The Sword of Damocles - (Sign Up Thread) - Closed, 2017 Game Next

[Dr. Cynic]

I miss playing with yinz guys. Maybe next round you can save me a spot?

[Lumine]

I miss playing with yinz guys. Maybe next round you can save me a spot?

Cynic! So good to see you here, and as a GM I certainly miss seeing you play. You're certainly welcome to join at any moment if you want.

[Dr. Cynic]

I miss playing with yinz guys. Maybe next round you can save me a spot?

Cynic! So good to see you here, and as a GM I certainly miss seeing you play. You're certainly welcome to join at any moment if you want.

Well, depending on what's available, I might like to try Canada or maybe something more random like New Zealand...

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

The U.S. are the new sick man.

"America is new Turkey".

[Lumine]

Ideally this would be ending during the weekend, but several players still need to send their orders.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I wonder how come just a few of us posts in the public thread. Very unlike the Balance of Power.

[Dr. Cynic]

Ideally this would be ending during the weekend, but several players still need to send their orders.

Sad I missed out on this, but maybe the next round.

[Lumine]

Ideally this would be ending during the weekend, but several players still need to send their orders.

Sad I missed out on this, but maybe the next round.

I hope so! And sorry for not replying. I'd be wary of allowing Canada or smaller countries since we're struggling with the major ones as it is (I believe I only have two or three player orders so far), so it would be amazing if you were interested as well on a larger one.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I guess it's up to me to ask this again: what's up?

[Lumine]

I guess it's up to me to ask this again: what's up?

Well, I think I ran out of ideas. I wasn't able to close the turn on account of what was left, and I'm unsure on what direction this should go. As I said to you a possible idea was to make a jump five years to the future or so and take it from there or play our version of WW2.

I'm not sure if the blame rests solely on me due to the delays, but it may also be the inherent problems with doing a sequel since it's easy to contradict past events and hard to be consistent with the events.

Any ideas? Should we continue this, take it in a different direction, move to an epilogue?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'd hate to go to war now or moving to epilogue. It would feel like a total waste of efforts I've put in this.

Or maybe, just maybe, we can do a little skip/epilogue, end the game and keep our options open by picking up later... I don;t know, guys.

[Dereich]

I REALLY enjoyed this game...but I don't think it's viable to continue as is. I don't think the necessary continuity and player involvement is still there after this huge hiatus. If we DO skip ahead or resume the game I'd suggest that we first throw open the door and see who is interested in playing.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I REALLY enjoyed this game...but I don't think it's viable to continue as is. I don't think the necessary continuity and player involvement is still there after this huge hiatus. If we DO skip ahead or resume the game I'd suggest that we first throw open the door and see who is interested in playing.

Im for sure.

[Lumine]

I REALLY enjoyed this game...but I don't think it's viable to continue as is. I don't think the necessary continuity and player involvement is still there after this huge hiatus. If we DO skip ahead or resume the game I'd suggest that we first throw open the door and see who is interested in playing.

Yeah, it was an ambitious project and it worked reasonably well, but I would tend to agree. On other hand, players like you and Kalwejt put a lot of effort and research into this.

Tentatively I don't mind hosting more of these games, but I've discovered it's much easier for me to go with a time period we know than creating one. If we end this game I wouldn't mind hosting one in a different time period if people are interested.

[Dereich]

I REALLY enjoyed this game...but I don't think it's viable to continue as is. I don't think the necessary continuity and player involvement is still there after this huge hiatus. If we DO skip ahead or resume the game I'd suggest that we first throw open the door and see who is interested in playing.

Yeah, it was an ambitious project and it worked reasonably well, but I would tend to agree. On other hand, players like you and Kalwejt put a lot of effort and research into this.

Tentatively I don't mind hosting more of these games, but I've discovered it's much easier for me to go with a time period we know than creating one. If we end this game I wouldn't mind hosting one in a different time period if people are interested.

I'd leap at the opportunity to join your next game if you host another.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I REALLY enjoyed this game...but I don't think it's viable to continue as is. I don't think the necessary continuity and player involvement is still there after this huge hiatus. If we DO skip ahead or resume the game I'd suggest that we first throw open the door and see who is interested in playing.

Yeah, it was an ambitious project and it worked reasonably well, but I would tend to agree. On other hand, players like you and Kalwejt put a lot of effort and research into this.

Tentatively I don't mind hosting more of these games, but I've discovered it's much easier for me to go with a time period we know than creating one. If we end this game I wouldn't mind hosting one in a different time period if people are interested.

