Agema Publications

A forum for the disscussion of the Play by Mail games from Agema Publications


Game10

Share
avatar
Deacon
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1382
Age : 54
Location : Portland OR, USA
Reputation : 38
Registration date : 2010-04-13

Re: Game10

Post by Deacon on Sun Dec 14, 2014 1:00 am


The lack of France in Game 8 has been very strange.

jamesbond007
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 392
Age : 47
Location : Norwich
Reputation : 14
Registration date : 2009-04-07

Re: Game10

Post by jamesbond007 on Sun Dec 14, 2014 8:19 am

I might be wrong, but i believe i know the French player in game 8. I think he has an axe to grind regarding in game friendships. So i think that is why he plays the game as he does. His way of protesting if you like.
avatar
Ardagor
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 351
Age : 47
Location : Haugesund, Norway
Reputation : 9
Registration date : 2008-04-20

Re: Game10

Post by Ardagor on Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:09 am

If the French player had choosen a less Central Power he could have been as eccentric and quiet as he likes and just add flavour to the game.
France, however is important in any conflict in Europe and absolute silence from Paris worries everyone else.
There will probably be a coalition against France eventually if he does not talk to anyone.

jamesbond007
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 392
Age : 47
Location : Norwich
Reputation : 14
Registration date : 2009-04-07

Re: Game10

Post by jamesbond007 on Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:18 am

Every leader can rule how he likes. Kings do not have to make friends. As France, it will take some major coalition to take France on and win. Then those coalition partners run the risk of being under attack from a smaller nation looking to take advantage of the situation.

Why should silence from Paris worry everyone.? some French rulers attack from the start, he has been peaceful, so why should everyone worry.?

count-de-monet
Marquess
Marquess

Number of posts : 262
Location : Reading, Berkshire
Reputation : 8
Registration date : 2008-04-20

Re: Game10

Post by count-de-monet on Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:09 am

I have a sense that I tend to frustrate some of the other players (not done deliberately!) so I am not sure if my signing up to Game 10 is good news or not Smile My other current positions are certainly among the "large" positions. Game 10 for me will be a whole new experience and a much smaller position.

The information on the French player in Game 8 (which I play in) is interesting. Without seeking to cause further friction I must admit I sometimes struggle with the friendships that have developed and seem to carry over and re-emerge.

I also have issues with the way some players play the game - targeting other positions in a more "secretive and destructive" way.

At the end of the day it IS just a game and players are free to play as they wish to gain the maximum enjoyment. If I dont like it, my options are simple.....leave the game. I must admit its a train of thought that I strongly leaning towards.

As I said Im not trying to dig out other players here, but as a Game 8 player I didnt quite get the French player approach......but now understand it !

Stuart Bailey
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1101
Age : 54
Location : Somewhere East of Bristol & West of Bath
Reputation : 31
Registration date : 2012-01-29

Re: Game10

Post by Stuart Bailey on Sun Dec 14, 2014 7:21 pm

jamesbond007 wrote:I might be wrong, but i believe i know the French player in game 8. I think he has an axe to grind regarding in game friendships. So i think that is why he plays the game as he does. His way of protesting if you like.  

I dont mind players having in game friendships unless these leads to unrealistic alliances - ie the Pope allied to the Ottoman /Sultan.

Personally I think its better to try and keep to the historic alliances/dislikes as this helps keep the historic feel of the game.

Found this a bit of a problem with Rumelia since you start with a lot of historic "dislikes" very close and not many "likes". Had to spend ages hacking my way through the "dislikes" so I could improve the view from the Ottoman border and be able to have a friendly chat over the fence.

Guess that France and the Moghuls start with the same problem.

