View Full Version : KotR KotR cataclysmic event discussion thread
There's been some discussion in the King of the Romans OOC thread about having a cataclysmic event soon that shakes the game up a bit. I think it would be good to have a focussed discussion on this, with the aim of having an OOC vote on Friday to either say yes or no to the idea.
The basic idea, as I understand it, will be to manipulate the game so that we lose a lot of provinces. This could be by pushing taxes too high, cutting garrisons, messing about with AI factions (to the extent possible), maybe getting excommunicated, moving capitals etc. Essentially, it will involve the person in the Chancellor role doing lots of things that make absolutely no sense for a Chancellor to consciously do, but to do these for the OOC reason of making the game more challenging and reinvigorating it.
We will try to weave a plausible story that can explain the chaos - I don't want to go into details here; it will be more fun if it is revealed slowly. I don't really want this thread to go into the story side - just the principle of manipulating the game to make it more unfavourable.
TinCow has offered to take on the Chancellor role for about 10 turns to oversee the event. He is a veteran PBMer and I totally trust his judgement. He will not deliberately try to get any player killed, but he will create major chaos and some avatars probably will die. We will use the recruitable generals to make sure no player is excluded from the game for that reason. Players may have to use the better part of discretion to survive - or you can choose to go out in a blaze of glory.
The sequence I envisage is that we will have 10 turns under Kaiser Siegfried as Chancellor that will build up the story leading to the event. Then 10 turns under TinCow - presumably Chancellor Lothar? - to fully oversee it. So basically, there will be no Chancellor elections for the next 20 turns.
On Friday, I would like us to vote on the question of the following form:
econ21 and TinCow are authorised to engineer a cataclysmic event during the 20 turns after the coming Diet. This may involve temporarily abandoning some parts of the Charter - for example, Emergency Diets may not be able to immediately undo what they are engineering - and implementing things in game that the Chancellor in character has not authorised.
The above question can be amended based on the discussion in this thread, but it is essentially give TinCow and I carte blanche to engineer a cataclysm. Based on the principles I have sketched, you will have to trust us.
I propose we have a simple one player one vote ballot, with a 2/3 majority to pass. I realise that this is a major change from the design of this PBM so if a significant number of players object (ie a third of those who vote), we will not do it.
The reason why I want us to resolve this issue now is because it will take some time to write the stories and make the preparations. Waiting to the next Diet will be too last minute, but we don't want to commit too much to the planning unless we know it is authorised.
I think this is a great idea as the game has become a bit easy for the Germans at the moment, but are you planning to make it 'major' and mae half of our settlements rebel or not so major and just destroy a lot of bulidings and disband a lot of troops?
RoadKill
09-10-2007, 21:08
I'm loving this idea, I would prefer the more choas the better. If I could make a suggestion. Maybe we could use the hotseat program to help the other computer factions to build powerful armies, and use those armies to assult the HRE, or something along the lines of that.
I don't agree to this:
econ21 and TinCow are authorised to engineer a cataclysmic event during the 20 turns after the coming Diet. This may involve temporarily abandoning some parts of the Charter - for example, Emergency Diets may not be able to immediately undo what they are engineering - and implementing things in game that the Chancellor in character has not authorised.
I think we together should agree on what we want to happen and Lothar as Chancellor lets that happen. This should ofcourse be within the thinking world of Lothar (less Outremer is one of them). And at some point Lothar gets impeached.
I am against giving one player all control over the game to turn it into something that is as bad as possible, we together should agree on this, not just one player (or 2 for what it's worth).
Northnovas
09-10-2007, 21:21
I think this could be the spark for some. We would basically start a new game but we are working out of the framework that we created the past 10 months in the game.
We would face new challenges but have experienced avatars that would add to the IC development and try to claim what is lost depending how it was loss.
The goal is not to loose an avatar but change the circumstances for an avatar and have new challenges in the game instead of waiting for in game events. The Black Death and the Timurids being the next wave added to the cataclysmic event sounds good to me. This could be interesting.
