I thought about that, but I think that's be a little unfair.You could just put a player/update cap if you want a small game.
In case that question was addressed to me- yes, ancient Mesopotamia.What timeline (is it ancient)![]()
I thought about that, but I think that's be a little unfair.You could just put a player/update cap if you want a small game.
In case that question was addressed to me- yes, ancient Mesopotamia.What timeline (is it ancient)![]()
Well, I'll think about it.
Uh RNG is most fair IMO. First come first serve let some of us(myself, d3k, and others) who are a) in the same area as the GM(I think) and b) who are on more often an unfair advantage.
Are you trolling me? No limits in a map probably around 60 provinces in a game as popular as IOT would be beyond stupid. Unless you want war starting out on update 2 because you have to war to expand.
Just like RLAre you trolling me? No limits in a map probably around 60 provinces in a game as popular as IOT would be beyond stupid. Unless you want war starting out on update 2 because you have to war to expand.
Also, I'm working on the map for a mini-IOT (a shorter game with smaller map, less territories, hopefully less players) that's set in Mesopotamia.
Just like RL
Okay, so I finished the map. I'll post the signup thread soon, once I devise the rules.
Next game, WIM. I'd like to try a Classical game myself.![]()
Alright, who's still interested in a Classical-era IOT-variant? I have a map and I have most of the rules sketched out, though I still need to look over them and see which ones would work and which would not.
I know there are already several IOTs running; however, I'd like to do this one a bit differently than others, ie. it won't just be a copy of IOTII or IOTV. There'd be fewer provinces, and each province will be more important. It'd have a different, faster pace. So, can I get a rough show of hands of those interested?