Do not know G8 at all but I guess as France you can justify taking view you are not going to speak to anyone who was on the other side in the War of the Grand Alliance. Think that leaves you with the Jacobites and Spanish Bourbons who you can talk too.
avatar
revvaughan
King
King

Number of posts : 652
Reputation : 7
Registration date : 2008-07-15

Re: Game10

Post by revvaughan on Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:29 am

I have developed some friends in the game, but the alliances we have are realistic or are brought about due to in game events that caused certain things to occur. In Game II there is a strong alliance between Prussia and Great Britain... This was born out of support in a way nearly 10 years ago and it has worked to make a strong power block.

I look forward to Game 10 as it appears that we have a good list of players. As to England and Scotland and any talk of Union... We shall see wha the diplomatic mail should bring in the coming game. It could prove interesting for sure.

jamesbond007
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 392
Age : 47
Location : Norwich
Reputation : 14
Registration date : 2009-04-07

Re: Game10

Post by jamesbond007 on Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:42 pm

Personaly I cannot see any reason not to talk, engage with any and all Glory players in your particular game you are playing. Even nations you are at war with or unfriendly with. After all. Talking is the only way to eventually resolve matters. You can deal and trade with nations even if their faith is in conflict with yours. I will always engage with other in game players for the above reasons.

One part of the game I do have issues with is spying. Seems to me, spies are having far too much success. Counter spying on the other hand seems to have very little success. This is my only current gripe with Glory. Positions are being ruined by unrealistic spy action success. Well in my view anyway.
avatar
revvaughan
King
King

Number of posts : 652
Reputation : 7
Registration date : 2008-07-15

Re: Game10

Post by revvaughan on Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:03 pm

I have found that a well established constabulary does help in keeping down the spy gains. Indeed, the police seem to be much better at keeping them at bay. I find that the best use of counter-espionage efforts is in identifying and capturing the occasional enemy spy.


jamesbond007
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 392
Age : 47
Location : Norwich
Reputation : 14
Registration date : 2009-04-07

Re: Game10

Post by jamesbond007 on Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:31 am

revvaughan wrote:I have found that a well established constabulary does help in keeping down the spy gains.  Indeed, the police seem to be much better at keeping them at bay.   I find that the best use of counter-espionage efforts is in identifying and capturing the occasional enemy spy.



Thanks for that idea. I had thought about it before, but didn't think it would work overly well. Compared to cost and town watch. I always felt town watch did a similar job.
avatar
the great unwashed
Viscount
Viscount

Number of posts : 176
Age : 58
Location : bristol (uk)
Reputation : 5
Registration date : 2010-08-15

Re: Game10

Post by the great unwashed on Tue Dec 16, 2014 12:51 pm

Night lighting and fitting grilles to the windows of government buildings is of help in reducing the chance of successful covert actions by third parties.
avatar
Deacon
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1382
Age : 54
Location : Portland OR, USA
Reputation : 38
Registration date : 2010-04-13

Re: Game10

Post by Deacon on Sat Dec 20, 2014 3:46 am

count-de-monet wrote:I have a sense that I tend to frustrate some of the other players (not done deliberately!) so I am not sure if my signing up to Game 10 is good news or not Smile My other current positions are certainly among the "large" positions.  Game 10 for me will be a whole new experience and a much smaller position.

The information on the French player in Game 8 (which I play in) is interesting.  Without seeking to cause further friction I must admit I sometimes struggle with the friendships that have developed and seem to carry over and re-emerge.

I also have issues with the way some players play the game - targeting other positions in a more "secretive and destructive" way.

At the end of the day it IS just a game and players are free to play as they wish to gain the maximum enjoyment.  If I dont like it, my options are simple.....leave the game.  I must admit its a train of thought that I strongly leaning towards.

As I said Im not trying to dig out other players here, but as a Game 8 player I didnt quite get the French player approach......but now understand it !

I guess I don't see the same things you do. I don't have any real friendships out of game that carry over, all the stuff that has happened for me in game 8 has happened between the realms in game 8. my conversations with other players there don't seem to indicate that they have an agenda other than what's happening in that game.

I've worked to develop relationships in the game, but they're just based on the letters I've sent and received.

