Struggle for Empire

[Civilionaut]

IROQUIOS: Jerec
ABENAKI: Karlheinz

McMonkey, change please

I = Six Nations
A = Mission Indians


French must start

[Cobra]

Hotseat or Network ?

[Historical Atze]

Hot.

[Cobra]

We are proud to have such venerable Allies. We ask our Allies to confirm our Alliance. In war with England we need each hand.

Wir sind stolz auf unsere Verbündeten und bitten sie, die Allianz zu bestätigen.
Im Krieg gegen England ist jede Hand nötig.

[Radyserb]

I think it's a little bit unrealistic, that a colonial power owns a native village (look to Pitts war). One proposal as additional house rule: If someone conquers a indian city he has to destroy it through cheat mode. He gets a slave unit (or more?) on the former city field, which are the indians. Just when the city reached size 6 or higher, it will be not destroyed.

Ich finde es etwas unrealistisch, dass eine Kolonialmacht ein Indianerdorf besitzen kann (siehe Pitts War). Ein Vorschlag als zusätzliche Hausregel: Wenn jemand eine indianische Stadt erobert, hat er diese zu zerstören per Mogelmodus. Er bekommt eine Slave-Einheit dafür (oder mehr?) auf dem ehemaligen Stadtfeld, welche faktisch die Indianer sind. Nur wenn die Stadt Größe 6 oder höher erreicht hat, wird sie nicht zerstört.

[Lenin]

Das sagst jetzt, wo ich grad dabei bin die dritte zu erobern? Wenn dann muss das am Anfang geklärt werden aber nicht mitten im Spiel.

[Civilionaut]

Die Algonkin stehen zu ihrer Allianz mit Frankreich, werden aber keinen Krieg gegen unsere Brudervölker führen.

@Atze
die Regel soll dann aber nur für Europäer gelten?

[McMonkey]

I see your point Rady, but I think a house rule is un-nessasarily cumbersome. If a European nation captures a native village the graphic should change to the fort style and they can simply rename the city to Fort So-and-So

Also what happens if a native tribe captures a rivals settlement?

I think we should carry on as we are and just rename the settlements!

[McMonkey]

I hope you will all agree to this rule. I propose no road pillaging. Attacking in this scenario will be slow and hard enough without stackable terrain. Destroying roads would just make the problem much worse. Any objections?

[Radyserb]

That's nonsense.

[Historical Atze]

I hope you will all agree to this rule. I propose no road pillaging. Attacking in this scenario will be slow and hard enough without stackable terrain. Destroying roads would just make the problem much worse. Any objections?

Unsure.

[Jerec]

I hope you will all agree to this rule. I propose no road pillaging. Attacking in this scenario will be slow and hard enough without stackable terrain. Destroying roads would just make the problem much worse. Any objections?

Roads aren't as vital in this scen for getting around as in Sengoku Jidai, and if a city is approached on a hill or forest, the attacker has a good chance of actually taking the city before he is destroyed by the city's defenders. In Sengoku Jidai, the defender would always win if the Daimyo had a chance to attack from a city.

Becaue those reasons don't apply here, pillaging should be a legit tactic.

I repeat: can the Indian settlers found new cities?

Let's make it simple and have no bribing of any player's units. Just barbs.

If Indian cities were razed by Europeans and vice versa, all cities except the strongholds would soon be gone. So I agree with McMonkey.

[McMonkey]

@Rady
Don't just say "That's nonsense" without giving a reason. Whats nonsense about what I have said?

For example player A destroys all roads around a city. Most units in this scenario are 1 move so they will have to use up their whold movement allowance just to get to the outskirts and hope they survive until the following turn to launch an attack. The only exception to this would be units with the Alpine flag who could attack at 2/3 strength. Even if you went in with a pre-charged engineer you would have to pray you survived the counter attack before they could construct a replacement road. All this will lead to a slower, more defence oriented game. I don't see how this is nonsense

Indian settlers should be allowed to found new cities!

I'm playing my turn now

[Radyserb]

If you argue this way, we need railroads! No loss of movement points

You can build engineers. They have 2 movement points and can build fortresses. That's to the defence

If Indian cities were razed by Europeans and vice versa, all cities except the strongholds would soon be gone. So I agree with McMonkey.

No! It's for all sides allowed to build new cities
Add-on to my rule proposal: If the Indian conquers a european city, he have to give the city to his european ally, if there is no european ally, the city will be destroyed too.

[Historical Atze]

Add-on to my rule proposal: If the Indian conquers a european city, he have to give the city to his european ally, if there is no european ally, the city will be destroyed too.

Indians should be allowed to build cities with their settlers, I'd say.

I'm still not sure what to do about the roads.