A final battle I think.
14 Nov 2015, 21:10
British=best. Duh!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk
100 players map "retire"
Hello!
In 100 players map still only 3 players can retire?
I saw a 15 players alliance, in some game. They will fight with each other in the end? Or can retire more?
10 Replies
18 Nov 2015, 18:30
When you make an 100 players map with 2 teams ?! or 4 teams ?!
20 Nov 2015, 15:11
Yes, only up to 3 active players can Retire a game. All the winning rules of other maps/scenarios exist for the World map/scenario.Keyadoria wrote:
Hello!In 100 players map still only 3 players can retire?
I saw a 15 players alliance, in some game. They will fight with each other in the end? Or can retire more?
20 Nov 2015, 18:00
There should be a bit of scaling, these games'll last months
"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
20 Nov 2015, 20:19
Well it'll take a long time to get over 3000 points when playing against at least 20 other active players. I remember playing a round of the world map in S1914 and it was just deadlock trying to get across the Atlantic.
British=best. Duh!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk
21 Nov 2015, 13:57
I, too, am finding the World map...umm...let's say: "significantly different" from the others; in more ways than one.
I don't know how fun a 3 person retire will be for most games. I'm not saying it won't be fun...I'm saying I don't know if it will be. (but I hope I get the chance to find out, lol)
22 Nov 2015, 21:13
Scaling is right, I have at least three close allies and two friends, I know I wont attack them no matter what so if all hang on to the end it would go unfinished, kinda dumb if you invest so much time in a game with less than satisfying result methinks. I mean our territories are intermeshed and with the 3 region switch we cant even straighten that out.
23 Nov 2015, 13:26
yeah, 3 players is too few. its a world map, you'll end with 2 or 3 players dominating an entire continent and it will be no fun anymore. it should end with 8 i guess
23 Nov 2015, 19:08
Eight? That is far too many in my mind.
I think you should be more discriminating in permanent alliances. I know it's impossible to go it alone but if you can't get down to three people working together than maybe you haven't earned a win yet.
24 Nov 2015, 23:34 (edited)
When you conquer the full africa and look at the pain it's going to be to conquer europe you will understand. than you just have to scrool and see that, likely, asia is divided by 2 ou 3 players in this stage, oceania by 1 or 2 and america by more 2 or 3. so it's maybe 9 or more. the world map is not ever going to be about conquering the world, just about conquering your region.xswazse12 wrote:
Eight? That is far too many in my mind.I think you should be more discriminating in permanent alliances. I know it's impossible to go it alone but if you can't get down to three people working together than maybe you haven't earned a win yet.
Not even if you sum up gengis kahn empire, roman empire and nazi germany you would have enough victory points. you need to be the ever biggest conquistator if the human history to finish a game with last standing 3 players!
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