I don't carry stuff over from game to game, and haven't been in many games anyway.

My biggest annoyance in game 8 was the "metagaming". We all know what history was, but in the game, your realm doesn't know. Like we know the northwest passage doesn't exist, but it was found. Like we know that there is no treaty granting portugal spain, but it was found.

Stuart Bailey
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1101
Age : 54
Location : Somewhere East of Bristol & West of Bath
Reputation : 31
Registration date : 2012-01-29

Re: Game10

Post by Stuart Bailey on Sat Dec 20, 2014 11:06 am

Deacon wrote:
count-de-monet wrote:I have a sense that I tend to frustrate some of the other players (not done deliberately!) so I am not sure if my signing up to Game 10 is good news or not Smile My other current positions are certainly among the "large" positions.  Game 10 for me will be a whole new experience and a much smaller position.

The information on the French player in Game 8 (which I play in) is interesting.  Without seeking to cause further friction I must admit I sometimes struggle with the friendships that have developed and seem to carry over and re-emerge.

I also have issues with the way some players play the game - targeting other positions in a more "secretive and destructive" way.

At the end of the day it IS just a game and players are free to play as they wish to gain the maximum enjoyment.  If I dont like it, my options are simple.....leave the game.  I must admit its a train of thought that I strongly leaning towards.

As I said Im not trying to dig out other players here, but as a Game 8 player I didnt quite get the French player approach......but now understand it !

I guess I don't see the same things you do.  I don't have any real friendships out of game that carry over, all the stuff that has happened for me in game 8 has happened between the realms in game 8.  my conversations with other players there don't seem to indicate that they have an agenda other than what's happening in that game.

I've worked to develop relationships in the game, but they're just based on the letters I've sent and received.

I don't carry stuff over from game to game, and haven't been in many games anyway.

My biggest annoyance in game 8 was the "metagaming".  We all know what history was, but in the game, your realm doesn't know.  Like we know the northwest passage doesn't exist, but it was found.  Like we know that there is no treaty granting portugal spain, but it was found.



Ref odd/unhistoric actions in some games which seem to have annoyed a few players such as the treaty granting Spain to Portugal in G8 and the "miracle" baby in G9 my view is that while such things did not exist good forgers and straping guardmen/spare babies do exist so agema will allow players to attempt such plans. And even allow them to work like a bluff in Poker if no one challenges them in game.

I suspect that if you do "bluff" with fake treaties and the like and your bluff gets called then you could end up in deep trouble!

Have only played in one game (G7 as Hapsburg Spain) but I like to think that if Portugal had pulled its fake treaty stunt on me as either a Hapsburg or a Bourbon it would have been hit by a flood of highly respected and elderly ministers/cardinals/royal clerks etc swearing on the Bible that the King of Portugal is a liar. Portugal would also have found itself in a war for truth, justice etc.

This is after all the period when a gentleman was expected to fight a daul and risk death rather allow an insult to go unanswered. Yet some players seem to want to settle everything by "diplomatic" means. Which in my opinion allows the "bluffers" too much freedom of movement.

If you dont like something...........dont walk away..........call them out and fight for your honour & principals Very Happy

Ok you may look doomed to defeat, but its odd how often the game seems to favour the heroic and gallant and how such a stand will attract allies/support from other players.
avatar
Deacon
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1382
Age : 54
Location : Portland OR, USA
Reputation : 38
Registration date : 2010-04-13

Re: Game10

Post by Deacon on Sat Dec 20, 2014 4:12 pm

Well, my perspective, coming from more of a roleplaying background, is that, in game, history hasn't happened.

So you don't know what we know.  You, the player, know the treaty didn't exist in history.  How do you know that it doesn't exist in game though?  You don't, or shouldn't in my view.  (and, of course, the matter was vastly more complicated than that, which I won't go into, particularly since I don't want to risk crossing the line of diplomacy on the forum.)

At least historically, Pedro was floated as a compromise candidate for the throne of spain.  He didn't want to go there himself so that proposal never went anywhere, but it did happen and so isn't that far out there.

The miracle baby in game 9 is more of a question to me, because I'd think that ambassadors and the like with exposure to the mad king would have a pretty good idea that he was incapable of fathering a child.  Still, I know that I thought, or even mentioned, that getting the queen pregnant would be a good solution for the spanish player, albeit shocking.

But as I said elsewhere, being the regent isn't the same as being king.  Regents can, and are, replaced.  They have no legitimate authority except by the proxy they hold.  A concerted attack upon the regent can unseat them, and once you sign up for a probable questionable birth baby, you have many long years of being open to attack along this line.

So in the end, you do diplomacy to end the crisis, which is what happened in real life.  You can march a bunch of armies around first, but if you want to insist you know real history, then you also know that in the end the war achieved almost nothing.

Players are going to act in their own self interests as they see them.  They will respond if they feel threatened, seek advantage and allies, and do all the things that kingdoms did.


Stuart Bailey
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1101
Age : 54
Location : Somewhere East of Bristol & West of Bath
Reputation : 31
Registration date : 2012-01-29

Re: Game10

Post by Stuart Bailey on Sun Dec 21, 2014 9:49 pm

Ref Deacon quote "So in the end, you do diplomacy to end the crisis, which is what happened in real life. You can march a bunch of armies around first, but if you want to know real history, then you also know that in the end the war achieved almost nothing."

Feel this comment is a bit harsh on the Bourbon commanders in Spain who won this campaign and secured the throne for Phillip of Anjou (with a bit of help from the death of Charles Hapsburg's brother). And the allied commanders in Flanders & Italy who set back French dominance of Europe.

As for the rest it seems I may have been mis-informed ......the advert I answered in minature wargames magazine said "Postal Wargames Campaign set in the period of the War of the Spanish Succession". I thought the game was a strategic level wargame!? And the "diplomacy" is just to set the campaign up & pick sides.

Did other players answer a different advert? And could this explain why I always seem to be the attacker?
avatar
Jason
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1520
Age : 47
Location : Gourdon, Aberdeenshire
Reputation : 16
Registration date : 2008-08-27

Re: Game10

Post by Jason on Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:17 pm

When I signed up for agema originally the ad made it clear you could play in a number of ways-as a wargame, as a nation-building game, as a devious sort who tried to undermine others through spies and being naughty...I have tended to go for the nation-building route as most positions I've played haven't been military powers...a bit hard to got to war when most of your neighbours can wipe your army off the face of the earth with their little finger Wink

On G8, my only (very minor) gripe was the finding of the North West Passage...I would if it will turn out to be some sort of fraud...
avatar
Ardagor
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 351
Age : 47
Location : Haugesund, Norway
Reputation : 9
Registration date : 2008-04-20

Re: Game10

Post by Ardagor on Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:39 pm

I suspect the North West passage will be closed most of the year and horrendously dangerous to sailing ships, unless the liners are built as icebreakers.
avatar
Deacon
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1382
Age : 54
Location : Portland OR, USA
Reputation : 38
Registration date : 2010-04-13

Re: Game10

Post by Deacon on Mon Dec 29, 2014 3:09 am

Jason wrote:When I signed up for agema originally the ad made it clear you could play in a number of ways-as a wargame, as a nation-building game, as a devious sort who tried to undermine others through spies and being naughty...I have tended to go for the nation-building route as most positions I've played haven't been military powers...a bit hard to got to war when most of your neighbours can wipe your army off the face of the earth with their little finger Wink

On G8, my only (very minor) gripe was the finding of the North West Passage...I would if it will turn out to be some sort of fraud...

I like the fact that Richard changes things up.  Players should have near certainty about things in game "because it wasn't like that in real life".  You're playing a government who didn't have the certainty you do, so if Richard can inject some of that doubt into the game, I think that's a bonus.

