Posts: 2,153
Threads: 34
Joined: Aug 2017
Reputation:
1
If there are no NAP’s or very limited NAP’s like we did in the limited FORUM communication game, and if we only have 1 ally deceleration could be good enough for play?
Posts: 2,149
Threads: 107
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
1
Actually, I thought the forced enemy declaration was a sort of casus belli where a kingdom must declare another an enemy BEFORE attacking them (or moving emissaries into their territory as a fair warning). Was that the intent of the enemy declaration idea for this game? If so then would that be bad or good? I haven't played enough of games to say either way...
Posts: 1,302
Threads: 13
Joined: Jan 2018
Reputation:
0
I would be fine with declaring as you move in but having to before would sure give any magic based kingdom to much fair warning as they 477 you to hostile for the declaration. So you can still have your surprise attack but other would know something is up.
Posts: 893
Threads: 34
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation:
0
As I just freed up a spot I am in and choose slot #8. I would vote against the required enemy declaration by turn 5.
Posts: 2,370
Threads: 57
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
2
I'm not crazy about being forced to declare an enemy either. It's easy enough to find enemies without being forced to declare them.
Posts: 893
Threads: 34
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation:
0
I think maybe do that as a variant down the line but let’s play at least one game before we try and add more special rules.
Posts: 1,302
Threads: 13
Joined: Jan 2018
Reputation:
0
Seems to be the enemy declaration is causing all the hang up. So let’s just remove that aspect.
Some people will not play straight diplomacy so we need to keep it limited to the once every 3 turn forum style. With no naps lasting longer than 3 turn at time. No extending
Only 1 ally declaration to also help avoid lteam groups.