Posts: 2,585
Threads: 42
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
7
Should we agree in the spirit of no formal alliances we have no NAP/turned based diplomacy. Not saying we can not agree to attack same person, even a "You leave me a lone I will leave you alone" would be fine since it still leave things open really.
Is there no Dwarf lovers out there. Friendly with tolerant next door, 20% bonus vs giants great defensive towns.
Posts: 1,266
Threads: 25
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
8
If someone prefers to play EL, I will switch to DW since I was on the fence originally anyways.
-The Deliverer
Posts: 2,249
Threads: 75
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation:
17
Awesome. Five on board. Just need clarity from Rick on whether DW and GN affect each other with influence raises. Hoping that is a quick fix so those two are not disadvantaged on that point.
Posts: 5,613
Threads: 619
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
6
Very good.
Good point on the natural enemies having maybe too much impact on influence losses.
So this will have the GN and DW remain in their eternal natural enemy status. And now the BL and EL are natural enemies. The Giant is free of a natural enemy. Everyone else is just neutral then and no allies can be declared, but enemies can be declared. This is again for player enforcement, a "mistake" of declaring an ally will be a -2 to influence. No trading except in the open market, at all - same penalty.
I would appreciate it if the players would email me on their feedback on this game at my personal email or @support as I am quite interested in how this more open game plays.
If the players all like, I will attempt to get Grasshopper to run this game x3 a week - M, W, F.
I'm looking forward to following this one.