Slitherine

There are no ports - if we adopt this (& it looks good to me) then all 3 outer zones may be attacked by an other power.

This would limit how many players could attack another player.

What do others think?

Is it OK for Scar?

TheGrayMouser wrote:...late one afternoon the senate is ready to adjurn, the official stenographer typing up the last few noted remarks when junior Senator , Abeo Mens Mentis addresses the crowd
"My esteemed fellow Senators, before we conclude I must be heard, for we have not fully addressed the reports of numerous victories of the Panthers over their foes.. Only now we have sent legions into far off sandy lands and reports on how that campaign fares are far and few between. Perhaps we should regard the Panthers in the same light as their foes, a threat that.... **censored*** ***censored***

I was expecting this speech to finish with the words: "ceterum censeo Pantherites esse delendam" (English: "Furthermore I think Pantherites must be destroyed") in the style of Cato talking about Carthage.

Edited to add English translation.

Let me be the first of many to say What?

Read the bit about The Punic Wars http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Elder. I believe it is the main reason why Carthage was ultimately utterly destroyed.

At the end of every speech he finished with the words.

Latin: "ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam"

English: "Furthermore I think Carthage must be destroyed".

Edited to explain the latin translation.

Morbio's map seems a great idea.

That doesn't mean Scar's chart is redundant, as that's the league table. But Morbio's map gives a geographical focus as to why you might want to attack area A, rather than area B.

Some late news just in:-

More Morbid Mortalities

In retalitation for the Texan invasion of his lands Morbio has led his army into The Alamo & won a great victory - according to his reporter!
However losses have been confirmed as a mere 28% for the Texans but a massive 36% of the morbians are lost.
No news yet of any peace in this bitter struggle.

The Rhomians have also been defeated by Morbio at East Karana. Losses a more palatable 21% and 27% respectively.
As is now expected in these things a counter invasion is said to be taking place with morbians massing upon the Rhomian frontiers.

To date I've had the results in for 15 battles of which 3 were 'draws' due to resignations.

Congrats to pantherboy and TheGrayMouser as the first 2 players to get national morale from amber into green. No-one has fallen down to the red zone as yet.

Following the campaigns some have made peace and some are carrying on or are undecided. Remember that if you fight on it is with the new reduced army points which I have PM'd to you. Neither you nor your opponent know each others new points. However as a guideline the battle winner recovers 50% of losses but the loser only 20%.

Also, as posted earlier today, no more quick resignations - penalty will be high for this.

We are roughly half way through spring.

Great fun!

Morbio wrote:

TheGrayMouser wrote:...late one afternoon the senate is ready to adjurn, the official stenographer typing up the last few noted remarks when junior Senator , Abeo Mens Mentis addresses the crowd
"My esteemed fellow Senators, before we conclude I must be heard, for we have not fully addressed the reports of numerous victories of the Panthers over their foes.. Only now we have sent legions into far off sandy lands and reports on how that campaign fares are far and few between. Perhaps we should regard the Panthers in the same light as their foes, a threat that.... **censored*** ***censored***

I was expecting this speech to finish with the words: "ceterum censeo Pantherites esse delendam" (English: "Furthermore I think Pantherites must be destroyed") in the style of Cato talking about Carthage.

Edited to add English translation.

It is unkown what poor Abeo Mens Mentus meant to say... He was found floating in the Tiber.

maximvs wrote:Morbio's map seems a great idea.

That doesn't mean Scar's chart is redundant, as that's the league table. But Morbio's map gives a geographical focus as to why you might want to attack area A, rather than area B.

I like the map as well, some thoughts/ concerns:

Is it desirable that a player could lose his 3 outer territories and not be able to fight anyone except the enemy(ies) that took his outer terrains? In effect that player might only exist as a "reservation" ? Not sure if a good or bad thing.....

Also, if a players 3 outer are intact, but owns the outer of another player, in effect he could be attacked by 4 at once..... In addition, If a player had a conquered land somewhere but lost his 3 outer, would he still be able to launch invasions against anyone else and not just the enemy(ies) that has taken his 3 outer core lands?

*The Conquering General Grows Weary of the Bubblebaths**(But not the Bubblebathettes!!)*

Decides to tour North Africa.

Hurls the wine-stained papyrus rag of war at the un-noted Carthaginian general, girds loins (with help from said Bubblebathettes), stashes a bit of chocolate and slurpy liquid imported from the new Gallic province, and heads off to further fame and glory (or ingnomious defeat!!) to relieve the boredom of greatness.

See what happens when we move away from being simple - never lose your ignorance it's invaluable I say.

Adoption of a map is after we play this year out (year in game terms I mean) - I thought Morbio's idea better than having a geographical map but we would need to agree the rules to cover questions already asked. Alternatively if Scar is upto it we go for a geo map but that means keeping track of where each army is.

Can't see a post by CharlesRobinson to pm him.

I'll post a battle. Password: punicdoom

Do I get to know which period of Carthaginians you are running??

I know Charles is around as we are playing a mini campaign currently. Have let him know of your plans to invade.

game posted...no FOW unless you prefer it on

Incidentally any of you taking part from home in the Athens IWF in the morning?

petergarnett wrote:There are no ports - if we adopt this (& it looks good to me) then all 3 outer zones may be attacked by an other power.

This would limit how many players could attack another player.

What do others think?

Is it OK for Scar?

Sorry for the late response. That looks fine, I just need a good system for updating, either PMs, or maybe a seaonal report. Not sure how is best, and also avoid more paper work for P.G.

petergarnett wrote:See what happens when we move away from being simple - never lose your ignorance it's invaluable I say.

Adoption of a map is after we play this year out (year in game terms I mean) - I thought Morbio's idea better than having a geographical map but we would need to agree the rules to cover questions already asked. Alternatively if Scar is upto it we go for a geo map but that means keeping track of where each army is.

I am open to the geo map. If we limit the number of armies it should be ok, but if everyone has lots of armies, it will be high maintenance.

petergarnett wrote:To date I've had the results in for 15 battles of which 3 were 'draws' due to resignations.

Congrats to pantherboy and TheGrayMouser as the first 2 players to get national morale from amber into green. No-one has fallen down to the red zone as yet.

Following the campaigns some have made peace and some are carrying on or are undecided. Remember that if you fight on it is with the new reduced army points which I have PM'd to you. Neither you nor your opponent know each others new points. However as a guideline the battle winner recovers 50% of losses but the loser only 20%.

Also, as posted earlier today, no more quick resignations - penalty will be high for this.

We are roughly half way through spring.

Great fun!

I hope we can rethink this 20% for loser and 50% for winner straggler recover rule. Part of the campaign realism is to conserve your armies and their strength. If you reward play that may win on the route points in the simulation, but ignores losses on the field, then it does not encourage one to watch losses. It makes the win on the DAG all important, irregardless of losses. I think something like 10% for loser and 20% for winner would be better, if this is needed at all.

Only a fragment was received...

*...battle still rages...since dawn until the sungod hangs just above the horizon (22 turns and counting!! )...slaughter on both sides in the thousands and no end in sight...each side only halfway to breaking...*

[Anyone know for certain how long a DAG game is? Will this bloodbath (much prefer bubblebaths!! ) continue for much longer?)