Just wanted to say in case the vote on not including cities for Prestige wins, I will bring this new rule from the Turn coming next after the final decision. I am not going to change the count before coz it will be way too much work.
I think cities should make Prestige. Maybe change it in the next game but for now it's fine.
Certainly not, I agree that changing the current prestige count (if it passes) is too much.
I'd increase the prestige gained from finishing a city to 5 and remove the prestige per turn gain.
I think that cities should produce 1 prestige point per turn.
i dont know if this is in rules or not but i was wondering: what if in random event could turn up rival faction inside faction example: random event happens rebellion (my case) Lancaster family has risen against you and captured one of your regions rebellion happens if dice is 1,3,5 and not happen if dice is 2,4,6 and rebellion faction would have always just one move per turn. does this make any sense?
It makes sense, I'm not sure if it would work well.
We're at a deadlock so looks like the rules are staying as they are.
To be honest, I don't really care much about prestige.
(This post was mainly refering to EW7 I haven't looked at the prestige rules in this.)I think that Prestige is slightly overpowered, I think it was a very... uhh underwhelming, It's called European Wars, not European I am the most pompous in the whole of world! I want the conquests of a nation to be celebrated as well as the prestige, since it just seems that if you have 10 provinces and just spend your time building cities, at that time you've been considered better than someone whose done expansion. This may aswell be outdated now. But as said before, the conquests of a nation should also be celebrated.
The voting impasse means that the prestige generation by cities stays. The only change is, the winning Prestige count will be 250 and not 200.
I vote that Cities do not generate prestige.
I have a suggestion for the Next EW. Could we be able to make a faction in the New world, like say the Aztecs at the start of the game instead of the middle. So they'd be more competition in the colonizer gamers, I suggest limiting it to 1, and not able to engage in diplomacy untill discovered.
I like that, but there will have to be a way to differentiate their colour, so that it's an 'AI' faction is clear. The rules of expansion of the faction would have to be arranged - how many regions can it take at once? Where can it expand? Is it limited to historical expansion? Will it's roll values be the same as players, or will they be modified? I disagree on diplomacy though, as it'd become too much like the GMs faction. The AI would be there for a challenge and atmosphere in the New World.
I guess this is the rules-discussion thread in addition to regular discussion? Anyway, I propose a rule change for the guilds: Like the Banner Bearer's Guild, the Sailor's Guild should give an extra move to the player once every 5 turns. While Banners gives an extra land attack move, Sailors should give an extra fleet move. And this is better than the original rule of crossing two sea zones in a move because what if a player got a 3? A 3 results in a +1 if the player attempts to move to that zone next turn, but the guild can only be used every 5 turns. The bonus is always lost then. Please vote yay or nay. Thanks. Cats
Nay
Nay, and Ikaroqx, Thats was the main Idea. But the original idea, was having me (or another player) playing them. But "AI" movements would be ok, by no diplomacy I meant untill their discovered.
i believe the SG effect should stay as it is, Nay.
I suggest that when someone doesn't post, their city/s don't generate prestige for that turn. It seems unfair to active players if someone who is inactive wins because they've got lots of cities generating prestige, so the game ends and they don't even notice.
Is it just me or is the Group really inactive?