Dutch_guy
09-10-2007, 21:25
I'm all for a civil war! Now that was a lot of fun in the WotS (even being on the losing side of it, heh) and I imagine that with the different houses, it wouldn't even be that hard to make happen.
:balloon2:
I am perfectly comfortable giving econ21 and TinCow a free hand to do as they wish, and actually would much prefer *not* to know what they plan. It would be like reading the end pages of a book first and then going onward sure of the plot. That would without a doubt take most of the enjoyment out of it for me.
If there are those (like Stig) who utterly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holstein_%28cattle%29) refuse to have any mystery about it, I do hope those discussions will into a separate thread that I'm not obliged to read. I really want to find out what will happen in the same way that Fritz would so that my IC reactions can be genuine.
And if Fritz dies in a battle with impossible odds, all the better. As long as I get to fight it ~:)
My goal would not be to simply wreck everything, but to create a real storyline IC that ends by creating new and interesting challenges for future years. I would not intentionally get any avatar killed, but the world will certainly become far more hostile than it is now. People who insist on fighting every enemy head-on instead of making strategic withdrawals will be risking their own lives. That will be their choice to make, though. Furthermore, no House (or Outremer) will be prejudiced in the process. All will suffer equally.
The end state will be much weaker than it is now with our enemies much stronger. Many difficult decisions will have to be made in the Diet about how to rebuild and regain what was lost.
I am against giving one player all control over the game to turn it into something that is as bad as possible, we together should agree on this, not just one player (or 2 for what it's worth).
This thread is to make sure we're all in agreement beforehand. We're not going to do this unless people want it. As for requiring group consent before acting, that's fine but you'll have to find someone else to do it. I have ideas about how to implement this in-game as well as plotlines and stories to justify it IC. That said, it will be very, very complex to implement and doing it my way will take forever if I have to check with other people before acting. Furthermore, it will ruin the surprise. Part of the point is to inject some excitement into the game and the 'plot' of the event will be spoiled if I have to get approval for everything.
For example, if I decide I want Swabian city X to revolt, I will probably have to disband some of the garrison, raise the taxes, and move the capital to Outremer for a couple turns. For the purpose of the 'event' none of that would have occurred. IC, the only thing that would have happened would have been that Swabian city X revolted for the reason I give IC. You will simply have to ignore whatever OOC actions I am taking and concentrate on the storyline that I put over it. The results are the important part, not the in-game methods I use to achieve them.
If you are concerned about my ability to successfully implement this in-game, ask econ21 about what I did with Appolonia in WOTS. I assure you that I can get it done in a logical manner without simply wrecking the Empire. I would also provide several stories to advance the 'event' plotline so that there is background info on why and how these things are happening.
Maybe we could use the hotseat program to help the other computer factions to build powerful armies, and use those armies to assult the HRE, or something along the lines of that.
Can this be enabled on the savegame without any problems? If I could control everything the AI factions do for 10 turns, I could do wondrous things with the game.
I am definately for the 'disaster' in that case, but I think it would be good if it only afected mainland Europe and not Outremer so that when the people over here hear about it we can sail some men back to help cope with the 'disaster'. Btw how would a civil war work becuase that could also be very interesting
I don't think we have an IC rationale for a civil war quite right now, and I don't think that's what is planned. However, we did that at the end of WotS and it was tremendous fun. Basically two sides arose, one loyal to the Senate (sort of), the other loyal to the Consul that Lucjan was playing at the time. econ21 GM's battles between the two sides via PMs, images, and "real" board battle mechanics. In all my years of TW, that was without doubt the most memorable series of battles ever.
But again, not sure we should go that route here. There are plenty of external forces that can be brought in.
gibsonsg91921
09-10-2007, 21:58
I got something up my sleeve...
Can this be enabled on the savegame without any problems? If I could control everything the AI factions do for 10 turns, I could do wondrous things with the game.
