Enlightenment and Absolutism-(14/14)

14-player game set at the beginning of the War of the Austrian Succession; numerous special rules. Created and GMd by VaeVictus. 3-way draw between Russia (Alupi), Saxony-Poland (Stanislaw) and Spain (Shibabalo)

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(5-6/14)

Postby Pedros » 05 Jun 2014, 21:29

Agree totally re the victory count. I've never liked it in 1900 which is where the idea seems to have started; and I'm otherwise a great 1900 fan. More than half should be the absolute rule.
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(6-7/14)

Postby Bob.Durf » 06 Jun 2014, 13:37

Its to prevent stalemates and long late game fights, but unless its a world map with lots more supply centers and stalemate lines it doesn't make much sense.
Cheater-Hunter (Fired on account of incompetence according to top secret reports)

There's a saying amongst the moderators: "If a job's worth doing, it's worth doing well. If it's not worth doing, give it to Bob." Promotion prospects: Comical
User avatar
Bob.Durf
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: 04 Jan 2009, 02:05
Location: South Carolina
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (970)
All-game rating: (969)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(5-6/14)

Postby VaeVictis » 06 Jun 2014, 13:52

Pedros wrote:Sorry, but I don't agree with glacier! Most complicated award, probably; but this is way too fiddly for me - millions of one-off rules are one of the precise things which Dip isn't about in my book.


That is fine, simplicity over complexity is a very legitimate view of Diplomacy; a view that I hold myself most of the time. I would counter the notion that simplicity should always rule by merely saying that it depends upon the variant. This one may sport "millions of one-off" rules which may make it initially more complex, but once the rules have been read and mastered, this game remains less complex than the Seismic variant. Seismic adds another level of complexity, not only in the mechanics of the game and the extra seismic phase, but also in the strategy that each player needs to consider and address for the ever altering map and orders needed to change the landscape. Most of the rules for Enlightenment & Absolutism are explanatory, relating to odd points about the map or relations between countries (such as the Saxony-Poland rule which merely identifies that one player controls two allied countries), and introduce little more to the Classic formula other than an odd new map with nearly twice the spaces and double the number of players.

I am not disagreeing just for the sake of disagreement, I just think that Enlightenment & Absolutism deserves more of a chance to be seen before it can be written off as overly complex (please understand as well that I would not be surprised at all if your view is correct; I cannot know one way or the other until the first game).

Stanislaw wrote:Alright so those new bullet points mostly clear it up. One more question though. Does that mean Saxon units cannot enter Polish SCs and vice versa? Because they could potentially enter them just not capture them if they stay there in the fall.


I added another sentence to the fourth bullet point that should clear it up.


Pedros wrote:
Stanislaw wrote:Also I strongly second glacier's concern about the low SC victory count. Variants like the 1900 extension with the Americas have suffered before from gaining more SCs but not an increased victory condition of SCs. I understand your viewpoint on the not conquering all of Europe part, but I'd at least increase it to say 24. 18 is incredibly low for a 55 center map.


Agree totally re the victory count. I've never liked it in 1900 which is where the idea seems to have started; and I'm otherwise a great 1900 fan. More than half should be the absolute rule.


I am simply afraid of the map becoming bogged down with so many players vying for control of 55 centers. I think that it should be increased to 19 to avoid the possibility of 3 players tying, but I am loathe to do more for the moment. By a general analysis of the map that I have done in the past, most nations would need to overrun an average of 4-5 other players to achieve a solo. That is somewhat comparable to Classic where most players need to eliminate an average of 2-4 to win.

I understand the wisdom of having half the total SCs as a victory total, but I think that 28 is a distant goal with 14 players conniving to overthrow one another. Please correct me here if I am wrong and convince me otherwise; I am not trying to be dense or stubborn, but merely thought that my reasoning was sound.
VaeVictis
 
Posts: 1602
Joined: 30 Dec 2012, 01:57
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1248)
All-game rating: (1251)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(6-7/14)

Postby glacier777 » 06 Jun 2014, 15:21

re victory criteria:
I'm sorry but I won't play if it is not increased. It gives countries like France and Russia a huge advantage in my opinion. Just when a small country has expanded and worked their ass off to be in that position, a big country hits 18 and is declared the winner.
I think the victory criteria should be between 23 and 28.
Back on PlayDip after a 3 year hiatus

Silver member of the Classicists
User avatar
glacier777
 
Posts: 557
Joined: 06 Jan 2013, 19:40
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1264)
All-game rating: (1278)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(6-7/14)

Postby bindlestiff » 06 Jun 2014, 17:16

glacier777 wrote:re victory criteria:
I'm sorry but I won't play if it is not increased. It gives countries like France and Russia a huge advantage in my opinion. Just when a small country has expanded and worked their ass off to be in that position, a big country hits 18 and is declared the winner.
I think the victory criteria should be between 23 and 28.