I really enjoyed doing a surviving Ottoman Empire. Well, can't impose my feelings on everybody.

What period would you have in mind?

[leonardothered]

I would probably be more interested starting from scratch rather than picking up someone else's stuff honestly and it would be easier to read up on the history.

[ASPN]

I'd also be fine with starting over in a different period. Get a fresh new take on things.

[NeverAgain]

I'd also be fine with starting over in a different period. Get a fresh new take on things.

[windjammer]

As long as I can play France, this will have my support

[Lumine]

Interesting!

I'm open for suggestions, but as to what I am interested in doing:

1.- World War Two: This is a slower game, taking over terms of a month or two. It begins in the earlier stages of the war, either in 1940 or 1941, and it has the novelty that players begin with those countries at war. That means that, for example, the US wouldn't be available until it's attacked or enters the war on its own, which helps balance in a conflict which does have a harder position for the Axis players. That means starting as France (or Free France), the UK, Germany, Italy, possibly the Soviet Union (like the US it could also be unlockable), possibly China and Japan. This one would probably have a few guidelines though, in order to account for the more sensitive aspects of the period.

2.- Cold War: The early Cold War, before mutually assured destruction. The idea for the game would be for the US and the USSR to expand its areas of influence as minor powers attempt to rise and avoid the eventual nuclear war (or win it while it's possible to do so). This one starts as early as 1949 and as late as 1961, with the main players being the US and the USSR, with other countries like the UK, France, North and South Korea, Egypt, Israel, Iran, India, Chiang and Mao's Chinas and so on available. The problem with this one is that it will be a less imperalistic game than before, which is one of the best parts of these games.

3.- British Chain of Elections: Spamage once did a "Chain of Elections" game, in which we played several Presidential elections to create our own history (lasted from 1824 to 1832). I'm interested in a British version, in which players play as party leaders in a general election and then we play each year or every six months until there's another election. It would also involve leadership elections. This one was designed to start in either 1990 (post-Thatcher Conservative leadership election), 2010 (Brown-Cameron-Clegg general election) or the 2015 General Election.

Do any of these appeal to players?

[windjammer]

Interesting!

I'm open for suggestions, but as to what I am interested in doing:

1.- World War Two: This is a slower game, taking over terms of a month or two. It begins in the earlier stages of the war, either in 1940 or 1941, and it has the novelty that players begin with those countries at war. That means that, for example, the US wouldn't be available until it's attacked or enters the war on its own, which helps balance in a conflict which does have a harder position for the Axis players. That means starting as France (or Free France), the UK, Germany, Italy, possibly the Soviet Union (like the US it could also be unlockable), possibly China and Japan. This one would probably have a few guidelines though, in order to account for the more sensitive aspects of the period.

2.- Cold War: The early Cold War, before mutually assured destruction. The idea for the game would be for the US and the USSR to expand its areas of influence as minor powers attempt to rise and avoid the eventual nuclear war (or win it while it's possible to do so). This one starts as early as 1949 and as late as 1961, with the main players being the US and the USSR, with other countries like the UK, France, North and South Korea, Egypt, Israel, Iran, India, Chiang and Mao's Chinas and so on available. The problem with this one is that it will be a less imperalistic game than before, which is one of the best parts of these games.

3.- British Chain of Elections: Spamage once did a "Chain of Elections" game, in which we played several Presidential elections to create our own history (lasted from 1824 to 1832). I'm interested in a British version, in which players play as party leaders in a general election and then we play each year or every six months until there's another election. It would also involve leadership elections. This one was designed to start in either 1990 (post-Thatcher Conservative leadership election), 2010 (Brown-Cameron-Clegg general election) or the 2015 General Election.

Do any of these appeal to players?

The most interesting seems to be Cold War, because this isn't only a wargame.

[Dereich]

I agree that Cold War is the best option, though the election series could be interesting. I've come to enjoy the intrigue and diplomacy aspects of these games more than the wars themselves. The border stability/lack of major non-life ending war potential could end up being a problem though.

[Lumine]

I agree that Cold War is the best option, though the election series could be interesting. I've come to enjoy the intrigue and diplomacy aspects of these games more than the wars themselves. The border stability/lack of major non-life ending war potential could end up being a problem though.

Yeah, that is a serious problem. Conflicts will be local rather than full scale war save for WW3, which is why I've struggled to find an option without major drawbacks (like 1900, which ended up being perfect).