That said,  I also suspect that the passage isn't as good as envisioned (or it would have been found before).  

I think I"m going to join game 10, just have to decide who to play...

I too like the building game, and I've had more success and frustration from Richard on that than on a lot of other things! Nothing is easy with Richard!
avatar
Deacon
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1382
Age : 54
Location : Portland OR, USA
Reputation : 38
Registration date : 2010-04-13

Re: Game10

Post by Deacon on Mon Dec 29, 2014 3:21 am

Stuart Bailey wrote:Ref Deacon quote "So in the end, you do diplomacy to end the crisis, which is what happened in real life.  You can march a bunch of armies around first, but if you want to know real history, then you also know that in the end the war achieved almost nothing."

Feel this comment is a bit harsh on the Bourbon commanders in Spain who won this campaign and secured the throne for Phillip of Anjou (with a bit of help from the death of Charles Hapsburg's brother). And the allied commanders in Flanders & Italy who set back French dominance of Europe.

As for the rest it seems I may have been mis-informed  ......the advert I answered in minature wargames magazine said "Postal Wargames Campaign set in the period of the War of the Spanish Succession".  I thought the game was a strategic level wargame!?  And the "diplomacy" is just to set the campaign up & pick sides.

Did other players answer a different advert?  And could this explain why I always seem to be the attacker?  

Yes, the advert I answered led me to see the game as period RPG/wargame.

That's how I approach it. In Game 8, Pedro has a personality, even if it isn't as obvious to others and I act as I think he would. I do far more RPGs than I do war games. I get, and accept, the war game part, but it isn't the part that interests me the most.

Perhaps my judgement is harsh, but I think it's on balance fair. The problem in game is that the problem of the spanish succession isn't. Spain, the player, can pick a successor, but if they pick france, then france doesn't get the combined position. THAT is what motivated the war. Spain and France united as one kingdom would remake the face of Europe. That isn't on the table in the game unless France really goes for it and tries to knock out the Spanish Player _and_ the Austrian both.

I think it might be far more interesting to not permit a Spanish Player at all. You need competing sides there with the real chance of something dramatic happening to light the fires of war in Europe.

(And as an aside, France in Game 8 can be as quiet as they want, but if they don't talk, it makes me nervous, and I'm going to take more precautions in case it's the calm before the storm. But I can understand how some players might wish to avoid conversation. I think the initial france from game 7 "the real king louis" was treated rather hard by the forums and other players and if I were he and wanted another shot at france, I might well do it without speaking to anyone....)

Stuart Bailey
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1101
Age : 54
Location : Somewhere East of Bristol & West of Bath
Reputation : 31
Registration date : 2012-01-29

Re: Game10

Post by Stuart Bailey on Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:28 pm

I think the major problems with getting a proper WSS in Glori du Roi is:

1) You need players who are willing to adopt a 18th century dynastic policy rather than a "National" policy ie playing a Bourbon or a Hapsburg rather than French or Austria which can be a problem after 200 years of seeing everything in terms of Nation States.

2) If you only have 1 Spanish player then he or she is likely to pick the option least likely to cause a problem. Which means that the less aggressive of the French/Austrian players will then end up facing the nasty option of taking on two major powers.

I think a French Player could take action in these circumstances but Austria does not have a hope without England & the UDP joining in.

