General situation reasoning

[Old Shendemiar]

I think MU has two severe problems, that pop out after some enjoyable games.

1) "Player with most lords winns" -thing. This leads to recruitment race, that gets boring after 10 games.

2) There is no strategical depth. Battles are just battles with no possibility to effect them anyhow.

There are solution categories i think of:

Randomized lord positions This would help some, but not solve the problems.

Victoryconditions Mankinds last best hope... These would definitely allow all things i desire.

Battlerule enhancements This is the most difficult and dangerous area of these three. Possibility of going wrong direction is highest, but reward would also be great.

******************************************

Some post about these:

Natmus said:

Steady on, everybody. This is a LoM remake, and I don't think the original gameplay should be sacrificed for more and more demands for realism. We shall have too look elsewhere for that.
My take on this whole mess of a discussion, that now does belong in the Suggestions section, is that M/MU should be as simple and fun to play as the original, with the addition of more players for unpredictability. Not too many special rules or advanced features or things like that, there's a ton of other games that can provide that.

The current problem, as I see it, is the great potetial for unbalanced recruiting and subsequent lack of real play. Solve that, and we get a pretty fun game, even if it isn't realistic.

I kind of agree keeping it as simple as possible. I was looking for a simple solution, something that would not change the game much, but would allow the possibility of cunny planning and something that would change the "player with most lord will win."

I remind that also simple rules changes can add a whole amount of depth, a need to plan and think, and react.

What it would be, that i dont know, but we all must keep our eyes open, and take a minute to imagine what the game would be like with any suggestion.

Many suggestions here, (and anywhere that improvements are discussed) tend to grow to undefined complex grey mass, Nobody really wants that.

There must be a Supreme god who sorths all out, that keeps his head cool. JY has done this pretty good i think.

***************************************

So please post here your general thought about these... matters...

[Matija]

Couldn't agree more. Only, I also like games with complex rules.

[Old Shendemiar]

Matija said:

Couldn't agree more. Only, I also like games with complex rules.

Rules, or their effects can be complex, but rules themselves must not be complicated just for themselves. They can if it's well argumented.

Have you tried Strategic command: European theater? It's exelent sample of fairly simple rules (for a strategy game that is) but still amazing variety and versatility in gameplay! Best SStrategygame i've played, and i've played real many...

But if you want complicated rules try Russian Front (board game) IT's more complex than Alpha Centauri which is the most complex game i've ever seen.

[Ringthane]

This thread was long due

[Natmus]

For a while I worked on a suggestion about restricting the number of armies you could have in one square.

Working with about 5 armies per square per player prevent players from grouping all armies inside one citadel, and bring all their forces to bear on one particular opponent, for example.

In cases like big battles, it cold then be possible to have armies located in four squares; centre, left flank, right flank and even a reserve. Supposing the enemy had about the same size armies, you would have to consider carefully how you placed your armies together. Going by the first days battle you then withdrew exhausted armies and put in fresh ones, or re-stocked depleted armies from the reserves.

Also, when attacking strongholds, you could attack with 5 armies one day, then the next day withdraw them and send in 5 fresh armies at the (at most) 5 enemy armies inside.

This method also would lead to an increase in strategic positions, for example trere are a few keeps that would be good to hold and defend under those conditions.

I seem to remember some drawbacks to this system that prevented me from ever putting it forward, but since everybody else are making suggestions, and I can't at present remember those drawbacks, I put it out there.

Comments?

[sparrowhawk]

I had the same idea way back in the days of the Alpha when I was playing against Gaz.

I can't remember why the limit was not implemented either! Probably because of army size - ie 5 lords alone would use up the limit, though now of course I'd just have a limit of 5 x Max Army Size (currently 2500).

[Matija]

Shendemiar said:

Rules, or their effects can be complex, but rules themselves must not be complicated just for themselves. They can if it's well argumented.

Have you tried Strategic command: European theater? It's exelent sample of fairly simple rules (for a strategy game that is) but still amazing variety and versatility in gameplay! Best SStrategygame i've played, and i've played real many...

But if you want complicated rules try Russian Front (board game) IT's more complex than Alpha Centauri which is the most complex game i've ever seen.

Now if you really wanted complex rules, try board game called Magic Realm.

[ladyhawke]

Matija said:

Now if you really wanted complex rules, try board game called Magic Realm.

The game by Avalon Hill. Fun game!

[Matija]

Yes, I like it a lot. Just finished a PBEM a month ago.