Although I don't have a particular position as to whether the victory threshold should be 18, 19, 0r thereabouts, I do disagree that it should be a majority of the SCs. As I see it, this variant is different in a fundamental way from classic Diplomacy. Although classic Diplomacy uses a more or less historically accurate map, the relations between the Powers are entirely arbitrary, as each Power is essentially equal in power. Thus, alliances ignore historical reality, and it makes sense to set the victory criterion at a majority of SCs.

This variant, however, is more historically accurate, as it has a few major Powers and many minor Powers. In order to survive, the minor Powers will need to take this state of affairs into account, establish alliances with each other, and work together to counter the big boys. It's not classic Diplomacy, but it should make for interesting gameplay nonetheless.
-- bindlestiff
-- Platinum Classicist, Star Ambassador, card-carrying Oldie, and all-around prince of a guy

"La parole nous a été donnée pour déguiser notre pensée." (We were given speech to hide our thoughts.)
-- Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord
User avatar
bindlestiff
Premium Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: 24 Feb 2011, 06:02
Location: Oregon, USA
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1331)
All-game rating: (1388)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(6-7/14)

Postby Shibabalo » 06 Jun 2014, 22:45

It's been awhile since my last forum game ended.

Sign me up!
SOLO- Baltic, Double Diplomacy
Draw- Layered, Dip Lite, 1700, Zeus, Simple, 1900 S&S
Loss- Some games

Classicist, Whippersnapper, Swag Bagel
Shibabalo
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: 14 Jun 2010, 21:59
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (950)
All-game rating: (1222)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(6-7/14)

Postby Stanislaw » 06 Jun 2014, 22:59

Vae I understand your point about not wanting the game to end in a stalemate of 4-5 players, and I don't think you necessarily need to make the victory criteria 28, but 18 is incredibly low. You've increased the map by more than 18 centers, yet the unchanged victory criteria I think just won't work. At least bring it up to the 20s, 24 being a number I think would be better, which would keep it under half but still make up for having a large SC increase.
When you play the game of thrones you win, or you die, there is no middle ground.

Platinum member of the Classicists
User avatar
Stanislaw
 
Posts: 385
Joined: 16 Feb 2012, 02:55
Location: CT, USA
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1434)
All-game rating: (1484)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(6-7/14)

Postby glacier777 » 06 Jun 2014, 23:01

Stanislaw wrote:Vae I understand your point about not wanting the game to end in a stalemate of 4-5 players, and I don't think you necessarily need to make the victory criteria 28, but 18 is incredibly low. You've increased the map by more than 18 centers, yet the unchanged victory criteria I think just won't work. At least bring it up to the 20s, 24 being a number I think would be better, which would keep it under half but still make up for having a large SC increase.

I was thinking 24 too.
Back on PlayDip after a 3 year hiatus

Silver member of the Classicists
User avatar
glacier777
 
Posts: 557
Joined: 06 Jan 2013, 19:40
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1264)
All-game rating: (1278)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(7-8/14)

Postby VaeVictis » 07 Jun 2014, 12:01

Stanislaw and glacier777,

You have convinced me. Part of me still really wants to keep it lower at 19, but I see the wisdom in your suggestions. I will increase the victory conditions to 24 and we will see how things develop during the game. Bindlestiff is spot on with my idea behind the strategy for minor powers against the larger powers. My assumption is that good diplomats at the helm of the minor countries can successfully manipulate circumstances to work in their favor.
VaeVictis
 
Posts: 1602
Joined: 30 Dec 2012, 01:57
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1248)
All-game rating: (1251)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Enlightenment and Absolutism-(7-8/14)

Postby glacier777 » 07 Jun 2014, 12:15

You can remove the question mark from my name now :)
Back on PlayDip after a 3 year hiatus

Silver member of the Classicists
User avatar
glacier777
 
Posts: 557
Joined: 06 Jan 2013, 19:40
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1264)
All-game rating: (1278)
Timezone: GMT+1

PreviousNext

Return to Enlightenment and Absolutism {All Maps Visible}

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest