|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Nov 4, 2015 19:15:52 GMT
I will participate, but I will ask to do the map stuff as Portugal? If not, I will still ask to be Portugal and be a referee or a guy on the side lines trying to decide which side to join.
And yes, green light.
|
|
|
|
Post by saltin on Nov 4, 2015 19:51:06 GMT
Well I know that right now these wars arent working, they are just generating frustration.
So we can either stop them or wait a bit,think about how to do them better and then try again.
I made a few suggestions,namelly making a few new groups with independant,non-participant game master that decide everything within their own groups.
Does this idea appeal,are we trying to do something else instead?Do I need to make groups with leaders or not?
I need names:
Name of the next leader in the rotation.
Name of his group.
Name of the theme for that group.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Nov 4, 2015 19:55:38 GMT
We could have a leader for the Axis who decides if his teams turns are fair. Same for allies. "But Mountbatten what if they disagree?!!!" There can be a judge like General William T. Sherman who decides if the two teams cannot agree. |
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Nov 4, 2015 20:03:32 GMT
maybe we can have a rule for the dices (the dices are always unfair).
if you attack a country with the same amount of stars your main number will be a 7.
if you attack a weaker country ranked by stars your main number is a 6
if you attack a stronger country ranked by stars your main number is a 8.
however, to keep it more fun/realistic you can edit this main number by giving arguments. with one argument you can increase/decreause the number by 1. your arguments must be reasonable amd defendable.
you can increase your amount of stars, if you invest in technology or if you get a bigger army. however, this cant be changed quickly. the game-refugee decides wheter you get another star or not.
the max amount of stars you can have is 5
the max amount of stars you can have in the beginning is 3
|
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Nov 4, 2015 20:11:56 GMT
We could have a leader for the Axis who decides if his teams turns are fair. Same for allies. "But Mountbatten what if they disagree?!!!" There can be a judge like General William T. Sherman who decides if the two teams cannot agree. I agree with this! Lord Portugal shall be the all knower and decider! |
|
|
|
Post by Saltin on Nov 4, 2015 20:12:50 GMT
K 1st group made,each one if you will eventually lead a group and see how you do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 5, 2015 8:26:26 GMT
Great, lets see how things turn out to be.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ant贸nio Salazar on Nov 5, 2015 8:31:52 GMT
SO does this mean I am leader of the Eagles?
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 5, 2015 9:31:00 GMT
You are and haelicon is also a leader of ??
|
|
|
|
Post by saltin on Nov 5, 2015 9:42:32 GMT
Yes Ant贸nio Salazar,you and/or Haelicon can lead the first campaign,you can take little time off to plan how to do it if you want. As game masters you let the players decide how they want to play their country but you set limits when they go overboard (and you know they will  ),decide dice rolls,you can even introduce events like bad weather,spies,bad communications,key general assassination, break down in the supply line ectt (best if pics are added for extra effect).. Anyways GM's lead their game with or without extra events,however they want.See the Eagles thread for more info. We rotate leadership of the group after each campaign/ war. |
|
),decide dice rolls,you can even introduce events like bad weather,spies,bad communications,key general assassination, break down in the supply line ectt (best if pics are added for extra effect)..