Since it seems impossible to find 4 players who are willing to fight for a "dynastic" cause........perhaps we should consider Deacon's suggestion of a NPC Spain so the Hapsburgs and the Bourbons and other interested parties are forced to either fight it out or settle by other means?
avatar
Jason
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1520
Age : 47
Location : Gourdon, Aberdeenshire
Reputation : 16
Registration date : 2008-08-27

Re: Game10

Post by Jason on Thu Jan 01, 2015 8:43 pm

I must admit I can see the appeal of having a non-active Spain in this way, maybe for Game 11 Wink  

I am not as hot on the various candidates as I should be but didn't Bavaria also have a claim on the throne?  I know they backed France in the war in the end but that could a really fun alternative WSS...either a three way war or France-Bavaria...

jamesbond007
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 392
Age : 47
Location : Norwich
Reputation : 14
Registration date : 2009-04-07

Re: Game10

Post by jamesbond007 on Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:01 am

Cannot see any sense in having Spain as a NPC. Spain is massive with its American possessions. With Spain non playing other nations will simply help themselves to various parts of the Spanish Empire. Leaving Richard a lot of work and unrealistic events.

Two Spanish players, a Bourbon and a a Hapsburg is more realistic. Then you run the risk of Spain being weak and fractured forever. Leaving France too powerful and dominant with no near rivals. Also how can two players give orders for one country.? For Spain's gold for example, two different people will give different orders for the same gold areas. Which orders do you take and which do you discard. I think Richard explored this idea and found those problems and since discarded it. Players were paying to give out extra orders which could not be carried out, due to conflicting with the other Spanish players orders.

I think all in all Richard has no choice. But to stick with the current arrangements. Any other way he gives himself too much work, which is the last thing he has time for and to what purpose.? France and Austria can still not fight each other in a WSS if they wish. Then what happens to Spain.?

jamesbond007
Duke
Duke

Number of posts : 392
Age : 47
Location : Norwich
Reputation : 14
Registration date : 2009-04-07

Re: Game10

Post by jamesbond007 on Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:35 am

I recall Deacon mentioning joining game 10. For information purposes the Papal States position is now free. Count de Monet (Paul) reserved it but has since dropped.

Richard D. Watts
Baron
Baron

Number of posts : 101
Reputation : 7
Registration date : 2008-04-21

Re: Game10

Post by Richard D. Watts on Fri Jan 02, 2015 9:29 am

I'm not sure Paul has relinquished his reservation of the Papal States; September is still quite a long time away, and by then he might well want to play again. His reservation remains in place.

With regard to the Spanish Succession, we once had a situation where Spain was run with two players from 1700, one running the Hapsburg and one the Bourbon faction: It'd didn't work brilliantly well in practice, so we dropped the idea for future releases. An NPC Spain we don't think would work either, after all in real life interested parties in Spain had their own agendas and were very active, and on the point about France taking over Spain, historically a Bourbon ended up on Spain's throne, but Spain was not absorbed into France (but certainly allied, of course; but that can happen in the game between two players).

I hardly dare mention that it is possible - not easy but possible - in-game for Austria or France, etc., to take over Spain by fixing the Spanish succession using... spies successfully! If you read what happened in Spain at the time it is the equivalent of such agents being at work (see AGEMA's 'No Peace without Spain' which describes the machinations). More conventionally, upon the death of the King of Spain the nations (players) have an historic reason for invading using their armies and going to war over the succession if their candidate is not chosen; that would be the most obvious catalyst for war. As 'No Peace without Spain' makes clear plenty of negotiations went on to try and avoid this, as tends to happen in the game as well, but if these fail Austria and/or France can use this failure as a reason to invade. It is up to the players whether they want to do so or not, and a military campaign would be a means of taking over Spain, putting your chosen king on the throne, and gaining Spain as a vassal state (in reality the war ended by negotiation, so it didn't quite pan out like this, but it could have done!).

To summarise, the war can happen if players want to indulge in it, there are reasons enough in the game without having to do anything else about it (but if they would prefer not to fight, that is there choice).


avatar
Jason
Emperor
Emperor

Number of posts : 1520
Age : 47
Location : Gourdon, Aberdeenshire
Reputation : 16
Registration date : 2008-08-27

Re: Game10

Post by Jason on Fri Jan 02, 2015 11:19 am

Thanks Richard Smile

Always like reading your postings, helps remind us of some of the aspects of the games we might have missed!

Sponsored content

Re: Game10

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:44 pm