Balance of Power: 270 B.C.E. Application Thread

[FrisianDude]

I think so, but I bolded it so Dodes'd notice it more easily, I hadn't noticed you wrote it as Frisi.

 

[Nord Champion]

I'll take Armenia please.

 

[Eктωρ]

Sign me as either

Maurya Empire

Parthia

Sarmatians

Nabatea


Since 270 was on the timeline of Ashoka The Great, I think it would look pretty cool.

 

[gaham1]

Rome

Dacia

What ever tribe that is in england

And whatever tribe that is in Denmark.

 

[Nord Champion]

Also, if I do get Armenia, which color is Armenia in the Middle East?

 

[BlackTide]

Also, if I do get Armenia, which colour is Armenia in the Middle East?

Armenia is the big pink one, above the Seleucids. 

 

[Nord Champion]

Also, if I do get Armenia, which colour is Armenia in the Middle East?

Armenia is the big pink one, above the Seleucids.

Ah, thank you. I thought right

 

[Dodes]

@Vieira and FrisianDude: I'll accept all three factions you guys have pointed out due to them being historic tribes. Actually did some research on the Lusitanians and was considering putting them in as a faction beforehand.

@Vieira: Nations not under AI control will be played by me, they'll mostly act defensively and offer alliances under which they will help attack if need be, but they will expand as well.

Additionally, because you "found" those tribes/factions, nobody else can apply for them, I might change that if people protest enough though.

@gaham1: The tribe in England is a Belgae colony and the tribe in Denmark is the Cimbri, I'll put you down for both as per your wish

 

[FrisianDude]

\o/

 

[Vieira151]

Coolios. 

 

[Eктωρ]

What about the Iceni and Catuvellauni?

If you decide on those and I don't get Maurya or Parthia I'd definitely like to play as the Iceni.

 

[Temuzu]

Yeah, about that, I'm just going to ask if you could put me up for the Sarmatians aswell. I was hoping that nobody would be interested in the Mayrya, but apparently I was wrong.

 

[Eктωρ]

You can sign for multiple ones.

 

[Dodes]

What about the Iceni and Catuvellauni?

If you decide on those and I don't get Maurya or Parthia I'd definitely like to play as the Iceni.

They both seem legit to me, though their time-frames are off a little, but one can assume that they were there before the Romans found them.

 

[Almalexia]

I think it would be interesting to have some of the largest Empires, such as the Seleucids, Romans, and Carthaginians, actually have several players running them as "families", each of them owning an important segment of the Empire and vying for the Imperial Throne or positions in the Senate. This could function to "nerf" some of the larger Empires and prevent them from steamrolling everyone else, before turning on each other. It would also make the interactions between players more interesting.

In any case I'd like to apply as the Seleucids.

 

[Dodes]

I'm against that idea as the Empires/Confederations did have a central leadership, either it be a specific tribe, royal family, or city-state.

The bigger nations will have plenty of problems going on that they can't simply steamroll other nations. In fact, I was worried that they might get gang-banged too hard by other nations. Like Rome or the Seleucids might end up collapsing in the first few turns, but who knows, that's the mystery of the game. Anyway, the larger the nation, the more problems and enemy nations you usually face.

 

[BlackTide]

I think it would be interesting to have some of the largest Empires, such as the Seleucids, Romans, and Carthaginians, actually have several players running them as "families", each of them owning an important segment of the Empire and vying for the Imperial Throne or positions in the Senate. This could function to "nerf" some of the larger Empires and prevent them from steamrolling everyone else, before turning on each other. It would also make the interactions between players more interesting.

In any case I'd like to apply as the Seleucids.

That would completely nerf them, players are spiteful little bastards at times, those empires would go nowhere. Unless it were the same for all nations, that would be a stretch too far.

 

[Austupaio]

I would agree with Dodes, except for Rome. Rome's ruler-ship was always very fractured, especially when it was the S.P.Q.R.

If you decide to go there, I would be willing to share ownership of the S.P.Q.R. for sure.

 

[Almalexia]

I'm against that idea as the Empires/Confederations did have a central leadership, either it be a specific tribe, royal family, or city-state.

Err, I get that. So what I was proposing is that whatever family is in the position of central leadership gets the country card for the entire nation, and can carry out actions for the entire nation, but will still have to work with the other families to raise armies or institute social, religious, or political changes.

 

[BlackTide]

I'm against that idea as the Empires/Confederations did have a central leadership, either it be a specific tribe, royal family, or city-state.

Err, I get that. So what I was proposing is that whatever family is in the position of central leadership gets the country card for the entire nation, and can carry out actions for the entire nation, but will still have to work with the other families to raise armies or institute social, religious, or political changes.

Deadlines would have to be massively extended if you wanted that kind of player cooperation to occur, especially with players in different timezones.