1000 Gb

General
#1

Any interest in one of these? We can do what we did before and restricted regions, I’ve got some interest.

Clint

#2

I would be interested, but not until one of my current games ends.

Jeff Young

#3

Agreed. I’m in three games right now. Once one ends I could be up for another. I do love 1000 GB.

Greg

#4

I’m interested and will sign up as soon as you announce a game Clint. FA GB 48 was a total blast!

Dave

#5

Clint,

I might be interested too if you set up a new game.

Alain

#6

Okay I’ll wait and see a litte bit. Last time we managed with a restricted format. I might be tempted to play myself as it’s GB so low maintenance.

Clint

#7

I’d be interested when the time comes to sign up. I had fun with the last FA GB. Keep me on the list and let me know when you are ready!

Mark Farrior

#8

Clint, if you play, that sounds like we have identified 4 of the 12 players needed (Alain, Mark, Clint, Dave). Clint, you’ll love FA GB because mages are really important and you always argue to that end, and now it’s even more true than ever. The fog-of-war aspect to this variant is huge. mages help in multiple ways to incrementally clear the fog.

Now we just need 8 more players?

Dave

#9

I’ve played a lot of 1000 (and GB a few times for 1000) so I’m aware of the Mages but thanks for the heads-up… :stuck_out_tongue: Tips always welcome. Been convinced of the 419 spell recently - awesome!

Clint (player)

Last game we did a restricted set-up with less players, it seems to be working fine so I suspect we’ll go for a variation on that should I see some more interest.

Clint

#10

Are you proposing a setup like in FA GB 48? That was a great setup IMO.

#11

Define “like” :slight_smile: More like game 46, similar set-up otherwise. That was 8 players in total, with some regions out of bounds.

Clint

#12

One observation from Game 46 is that the with so few players the market was quite quickly overvalued. You might want to look at that.

Gavin

#13

Interesting observation Gavin. Sounds like the law of unintended consequences in action.

well, if we can find 12 players, we can do the full board and have 22 positions as we did in FA GB 48. Of course, people need to send Clint an email indicating their interest. The format of GB 48 was:

DS: 5 nation pairs + NK
FP: 5 nation pairs + SK

nation pairs were geographically separated. All regions were available during nation design.

#14

Is this version using diplo’s?
Alain

#15

Generally no, but that’s open to debate. Got any others who might be interested in this format?

Clint

#16

I’d be interested if there are no diplos (not interested if there are - they ruin GB imo).

I’ll email you now :slight_smile:

JK

#17

I agree with no diplos. Helps maintain that Fog of War that is so hard to get with normal games. However, in full disclosure, my brother and I would each play a nation to make a nation pair. That way we can debate over strategy and tactics . . . . I would prefer a whole game that we wait for than an 8 nation game with limited geography.

Mark Farrior

#18

You might have a long wait for a full game, that’s part of the problem. We’ll see - we’re upto 5 at present (so that would be 3 more for 4v4 or 7 more - 2 of which are Kingdoms if a full game). I’ll have a go at this for fun… :wink:

Clint

#19

Any more takers? I’m raring to start =D

JK

#20

Are there restrictions in this game? e.g.: no +20% kidnap/assassinate, strategic locations disallowed, no double scout, etc.?

Just trying to plan out my ideas for the coming game.

Greg