I have already voted no.

ORIGINAL: Deerslayer

Honestly I think the biggest concern is actually finishing a multi-player PBEM like this in our lifetime...

One of my PBEM games is more than 65 turns old.

Also, I really dont think any player should be abstaining from a house rule vote. That is just going to make it take longer. Particularly when you have people like evwalt voting yes and then changing their mind and abstaining. We should not have to count, have a recount and then examine the pregnant and hanging chads here.

Yes or no, house rule adopted by majority vote or not, other settings are agreed on, lets get going. Being just after the 40 year anniversary of putting a man on the moon, I gotta say COG:EE isnt, lets go.

[;)]

Well, if I have to vote, I say yes. But I guess I will ask this question, does anyone NOT want to play if we use the rule?

If everyone will play regardless, lets go ahead and start. I don't think its going to come up anyway for awhile. Plenty of time to hash it out.

I'll go ahead and start my diplomacy.

I agree we should just start the game with the rules we already agreed on and give another day or two to hash out the house rule.

Its PBEM. We could keep voting on the house rule for 3-4 more days and probably still be on our first or second turn.

Is France going to send the first turn ASAP or what are we waiting for?

as I already wrote I'm for...(no insurrection/coups against players).
I play also if people decide against.
cya
aqui (spanish)

I'll email France. I think he was just waiting for the ok.

I mailed the french turn 0 to everyone
 
Enjoy!