CJ,
Brad suggested FA GUNBOAT free-for-all. It’s the GB aspect that makes it a difficult proposition, don’t you think? Take away diplomacy in the Free-For-All format, and all of a sudden everyone is an enemy (sooner or later). Then location on the board becomes really really important. the regions of the board that have 1 or 2 fronts would become by far the best and I suggest they’d be the ones most likely to produce winners. Regions in the middle that have 3 or 4 fronts, especially those without mountains bordering them, would be bullseye targets for all surrounding nations.
FA free-for-all is a reasonable idea. Your idea of nation-pairs in 1650 free-for-all is also a good idea.
Okay, I wasn’t serious about the “Bungoat” bit, but I do like the FA Free For All type system. Create a number of relatively equal nations, remove all the “unbalancing” SNA’s and let the players decide.
Unbalancing meaning any agent SNA’s and any Name at 40. Let MEGames create 20 nations scattered about, give northern/plains nations extra camps or so, give everyone good Morale SNA’s and Free Hire, randomize nation selection, issue pdf’s and let them go…
Brad,
LOL. i thought you were kidding about the GB FA FFA…
I’d be up for something in FA but I think you have it wrong about what’s unbalancing now days. Things are better balanced if you get rid of the +20K/A SNA (which I still detest). You don’t need to get rid of hire at 40 SNAs or other SNAs. Then people can design military nations, or character nations. Your suggestion makes a pure military game and that (IMHO) would be one-dimensional and less exciting than it could/should be.
agree with brad that regions should be assigned per random and ME should place the nations and make sure that there are no immediate neihbors and no totally isolated nations. that would prevent sooo much of the trouble we had in recent FA games. so players could still name their pops but not decide about location. regional bonuses/maluses apply as laid down in the new FA rules. one would have to agree upon a default fortification level like capital/castle, MT/fort, town/tower
downside of this would propably be that there would be no specialised nations (like the weakness elves I played in FA GB 140), because allround-setups would be advantages. I still think it is worth a try.
diplomacy rules could be like this: on the instance players seeing a popcenter of another nation (on their map, or via scouting, scrying, reconing etc.), they get the e-mail-address of that player. thats a little more work for the GM, but not much.
your thoughts?
PS please dont start this game until late august, since I don’t want to miss it due to holidays
Not that I oppose the FA free for all, but I thought I would throw out a set of duo’s for a 1650 free for all of paired nations. Any thoughts or better ideas for a 1650 version? Or has the fickle free for all mob turned to the fourth age for good?
Quiet Avenger, Woodmen, and Easterlings sit out.
Witch King-Dragon Lord
Dog Lord-Dark Lieutenants
Fire King-Ice King
Cloud Lord-Blind Sorceror
Eothraim-Long Rider
Harad-Noldo
South Gondor-Dunlendings
Arthedain-Rhudaur
Cardolan-Dwarves
Sinda-Corsairs
North Gondor-Northmen
I followed the logic that Corsairs, Harad, South Gondor, and North Gondor were all too powerful too be allied with each other and the Mordor situation needed to be made less complicated. Three powers in Mordor might come to an diplomatic arrangement that 6 could not.
Also, i ditched the Woodmen instead of the Northmen because it was my belief that the Woodmen were crummier in Free for All than the Northman would have been. I am concerned that the LR-EO player would be a shade too mighty, but its certainly less imbalanced overall than the original FFA.
A free for all is not the sort of thing for a gunboat I (Personal Opinion) would have thought. It’s straight take your nation to the top by hook or by crook. All’s fair in Love and MEPBM!
Herman, If you are referring to my previous post with all the duos - I do not intend that those duo’s should be for gunboat. It would be a talking-boat free for all, but it would have duos.
CJ,
I think your pairings are reasonable. I’d personally prefer the ones that are co-located because there would be a LOT of strength in that. I do understand your logic for seperating the BIG boys from their neighbors…
Just looking at them, NE/HA is a HUGE powerhouse and would have to be a target for all surrounding nations from the getgo. Maybe you’d be better off with a weaker partner for NE? Their character strength is remarkable, and couple that with their relative isolation, and they’re perhaps the best nation on the board for this format.
Unfortunatly, initial diplomacy didn’t work for me… Mainly due to the fact My turn 0, was sent to the wrong Person and I got it a day or two before process time, by which time alot of diplomacy had happened, and I was stuffed…
I tried to put up a good fight, and had allies that could have slowed my demise, BUT I knew that I would be out as soon as the FK moved on me…
In the end I managed to get my chars and artefact into positions for my allies to pick them up…
BUT it was fun to play the game… AND i have the honour of being the first position out…
So I have started looking at the FA rules, why aren’t regions assigned randomly normally? Or why not assign them by preference then let people build their nations?
In a free-for-all why do you all think that MEPBM should place all the pop centers (except for maybe capitals?) Wouldn’t reasonable capital placement by MEPBM then result in a decent distribution around which a player could place other pop centers?
Obviously I havent looked at this too deeply and not having played FA I am utterly naive to the inhuman abuses the clever player can deploy when turned loose.
After looking at the pairings, I have decided that it is quite difficult to make truly fair pairings that also seem fun.
I would like to propose that every player receives two random nations from 1650. The random pairings and the player who gets them would be matched. Let it be up to the players to cut down the randomly-chosen leaders! Perhaps the designated crummy-nations should be removed first before nations are handed out.
