Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3

[Mardonius]

In the box version of the game, DoWs cost 3 pp. In the Computer game, they
cost 4 pp.

This increase derives from Empires in Harm, but in EiH there were many
means of being able to DoW for only 2 pp with a Casus Belli so it balanced
out. As we have no Casus Belli and reduced DoW in EIANW for the PC, it
would seem prudent to revert to the 3 PP cost as the high cost of entering
wars really slows things down, (particularly if you get rid of the PP for
making free states which had served as a counter weight to some degree.)

Please let me know your thoughts

[NeverMan]

I'm all up for any part of this game reverting to Empires in Arms.

[Marshall Ellis]

When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA.
 

[Murat]

I like the 3 pp loss as well instead of the 4, Mardonius made a good argument.

[delatbabel]

Agree, without the casus belli rules from EiH, the 4 PP DoW makes no sense -- so it should revert to 3.

[borner]

the more EiA, the less EiH, the better

[timewalker03]

I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM!

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: timewalker03

I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM!

It's quite more disturbing that we are getting the 1812 campaign AHEAD OF Empires in Arms. How messed up is that?????

It really doesn't matter how much people say on this forum, Matrix continues to hold their strategy: listen to the few who don't complain about the game and ignore the many who just want this game to be good.

[NeverMan]

duplicate, sorry

[Marshall Ellis]

ORIGINAL: timewalker03

I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM!

Don't read too much into my "when/if" please! We have not totally discussed the details yet so it's an idea with a few plans around it but I do not have anything official from Matrix yet. There is much to approve. GDW also needs to be involved. I fully intend to add this element but there is a lot of business to discuss yet...

[Marshall Ellis]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: timewalker03

I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM!

It's quite more disturbing that we are getting the 1812 campaign AHEAD OF Empires in Arms. How messed up is that?????

It really doesn't matter how much people say on this forum, Matrix continues to hold their strategy: listen to the few who don't complain about the game and ignore the many who just want this game to be good.

#1. You don't have the 1812 scenario yet, do you ?
I would never ignore you Neverman LOL!

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: timewalker03

I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM!

It's quite more disturbing that we are getting the 1812 campaign AHEAD OF Empires in Arms. How messed up is that?????

It really doesn't matter how much people say on this forum, Matrix continues to hold their strategy: listen to the few who don't complain about the game and ignore the many who just want this game to be good.

#1. You don't have the 1812 scenario yet, do you ?
I would never ignore you Neverman LOL!

I apologize if I misunderstood you saying earlier that the 1812 was coming soon.

[Marshall Ellis]

No apologies here. It actually might come quicker than the classic scenario just because of the business issues involved.

[pzgndr]

GDW also needs to be involved.

Do you mean ADG and Harry Rowland? It would be nice to see some comments and insights here from those guys occassionally. After all, if Harry himself says such and such change or enhancement is a good improvement to the original game, or not, then that would carry a lot of weight in the development of this officially licensed computer version.

[Marshall Ellis]

ADG, Correct! Arrrrg! When Worlds Collide LOL!
I agree.
 

[pzgndr]

Not the Worlds Collide Theory!

George: Ah, you have no idea of the magnitude of this thing. If she [Susan] is allowed to infiltrate this world, then George Costanza as you know him, ceases to exist! You see, right now, I have Relationship George, but there is also Independent George. That's the George you know, the George you grew up with -- Movie George, Coffee Shop George, Liar George, Bawdy George!
Jerry: I love that George.
George: Me too! And he's dying, Jerry! If Relationship George walks through this door, he will kill Independent George! A George, divided against itself, cannot stand!*

[:D]

[Marshall Ellis]

LOL!
 

[iamspamus]

I'd like both. EIH 5.0 and EIA... [:D]
Jason

ORIGINAL: borner

the more EiA, the less EiH, the better

[delatbabel]

I actually quite like the casus belli rules from EiH.  They allowed some DoWs to only be 2 PPs.  However without them, a DoW needs to go back to the EiA method of 3 PPs.  It would be nice if casus belli could be implemented as an optional rule though.

[Marshall Ellis]

Is 3 the number?
I can change this easily for 1.06