No
Going the read what's left of your post now
GeneralHankerchief
09-10-2007, 22:12
Having PBM'd with these two loonies for well over a year now (wow! Has is been that long since WotS started) I trust their judgement completely. econ, TinCow: Act like a two-year-old playing with toys. :yes:
As to city revolts, I think they most be done realistically, not artifically (no moving capital). There are enough cities that can easely rebel (Hamburg, Stettin, Marseille, Milan, Bologna, Venice, Budapest, etc etc).
Also I think we shouldn't disband too many armies. Electors should get their own little armies with which they decide to protect something they call theirs (read further down). Armies should simply be split up.
Steps I would take:
1320: Massive rebellion in the Reichs Armies, some cities lose garrisons, other get disbanded. Only the crack troops of the HA stay loyal to us, and only those Armies with commanders with authority and a great name (think of Hans or Arnold, or even Ansehelm (he conquered Moscow)) remain fully intact. FH, or someone else, will give out a little mod that TinCow will use for 2 turns. This will make sure many more rebel armies spawn (this can be easely done by changing a number).
1322: The rebellions continue and the Diet begins to talk. Because we foolishly agreed on an CA we cannot impeach Lothar, but we do call on a Emergency Session at the end of this year (more a less official one) in which 2 main sides (I already see people as Lothar, Ansehelm, Helmut and some others grouping together, as they share similiar views) form and argue with eachother, this only results in more chaos. We decide to be ruthless to the normal people the plebs, which results in even more chaos and rebellion.
1324: The Chancellor loses control of the armies (well IC he does, OOC he doesn't). Noblemen start to use their army for what they think works best, Dieter Bresch for example could start attacking the Turks (as he wanted to) against the Charter.
1326: Things keep going worse and worse more cities rebel (hopefully) and quickly armies are formed from those armies that are still left. The Kaiser is still in Byzantium, because his wife doesn't want him to go back, and because the road is blocked by Hungarians. The armies proof not-capable of defending the Reichs borders and those electors that are still of reason decide to retreat to a Heartland Reich (hopefully 5 cities close to eachother won't rebel) and defend that. While others have small armies or loose bands and they wander around a city they claimed as theirs.
1328: It continues electors keep arguing and nothing gets done without proper leadership. Some advocate a independence of the Outremer as a Crusader State, some want to give it up as they don't like it. Others want to go out to fight and others want to keep what they have now. At the end of the year Kaiser Siegfried returns to Rome ... or Frankfurt, or whatever, and he imprisons Lothar claiming he is responsible for all this (Lothar gets released for lack of evidence later on) and he tries to bring some order back into the Reich by starting recruiting armies again.
gibsonsg91921
09-10-2007, 22:24
yeah, but ur missing something...
yeah, but ur missing something...
Which is?
Normally with this we would easely lose half the provinces but keep our avatars alive (as I think they should be, otherwise we would end up with loads of players without avatars, not a good thing).
OverKnight
09-10-2007, 22:44
Generally, I support something to shake the game up. I think it's been to long since we felt "threatened", at least since Scotland-gate, and the PBM could use a shot in the arm.
However, I don't want to know details. I don't want to know exactly how the house of cards I've helped build up will be destroyed by the "Chaos Toddler" about to be unleashed. Too painful.
What is basically being proposed here is that TinCow act as a Games Master, kind of like a Dungeon Master for those of you familiar with Dungeons and Dragons. He will use the console and various in-game manipulations to mix things up. I will help with the lead up and act as an agency of restraint in case things get too hairy for people.
The Apollonia event in Will of the Senate that TC referred to was an instance of this kind of thing. We had passed a controversial law mandating an expedition from Italy to Apollonia, a city controlled by Greece. TC was the Consul (read Chancellor) and was opposed to the expedition for in character reasons, so he decided to obey the will of the Senate to the letter only. He despatched a very modest expedition which my avatar commanded. Initially, we thought it would be like marching into the lions' den, as the Greeks had multiple stacks wandering around. Unfortunately, RTWs strategic AI being what it was, it was more like marching into a lions' den where the lions are all tame, well fed and very sleepy. So what TC did was use the console to manipulate a large Greek army into attacking my modest garrison, giving me the fight of a lifetime.
