Kalrex vs. the world

[Kalrex]

Kevin wants the neutrals removed from play cause he can't take advantage of the situation

I agree with the Winter sentiments but I'm getting used to dealing with it... Kevin doesn't exactly have the team to "steamroll" too much assembled there IMO-

---

do whatever you think is best Cipher-

I know I'll need to upgrade my account again, 1 level.

[kevindusi]

I want the neutrals moved because a 'regular' Titan does not have them. If you want skill v. skill, needs to be as level of a playing field as possible given that I obviously chose much wiser with my kingdoms, and you obviously don't appreciate a good dwarf.

If it's a sticking point to getting the game moving, leave them in, but I think - regardless of kingdom choices - that if the idea is to be a modified Titan game then they should go.

[Kalrex]

Dave's thoughts on the Darkelves are interesting but considering Kevin doesn't have a 4-1 edge this time...

---

If I picked the Gnome consider I'd be surrounded, as the Dwarves are, and get smacked around just like the Dwarves will be...

[kevindusi]

The lack of a 4:1 edge is why the consensus is that I won't be completely dominating until turn 4. This also factors in me botching an order or two in the opening rounds. Flawless order entry by the AoB will have you crying for momma by turn 3.

[Lord Thanatos]

Would the UN, GN, and TR not have existed, or will they be sitting still and waiting for someone to come along and kill them?

Assuming they would not exist. Traditional Titan does not have "empty" rd, un, so positions.

You'd be wrong about that. In this new variant, those nations do exist, armies included

I'd request that this be changed. Doesn't make sense to have empty positions.

This variant is intended to be very little manual setup. The unselected kingdoms remain (the way I envisioned it) (figure that into your kingdom draft!) and no kingdoms are declared allies at beginning while the Natural Enemy designation remains.

Essentially, no changes to the initial setup - simply assign only 12 kingdoms. That was my thought...

---

The unpicked kingdoms will be the 3 inactives as opposed to the typical 'epic' missing 3 kingdoms.
This variant is actually a TITANS matchup with the Second Cycle of Steel version.

There are some variables at play with this new, player driven, variant:
- should the unpicked kingdoms remain as generated at setup OR be completely removed from the game?
- kingdom alliance settings won't follow the teams that are created by the draft, choices
1. leave alliances as is, including natural enemies
2. remove all but natural enemy status
3. remove all alliance status & replace with defined allies amongst unique teams
4. leave natural enemy status and replace other with new teammate alliances

I am not in favor of 3. as I think working around the natural enemy status should part of drafting both sides. I favor 1. or 4. although 4. probably makes the most sense.

I will default to leaving the setup as is, unless both players consent to the same change. Changes aren't terribly burdensome to make, but will likely delay the creation of the game.

Cipher

I'm in favor of version 4. Definitely throws you for a loop when you suddenly need to remember to trade food/gold instead of using of using inter-alliance transfers

#2 is how I envisioned this game. Factor these things into the mix when selecting kingdoms....

[Cipher]

The beauty is that each of these games can adopt the choices that fit the particular players' agreement.

[Lord Thanatos]

The beauty is that each of these games can adopt the choices that fit the particular players' agreement.

So, then... I am brilliant?

[Cipher]

Did you mean to put a question mark at the end there?

[Kalrex]

Whatever Kevin wants to do is fine as long as he doesn't complain when I smack him down..

[kevindusi]

I never complain. You must have me confused with bluefile2, Jumbie, or anyone else that often suffers from Kalrexia.