Whos your favorite kingdom to play

[Sinestro]

I was just curious who is everyones favorite kingdom(s) to play? and why?

I was just setting a goal for myself and I want to become a master (master could be the wrong word but I think everyone will know what I'm implying) at playing the Black Dragon and Witchlord this will change soon as 3rd cycle is out but this is just my choosing for now. Anyways, I like how balanced the BL is, strength of its military and movement. The witchlord, im a fan of the wizard power, location they start, and the spells they get unlike everyone else.

Can anyone say that they are better at one kingdom of another? Or if you don't know if your really good at a specific kingdom are there any players that can say that another player is good at one. example: "You don't want to go up against the Dark Elf, HeadHoncho is playing them and he's really good at that kingdom."

Ry Vor and Uncle Mike, I would really like to know your guys favorites as well since you 2 develop this game, It would be interesting to know who your favorite is.

[HeadHoncho]

Ooh, favorite is a tough one. Ry Vor likes to say they're all his children, and they're all worthy.

I enjoy different things about many of them:

RD/GI: So fun to cruise around with a nigh-unstoppable military!
TR: Four groups that can take pop centers running around is also fun. There was a variant we tried for a while that allowed five groups, that was even crazier.
EL/DA: Unbeatable emissaries, at higher influences you have ems that can one-step cities!
WA/SO/WI: Few things are more fun in this game than the higher-level spells.
AN/DE: Love the special rules, the multi-King actions for AN and the DE Prince versatility are all amazing.
BL/RA: Great balance and flexibility, you can take the Kingdom in whatever direction you choose, pretty much.
UN: The early kidnap is fantastic, and having a fleet of Agents at Level 13+ means you can instantly neutralize entire political corps.
DW/GN: Solid defense and resources, good political rules like 320 bonuses and sleep resistance, although I haven't played these.

I've won with EL, GI, RD, WA, so I guess I'm "better" at those Kingdoms, but sometimes winning is more about how the game develops, rather than the particular Kingdom. I'd be more afraid of an expert player in any position, than I would be of a lesser-experienced player in, say, a military Kingdom.

EDIT: You know what, as I talk about this, it struck me that there's a reason I shell out more than $60 per month on this game after setup fees... that's because it's pretty much the best game of its type/genre out there.

[Sinestro]

So you wouldn't say that you have a favorite or are better at any specific kingdom over others?

I know you said you have won with those few kingdoms. But like you said, sometimes winning is about how the game develops. I agree with that statement.

That's one thing that is so fun about this game. Every turn will determine if you win or lose the game. I often think of the poem "the road not taken" by Robert Frost when playing a game and submitting turns. I think the really good players are those that take the road less traveled, they are the ones to fear.

[HeadHoncho]

I guess if I'm pressed to narrow the list, EL, RD, SO, UN have been some of my more "favorite" Kingdoms to play.

[Drogo]

I love the ground the BL can cover, especially with the Exploratory format (no HP until T4). As was said you can go a lot of different ways with the BL, both geographically and existentially. Love the early Summer region to yourself as well.

[Ry Vor]

My job in kingdom design is to make them all equally attractive: initially attractive to myself, selfish as that sounds, but as you can tell from the whole scope of the game, I don't necessarily favor military, political, magic, covert, or unusual ethos - I like them all and want them to be somewhat equally attractive.  Players have various preferences.  But also as you can see in the Resurgence, I'm not sitting still.  The Giants were ridiculously powerful when I got Alamaze back, the Elves and Dwarves were neutered.  So that all changed, along with dozens of other changes to kingdoms.  That unsettled some folks, but my intention is that all kingdoms compete, no kingdom dominates, and they remain unique and appealing in their own ways.  I did initially, with the Paladins and the Giants, give that central position more power, as they were essentially surrounded.  But it came back more exaggerated, for example, with Giants being the best seafaring kingdom.

We've had here on the forum discussions on formats: diplomacy or anonymous, SVC or Rex, Team or Individual.  I make an appeal to not take hard stances, like I only play anonymous, or I only play Rex.  The game, and the heart of PBEM involves diplomacy, else we could just play computer games against the AI.  SVC is necessary for kingdoms like the Underworld, and perhaps the Wizard kingdoms, as they are not likely to take 4 regions.   The SVC win in the last completed game was no easier than Rex, and SVC adds a level of tension, and a nuance, and players now have a deeper need to discover what the heck the Red Dragon (or whoever) is trying to do.  SVC was too easy prior to 2014, and too random.  I think its a great feature now.

A big part of the reason The Choosing is taking so long is the care I am trying to devote to making all 24 possible kingdoms a titillating choice.  Its certainly not the programming.  Uncle Mike usually shows me the next morning what I first gave him the evening before.  Fantastic.  Its either me getting dimmer, or it is true Alamaze is very complicated, intricate, has many ramifications and nuance and balancing various disparate strengths has been kind of the hallmark of Alamaze, and the thing Phil would enjoy talking about the most.  This is why I don't think of Alamaze as a war game.  What war game has the political, magical, economic, covert, diplomatic models/influences Alamaze has?  When Frost  Lord was asked to provide the tool for Unusual Encounters, he who makes a living on documenting business process (among other things I am sure) and is spectacular at it, was a bit staggered at how many moving parts there were.  I again am grateful for what he has given the player community.  But Unusual Sightings are only a percent or two of what is in Alamaze.  The artifacts themselves a percent or two.  What we are doing with adding so many new kingdoms and what I think players will really come to like with the Traits, the individuality of brigades and special abilities within some brigades (Zombie brigades grow after winning battles, for example), the new kingdom starting positions and the dynamics of 24 potential kingdoms for 12 positions I feel is a gaming design breakthrough.  But that's just me. 

So yes, as Head Honcho said, all the kingdoms are my children, and I love them equally.  And if someone doesn't like one of them, I am like a protective father.

[Ry Vor]

As an example, some might think, how are the Gnomes going to be as exciting/interesting as the Necromancer?

Well, in addition to their 2nd Cycle abilities, and unique spell lists, how about having traits of Cunning, Industrious, Foreknowledge, Trick of the Trade, and Spy Network?

Yes, I look after my Gnomes.  I can't always find them or know what they are up to, but short people do have reason to live. 

[Sinestro]

Lol. Should have named them hobbits....hmm is there a difference in the 2?

When I think of gnome, I think of the Travelocity gnome

[Ry Vor]

Lol. Should have named them hobbits....hmm is there a difference in the 2?

When I think of gnome, I think of the Travelocity gnome

In 2nd Cycle, most I think would agree, they are the #4 magic kingdom and can exploit gold production, and have a very defensible corner position in their favored terrain.  The Gray Mouser enjoys playing them.  Not your garden gnome. 

Its pretty intense early diplomacy in a diplomacy game, as so many kingdoms either have a PC there to start, or could be coveting the region.  Lots of deals to be made without cutting off all your future options.