Kalrex vs. the world

[wfrankenhoff]

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

[Kalrex]

Gnomes are fodder for Dragons

My team is Monster Force

[kevindusi]

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.

[Lord Diamond]

Sure it does. Those bastards sided with the Humans and refused to rise against them!

It's probably just too much of a pain in the butt to get rid of them. Think of their groups as good target practice and/or emmy blockers.

[kevindusi]

Were I a strong military kingdom with a group that started in the region, I'd probably be thrilled to have the target practice.

Regardless, should be fun!

[kevindusi]

My kingdoms united shall be known as the Assassins of Braggadocio. AoB for short.

[Cipher]

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

[Cipher]

This game will be created once I get the 'official' roster from RyVor indicating that the accounts are square. From there, I'll validate the options with the players and generate the game.

[davekuyk]

Official teams, yet to be named:

Kalrex:
GI
RD
WI
WA
EL
DA

Deliverer:
DW
DE
AN
BL
SO
RA

Interesting selections.

I believe Kevin's team will be steamrolling once winter hits. His side is set to dominate the south and contest several of the northern regions, particularly the Steppes. The DA could very well be a gutted kingdom by turn 6.

IMHO Kalrex should have taken the GN instead of the WA. I believe two wizard kingdoms is one too many in this format. I'd rather have the mid-range kingdoms such as the RA, GN and DA.

[wfrankenhoff]

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