No one cares?

getting effort in finishing games? thats a rule? xD

hit & run is under optional rules. i would like to put it in standard too.
and you moved fmds from optional to standard. i like it.

I can't agree to making a rule that I (and others) dislike a standard rule. In my view only those rules that everyone currently agree about should be listed as standard house rules. Such things change. Everyone currently agree about free movement on ships. Therefore I think it should be a standard rule.

i was just giving my point of view. so you can count me too. should we make a vote?

how many players are we actually ?

you, nosferon, radiantt, ramillies, zsaber, qweryu, pikle, laplace_demon, rodzilla, deroman, eriksson, boarungg, mac_biodiesel, me..

[This message has been edited by paatoo (edited 11-02-2014 @ 09:47 AM).]

If anyone cares besides us?

[This message has been edited by Kanibeos (edited 11-02-2014 @ 05:21 PM).]

I'm not very active, but I don't really object to the above rules, though I do prefer to look at the map in the editor myself.

Well, I do agree with Patoo on this. I give my vote on the rules presented, but for addition I think attack/retreat tactic is a clear and crude way of abusing the game mechanics and impair the AI that is already, well... not exactly splitting the atom. I know there are many other ways to exploit the mechanics and AI of such old game, but for me this is the most atmosphere polluter... Could it be possible to elevate the rule as standard and leave such tactic for single player or campaign?

Well, that's my opinion. Nice effort to try and modernize the rule set, Kani! I do care, I am just going through a bit less active phase here.

To me it is parallel to spending 10+ turns to drive a battering ram to the other side of the AI fortifications so it won't be shot and meanwhile having placed your archers so they can get in two shots against the enemy troops before they can be attacked

a battering ram can not take out enemy units, archers and ballistas can take out entire AI armys without being even touch. and so, the inexperienced players are the ones suffering most for it, and on my case, i dont want to spend half an hour taking the 3 staks of 8 archers/swordman/cavalliers from the AI.

if this rule is standard, it will give more variety to the game, if it isnt so, you just have to build ballistas, cause if u dont you just planing to loose. cause the others will be doing this hit & run, it can be even make with archers and take ALOT of advantage on the start of the game, i have done it on some games and i personally don't like it. time consuming, boring, and whats the point? oh, sure, winning!

I think Patoo has good points here. Haven't you have said before Kani, that putting up too many rules might make the games more complex and harder to enforce? However have you thought that maybe the less competitive and exploititive the games are by their nature, the less need there is for enforcing and supervising the rules? I won't accept the easiness to exploit as a reason to do so. I think we are having a situation here where needs of the competitive gaming is facing the needs of casual gaming. Neither one is better than the other, but I foresee that stubborn opinions (which I could quote many here) might lead to split in the players, where some play with one rules and others play with other rules, possibly making larger games totally impossible in the future.

So I think it's not about what form of exploiting is parallel to other, but rather how we could compromise here so that competitive gaming meets casual gaming in a good atmosphere. Gaming where players don't feel mistrust to each other nor cheat because they have lost the motivation to play clean. And for the record, I do not imply anything (in case you got that impression), I think you are honest player Kanibeos and you have done much good for our community.

Others can throw in opinions too!

this game, IS a competitive game, we must not forget that. in the time I have playing multiplayer, I had a lot of fun when the games where straight, and moved on petty "quick". I have lost fun when I "had" to do some things on the game to keep the competitive part up, and not geting so far behind the others players. thats why I personally complain about this exploits, in MY case, they have taken the fun out of MY games. Its just that, I was feeling when playing some games, like I was going to WORK! stressed by playing, I dont want it! i'm doing it for relaxing actually..
lets keep us togheter we can reason and discuss this to take good things out of it

(english is not my native language, i apologize for that)

I consider myself a quite competitive player and I have very rarely used the attack retreat tactic. Probably because by the time I have ballistas the AI opponents are no longer a serious challenge. Therefore I don't recognize that the tactic necessitates long turns and less variety in order for a player to stay competitive. At the same time since I believe that the tactic plays a very limited rule when allowed it is not that big a deal to me. It appears to be a important to you. Therefore I won't stand in the way of elevating the rule to standard.

Does anyone object to elevating the attack retreat rule to standard?

It would also be great if the rest of the active community would give their vote on the rules.

Also: Does anyone know who to contact in order to make a thread sticky?

it would be nice to have more players to debate this topic. for now on, its nice to have it on optional rules (before, it wasn't even mentioned)
i don't know whats the activity of the "elite" members of the forums?
its not so big deal if it is not in sticky, cause we are so few and we "know" each other. we can make the rules really clear before starting the new games!