Originally posted by no1marauderIt's not all about winning, no1.
What part of the Victory Conditions don't you and the Asakura understand?
Really, it isn't. I've just finished an MD game as Arles, surviving with a meagre 46 gold value. However the satisfaction of seeing my one mortal enemy go down, another reduced to penury (kept alive by allied gold injections) and a third to one small province made it worthwhile. I was also able to help a Spanish alliance make into the victory coalition, which felt good. Surely you can understand this sort of thing.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI don't. I understand the metagame - punishing people for ruining your chances to win or for being untrustworthy so they will think twice next game - but simply playing a game and intentionally not winning without metagame considerations I don't understand.
It's not all about winning, no1.
Really, it isn't. I've just finished an MD game as Arles, surviving with a meagre 46 gold value. However the satisfaction of seeing my one mortal enemy go down, another reduced to penury (kept alive by allied gold injections) and a third to one small province made it worthwhile. I was also able to help a Spanish alli ...[text shortened]... ke into the victory coalition, which felt good. Surely you can understand this sort of thing.
2 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI'm not too sharp this morning--could you put that in plain English?
I don't. I understand the metagame - punishing people for ruining your chances to win or for being untrustworthy so they will think twice next game - but simply playing a game and intentionally not winning without metagame considerations I don't understand.
It's ok I get it. Well, making friends is a "metagame consideration" if you like. Having fun is an end in itself.
For some rare souls, like Lord Oda, it's a case of art for art's sake.
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageMetagame is making decisions outside of a game to affect that game. For example, my doing my best to hurt Hosokawa will make you at RHP aware that there are penalties for attacking me. Maybe in another RHP game someone will think twice about it knowing I won't bot out if I am losing but will fight to the bitter end in retribution and that I will (hopefully) be good enough at it that attacking me is a poor idea.
I'm not too sharp this morning--could you put that in plain English?
It's ok I get it. Well, making friends is a "metagame consideration" if you like. Having fun is an end in itself.
Making friends is not metagame, though showing you are a good ally is if they will play again and remember and choose to ally with you for that reason. By having others take a beating so you can waltz in and clean up the mess and declare victory is not good metagame for those other players in my opinion. It just shows that they are timid and/or easily manipulated if they could try for victory but fail to do so.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI just got nailed in another game - foolish me trusted him as far as to withdraw from our mutual borders ...
I don't. I understand the metagame - punishing people for ruining your chances to win or for being untrustworthy so they will think twice next game - but simply playing a game and intentionally not winning without metagame considerations I don't understand.
Come hell or high water, I don't care what the situation is next time he's in the same game as me ... I'm gonna get him. 😀
Some things are more important than winning.
Originally posted by no1marauderCan you calculate how much the combined holdings of Ikko, Asakura and Oda have increased in the same period?
My facts are correct; on turn 6 they had 151 GPV and now they have 148. They're made incredible progress towards the victory conditions, haven't they?
Forgive me if I am wrong but The Ikko monks, Asakura and Oda could potentially win the game could they not? Or are there rules which stipulate what combinations of Royal/Commoners can claim victory?
Or are you simply trying to suggest that our allegiance to our Suzerain is not as strong as I think it is?
All in all I think your pitiful attempts to cause unrest in our alliances a bit lame and obvious.
I will enjoy arranging your entrails.
Oda.
1 edit
Originally posted by cadwahSo you think there's any chance at all that Ikko is going to declare with his vassals and leave Uesugi out? 🙄
Can you calculate how much the combined holdings of Ikko, Asakura and Oda have increased in the same period?
Forgive me if I am wrong but The Ikko monks, Asakura and Oda could potentially win the game could they not? Or are there rules which stipulate what combinations of Royal/Commoners can claim victory?
Or are you simply trying to suggest that our al ...[text shortened]... unrest in our alliances a bit lame and obvious.
I will enjoy arranging your entrails.
Oda.
I think you're playing like a fool, that's all.
EDIT: Oda jumped from 160 GPV on turn 6 to 185 now. You had more than Ikko than, too.