Sign Up for New Variant, Kingmaker

General
#1

“It is time young king, time to put down the darkness and step into the light. Time to be what your ancestors aspired too. Time to be the one and true King.” The elven chancellor’s voice rung true in the heart and soul of the man sitting on the throne. “Very well, I wish it would not come to this, but we must prepare for war. He shall not prevail. On the will of the fathers; a new darkness shall not rise!”

Meanwhile, elsewhere, from the slime covered lips of a darkskinned orc. “Yes, yes we have the hordes prepared and the warmongers still pretend to feud to have an excuse for their build ups. We are ready for your lead sir.” The King look at his servant, venom spitting from his lips with ever word. “My cousin is too weak to lead. His lack of ambition and reliance on diplomacy has gained nothing. It is time for his term to end and I, the only true lord of this realm to rise. It is time for war!”

The year is 998 of the 4th age. The Kingdoms precarious peace is about to come to an end, and only one shall rule in the end. It is time for middleearth to decide with blood and sweat. It is time for you to fight for the right to be a Kingmaker.”

Played 1650 a few times and enjoyed it grand epic feel?
Ever wonder what it would be like to develop your own nation, but not want to deal with the 3 way game and the smaller nations of 4th age?
This is the perfect chance to try both!

Kingmaker is a 4th age variant which incorporates the latest 4th age rules, which allow for larger nations, those nations near enemies are bigger or more heavily fortified, to denote their preparations for war. It is a 2 way war, with the free backing one of the kingdoms and the darks backing the other. 5 neutrals exist, much as in the standard 1650 and 2950 games, to later take a side.

The rules of Kingmaker are:

  1. One Kingdom starts on the Free team, and one on the Dark Team. Which is north and which is south is determined by regional selection rules as normal.
  2. Region Rules (including all nations knowing which allegiance is in which region before nation design).
  3. All other revised 4th age Rules (increased population money and SNA for having harbors and ports, free upgrades and fortifications for being on roads or not in mountains, etc).
  4. Kingdom at War: Kingdoms get troops for half cost just like normal nations.
  5. Embattlement Rules:
    a) For each enemy in an adjacent region, allied nations receive 4000 additional gold for population center upgrades.
    b) For each neutral in an adjacent region the nation receives 2000 additional gold.
    c) For each ally in an adjacent zone, allied nations reduce their embattlement bonus gold by 4000 gold.
    d) Embattlement bonus gold can not be reduced below 0 gold.
  6. True Neutrals: No allied neutrals at start (max of 5). Neutrals can not win.

This is a call for people interested in the 4th age Kingmaker Variant, particularly 1650 players new to 4th age and interested in trying something similar.
Clint has said you need 10 people before MEPBM will open up a listing for a variant game, so let’s see what we can do. I think I have around 5 people interested right now.

Mike and Ernie. I noticed you both lamenting about 3 ways on the list. Perhaps you’ll join this and see how it turns out?

Clint, maybe you’d be up for trying it?

See ya,
Ken

P.S. I’ll put a list of adjacent regions and the regional map up as a link later, or you can contact me privately.

P.P.S. I know some people do not like the embattlement stuff from the FASUP list. I personally do not know if it is needed in 4th age proper with the revised rules. Still, the variant would be a fun place to see how they work out without disrupting 4th age testing. If you would be willing to play if the embattlement rules were NOT part of the variant, go ahead and say so.

#2

It’s all a bit “the party of the first part herewith known as…”, any chance of dumbing down the rules a bit ?
I’ve only played 1 game of 4th Age and I don’t know what the variations are, please explain more.

#3

Alrighty:

Revised Kingmaker rules:

  1. All standard revised 4th age rules.
  2. Kingdoms start with half cost troops as per normal nations.
  3. One kingdom is free, one is dark, 10 nations to a side, 5 true neutrals.
  4. Alliance players recieve +4K gold for population center upgrades if 1-2 enemies are adjecent, and +8K gold if 3+ enemies are adjecent.
  5. All players recieve +2K gold if 1-2 neutrals are adjecent, and +4K gold if 3+ are adjecent.

4th age standard revised rules:

  1. Each person selects a number of regions and alligence choice much like choosing nations in 1605/2950.
  2. Everyone finds out who is in what regions.
  3. people design their own nations. The 2 kingdoms are larger than the other nations, but are more spead out with lots of preknown locations. During this time you choose your nation special abilities, pop centers size and locations, and characters.
    For those familar with the old 4th age, in the new version agents are more in check, and nations gain additional population money for harbors/ports, sitting on the roads, and not being in mountains. For new players you start with 2 MT’s, a T, a V, and a C. You also get an extra pop center which increases in size the father north your are.

That is about it. Pretty cool.

If you want to know more about regions, let me know, but basically it is the map divided into 25 areas like (iron hills, southern mordor, arnor, etc).

#4

Ken:
I like this idea, one of the “problems” with fourth age is actually too much fog of war. With each player naming their nation and the locations of those players not know.
If this was more like 1650 (but) with individual nation set up like 4age, I would be interested it trying it.

Barry

#5

Count me in. I’m in a 4th age game now w/ the new rules but I picked up a drop…so I haven’t made my own nation…

anyway, I’m in

Jason M.
morgulhammer@yahoo.com

#6

Yuck,

As a newt it’d be boring to join such a variant. No way for a neut faction to win, but that’s on purpose, so why not. And since newt dont’ to get embattlement bonus it makes them easy target to threats, thus little or no diplomacy. No fog of war one can use, weak economy with high odds of backstab, what’d be the point to be neutral in such game?.

