48 hr fast pace steel

[Draugr]

Brek did a pretty good job there of summing up my thoughts.

I put forum because I have found less teaming up in forum games than in silent games actually. when there is teaming up you can see the flow of the forum and follow the logic. the one ally thing is because yeah it is nice to make some plans but you would only be able to talk to that ally after you have openly declared them an ally. so everyone knows you could be planning secretly sort of. natural response would be to then find your own ally.

I see two votes for silent so far.

[Draugr]

I am not looking for this to be a full diplomacy game as a fast pace game full diplomacy would bog things down a bit.

but again if the votes are in for it I am game

[unclemike]

Slot 1 - I would like diplomacy.  I know a lot of players worry about diplomacy, but honestly the winter game had full diplomacy and it was a hell of a lot of fun.  In a communication game everything is in the open, lies, deceit, trading, even the double cross has some fun and at least it's in the open not a concern in the dark and people wondering.  Also lets face it this also makes some niche kingdoms viable that simply are not in silent games.  
Just think about it lets bring some community back into the game where people converse chat, bullshit, and bust balls, not a game played turn to turn quietly, let the community police itself in the open.

In a normal game, that would be the case where open communication works best. Also, if the game uses the forum for communication then everyone will know what is going on and can react to events equally. That's all good. However, the purpose of this fast-paced game is for players to possibly qualify for the championship game. If you allow teaming up on others (of which the other qualifying games do not allow btw) then it wouldn't be fair to the other players nor will it be a measure of individual skill. I'm joining this game to help 'up the ante' in challenging others to be better than the usual slow-paced game.

[Strongwill]

Open comms no ally? Will that appease all? I’m good with whatever the Great players say, for I am just a humble little player.

[Strylian]

I m fine with silent on a fast game. I do think it would bog down the game. I would allow for trade however on the forums.

I will pick 12

[The Painted Man]

Slot 1 - I would like diplomacy.  I know a lot of players worry about diplomacy, but honestly the winter game had full diplomacy and it was a hell of a lot of fun.  In a communication game everything is in the open, lies, deceit, trading, even the double cross has some fun and at least it's in the open not a concern in the dark and people wondering.  Also lets face it this also makes some niche kingdoms viable that simply are not in silent games.  
Just think about it lets bring some community back into the game where people converse chat, bullshit, and bust balls, not a game played turn to turn quietly, let the community police itself in the open.

In a normal game, that would be the case where open communication works best. Also, if the game uses the forum for communication then everyone will know what is going on and can react to events equally. That's all good. However, the purpose of this fast-paced game is for players to possibly qualify for the championship game. If you allow teaming up on others (of which the other qualifying games do not allow btw) then it wouldn't be fair to the other players nor will it be a measure of individual skill. I'm joining this game to help 'up the ante' in challenging others to be better than the usual slow-paced game.

I'm not sure I follow. Are we saying the only games that qualify for the championship are the ones that didn't have any forum communication? Or again that diplomacy is not one of the "skills" we are measuring? Or something else?

Keep in mind that I still have the baby symbol next to my name when I sign up for things, so that means my odds at qualifying for any sort of championship are slim to shady.

[Wookie Panz]

I have no problem with diplomacy.  2 day turn around assures a fast game.

[Drogo]

I'll play if it's silent

[Ry Vor]

Slot 1 - I would like diplomacy.  I know a lot of players worry about diplomacy, but honestly the winter game had full diplomacy and it was a hell of a lot of fun.  In a communication game everything is in the open, lies, deceit, trading, even the double cross has some fun and at least it's in the open not a concern in the dark and people wondering.  Also lets face it this also makes some niche kingdoms viable that simply are not in silent games.  
Just think about it lets bring some community back into the game where people converse chat, bullshit, and bust balls, not a game played turn to turn quietly, let the community police itself in the open.

Impressive, Young Skywalker. 

I like it and I think as long as we accept either no or one ally, and there are no "Game Long NAP's", or even a hint at the ineuendo we will never fight each other, then diplomacy should be fine.  The big problem as I perceive it in full diplomacy was the turn zero correspondence trying to lock up NAP's.  And having forum diplomacy plus coordination with just one ally makes diplomacy not too burdensome.  

I kind of like Draugr's one ally, only private correspondence with that one ally.  That should work out perfectly if the players want:  each kingdom would have one ally when the limit is one.   You'd have to be stubborn to not have that one ally once you can see which alliance makes the most sense for both.  So, kudos to Draugr as well for a new idea to again bridge the gap between Silent and Full.   Its kind of like a Confederations with two players per confederation but not pre-selected, determined after T0 results and possibly many turns later.

[Ry Vor]

Actually, I can see whole new levels of devious or should I say diabolical behavior in this kind of game.

First, a kingdom could only either declare one ally or be declared an ally by a kingdom.  In other words, three different kingdoms couldn't all declare the Halflings their ally.  But then, I might also decide to declare a most likely enemy an ally, such that he cannot get help from a more nobly intended potential ally.  Lots of other stuff.  Fun, or too, something.....

Or its OK to have more than one kingdom declare you an ally, you just can't declare more than one. So, three kingdoms could declare the Halfling an ally, the Halfling can only declare one, so for example, could only gift to one per turn, but could trade with all three, and potentially receive gifts from all three.

Where's the line for Halfling Kings - quick!