The Wizards' Isle

Batz · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 14

Just thought I'd start a topic to see if we can thrash out some basic house rules. Here is my take:

1. No reloads, no alternate rules files, no other 'hacking'

2. Please send a turn notification to all players when sending the turn on by creating a 'reply all'. The turn can then be tracked easily.

3. If you expect or are experiencing a delay in completing your turn it would be helpful to send a quick e-mail to all players explaining the situation.

4. Alliances can be made using the diplomacy option or secretly without the use of the diplomacy option.
a) Allied powers can attack each other for the exchange of cities and re-ally right away if that suits their purpose.
b) Using the diplomacy options to 'cheat' is forbidden. For example, making a secret alliance but going to war openly. Taking a quest to 'kill some enemy' and fixing it so the required amount of Peasants happen to get killed is wrong!!
c) alliances can be broken immediately without any warning

5. Silly e-mails, taunting, written diplomacy etc. is encouraged!

6. Feel free to play a solo game using the scenario.

7. There is no requirement to declare war before attacking anyone.

8. Use of the 'Resign' is forbidden in 'Raze on Capture' games. Instead if the player wishes to leave the game it should be offered to another person that is not playing or else turned to AI.

Any more ideas?
Batz

Drutt · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 31

I agree with all but 4c. Yes, alliances can be broken without warning but I think that when an alliance is made both sides should have honourable intentions to begin with. Otherwise the following scenario could occur which I think is wrong:

In the Illuria game in which I play Selentines there were lots of Horse Lords eagles etc. near my cities once the Dwarfs were conquered. I offered an alliance to the Horse Lords who accepted and moved their units away. In my opinion it would have been wrong for me to then storm into Horse Lord lands once the defences were weak.

Point 8 is valid but I'd like to add that you should be confident of finishing a game once you start it. Handing over your side to another player or AI should only happen in exceptional circumstances.

Mike

Batz · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 14

Drutt · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 31

I think the game sums it up best when you click to attack an allied force and it says "Attacking an ally is the lowest trick you could perform... Are you sure?".

Lord Nytram · Guest

Strictly speaking to capture the true flavour of Warlords I you should run with "raze any time". In the original game laying waste to cities that could never be rebuilt was a useful tool.

Drutt · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 31

I would like to add that I think exchanging screen shots with allies is integral and should be allowed.

Mike

Drutt · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 31

I think that raze on capture requires more strategic thinking because you must consider defending the cities immediately after the battle. It also rules out the possibility of pillaging/sacking a city before razing it to the ground.

Batz · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 14

I agree totally with Mike about Screenshots.

On Nytram's point, I have to agree with Mike. In some ways progress is a good thing and I don't think the idea is to replicate W1 Illuria just make w£ Illuria better.

Batz

piglet · Guest

Just a thought to add to the mix.
I like having the strategic option when on the defensive, of being able to scorch earth behind you.
It is quite a desperate strategy but I expect not without historical precedent.
So I quite like having raise-any-time switched on. But it's only a mild preference.

Phil/piglete

Drutt · Joined: 09 Apr 2006 Posts: 31

IMHO the trouble with raze any time is that battles never take place. A powerful hero is spotted and one side retreats leaving a chunk of the map as scorched earth which unbalances the game.