Call it 12/12 and be done with it.

count me out

#7

I agree with bakta, the neuts become nothings unless they all pick the same side and it makes a slaughter. Unless they are a thin line down the middle (as if) they will need to align with whoever is closest to survive. Neutrals get lesser gold bonuses for position unless they align immediately.
either go like a grudge formatt or increase the numbers of neuts to make it a true three way (loses kingmaker aspect).

that’s my 2c

Adrian

#8

Yes the purpose is to not have a 3 way game in this one. However, take note neutrals do get embattlement bonuses as written if they are adjecent to another neutral.

Actually, you might like it, its more of a challenge. Remember that like in 1650/2950 the alliances will have a real reason to interact with the neutrals (in 3 way 4th age they are more then likely just another enemy or a whole side to team up with) and the neutrals will likely have 6-10 turns to build up and like in 1650/2950 will have a moderately small chance of being attacked at the onset. So I’ll disagree that it will be boring. You might be in a real difficult spot and have to make signifigant long term plans and build your nation a bit more then in a 3 way 4th age.

But in anycase, if being a neutral and staying neutral to be your own 3rd side is your cup of tea, then the variant is not for you. I imagine most people who sign up are 1650 players looking to try some but not all of the aspects of 4th age for the first time (and in a way that is its purpose, so many have heard of the horrors of 4th age, and not seen the revision made recently, and thus do not know of its imporvements) or people who have played a few 4th age games and are not interested in the 17 on 8 till one side is dying or out then the other 2 sides play the “who backstabs first” game which can commonly occur.

Have a good one,
Ken

#9

Challenge barely begin to describe it. The one big difference in a FA is the fact that both side cannot have kingdom in their midst. Thus they do not know right from the start where the “third” side is. That is now done with.

Next, odds for a neut, out of 16/18 provinces, out of memory, to be close to another one are rather low. As for a neut being allowed 6 /10 turns to build up, have you played a neut recently?, I have folks who start gettin antsy by turn 4. Add to that should one neut be embattled by 3 powers around him, one of them being a kingdom, and the pressure to join that side will be quite great. That, in turn forces the other side to lean on those next to them or loose the whole game due to numbers, or plain decide a stab is in order. So no, it’s very unlikely neut will have as much leeway they do in 1650/2950 as they don’t start on an even footing, if only economically, and being quite alone. Once the first neut join a side, domino effects usually ensue, lowering the values of the respectives neut nations and/or fostering the events above.

And be so kind to read my post before putting words into my mouth, where did I say that being neut and staying neut was my cup of tea?. As for “Horrors of the 4th age”???, please explain. Long are gone the GSI, SNA 31 for everyone, days.

The setup might be fine, but I really think it’s not worth to bring neutral powers in it, a 12/12 is far better. For a neut, it’ll be indeed boring.

#10

You paint a very bleak picture, Bakta. In game 40, it’s turn 10, and none of the neutrals have declared…

#11

OK, to clear the air, no words were placed in anyone’s mouth, nor were any of my responses aimed at you in a negative manner. My “cup of tea” statement was in general and agreeing with you. If someone is a heavily inclined toward neutral guy, this might not be the best game for them.

I have played a neutral and in 1650/2950 you have a moderate number of turns to prepare (6-9 most commonly). I disagree they will not be on even footing, they will have more time to build their nation which likely more then compensate for a extra fort and a tower, or a camp to village upgrade most embattled allied nations will have “over” a neutral at start of game.

As for neutral placement, you get to choose your regions in 4th age, so if you want a rhudaur like position, put yourself near one of the kingdoms, if you want a more corsairs position, take Umbar or Khand, or even the Iron Hills. You have a moderately impressive amount of control over what neutral sylte you will have in the game.

As for the horror of fourth age, we have the same point. Long gone are the days of everyone haivng SNA 31, but a lot of 1650 players do not know that and this game would give them the opportunity to see the new rules.

That said, prove it wrong and join up and show me the errors of my ways. :slight_smile:

Have a good one,
Ken

#12

Is there a new rulebook for the “standard” 4th Age variant mentioned in this thread?

#13

What kind of time table are we talking about here starting up? If it’s likely at least a couple months out then I’m going to join up in another game while these others are working themselves out.

just curious,

JMR

#14

There is on the FASUP website and I believe on the main web-page now. Clint might be able to help with that. I could also send them to you via email privately.

#15

As far as when, it would depend on how many we can get together how quickly, I’d like to consolidate the two threads on this and see if a 12 on 12 would fill up faster.

If it was a 12 on 12 would more people sign up? If so post that ya would.

I would guess this will take a month or 2 to set-up in one form or the other.

Bakta and Elf-baiter, would you all play if it is 12 on 12 instead of 10/10/5?

If Mike joins (MJD from the other thread) we would have only about 8 of the 10 we would need to be listed, though it would be nice to have more.

Thanks,
Ken

#16

No thanks, I’m a newt to the bone.

As I understand your intend, you are attempting to bring 1650 players into FA, maybe asking clint to see if he knows more 1650 lovers willing to try may help fill up this game.

#17

Ken,

I might be interested in such a game sometime in the summer, because I’ll be out of town for a few weeks in May.

I also typically play only one game at a time, so I’d have to look at my time committments then in order to know whether or not I’d want to jump in then,

Mike

#18

i could be tempted, depends on timing and interest. Need to top up my account, i normally only play one game a time and that’s with grudge team aussie. We have just won against the dortmund dudes (fun game lasted 27 turns, longest in yonks) and will be doing the reverse soon. If i get few weeks warning, (havn’t done nat design for many years, havn’t played latest 4th age rules) and its a two week turn around i’ll be good to go :smiley:
I’m pretty busy and couldn’t do justice to my grudge commits if this involved twice as much time:o

Adrian