The cool thing about this episode is that I believe no one apart from TC and I knew what he had done to manipulate the game to provide the challenge. We built the tension up around the episode, with TC as Consul organising a relief army to rescue the Apollonia garrions. It was a sort of Gordon of Khartoum episode and one of the more dramatic parts of the PBM. This is the battle report of the final battle of the expedition:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1179602&postcount=11
Here, because we are proposing something of much wider significance in the game, we can't manipulate the game without you knowing. But we are asking that you allow us to take care of the details. We can use this thread to discuss possibilities, suggest ideas etc. We will listen and ideally steal the best ideas, but won't publicly commit to a specific plan. On Friday, I will ask you to vote yes or no to something like the proposal in my first post - essentially trust Tincow to sort out the details.
Don't feel compelled to vote yes just because you think other people want this. If you would rather stick with the rules we have been playing under, that is fair enough. It's just that now seems a good time to mix things up and TinCow is well positioned to do that for us.
Cecil XIX
09-10-2007, 22:57
Since this is a decidedly out-of-character occurence, any vote wouldn't include influence bonuses right?
As regard to the plan, I'm of the same mind as OverKnight and Tamur. I will also say that too much is certainly better than too little.
Since this is a decidedly out-of-character occurence, any vote wouldn't include influence bonuses right?
Yes. I may be creating a dangerous precedent here but given the wide-ranging ramifications of the proposal, it will be an unweighted vote requiring 2/3 of those voting to pass.
TevashSzat
09-10-2007, 23:38
Hmm...I will vote for it.
I personally would like the French cities of Paris/Rheims and maybe Dijon to revolt leaving Scherer alone in Caen and see how long he can hold out. That would be a nice challenge for me I would think:)
For those who want to, I suggest letting them get cut off from the main body of the Reich that is left maybe in a fort or a city and then see if they can hold out until matters stabilize and help comes or if they will die prematurely.
The best potential for chaos, however is if we get excommunicated and the pope calls a crusade on a major city deep inside of Reich. That way, if we lose the city, there will be tons of large armies just waiting to carve the Reich up. Even if we don't lose the city, we will still have to fend off hordes and hordes of enemies.
Hmm...I will vote for it.
I personally would like the French cities of Paris/Rheims and maybe Dijon to revolt leaving Scherer alone in Caen and see how long he can hold out. That would be a nice challenge for me I would think:)
For those who want to, I suggest letting them get cut off from the main body of the Reich that is left maybe in a fort or a city and then see if they can hold out until matters stabilize and help comes or if they will die prematurely.
The best potential for chaos, however is if we get excommunicated and the pope calls a crusade on a major city deep inside of Reich. That way, if we lose the city, there will be tons of large armies just waiting to carve the Reich up. Even if we don't lose the city, we will still have to fend off hordes and hordes of enemies.
I am highly in favor of settlements being cut-off and isolated from the rest of the Reich, at least for a period of time. Excommunication is a major possibility, but it will depend on which plot we choose to adopt. That's one of the reasons we want to talk about it now: the earlier we know that this will happen, the more time we have to devote to the details and the stories behind it.
Don't worry though, I've got all kinds of devious ideas rolling around in my head. I would probably request that people who don't mind their avatars being put at more risk to tell me so by PM. If you're really looking to find yourself in an interesting position, let me know and I will do what I can to make it interesting. I will also be far more open to players' concerns about movements and actions than a normal Chancellor would. As long as you give me early notice about what you want to do, I will follow your orders pretty specifically, and use DMing (going back to the D&D reference) to make it challenging. Oh, no! Your scout was bribed by the Poles and you marched into an ambush! If your avatar has problems with troop morale, some of his men may desert if they think they will lose the coming battle. If your avatar is immensely charismatic and a known leader, maybe an extra unit of knights will show up to help you just as you are about to be overrun.
FactionHeir
09-11-2007, 04:30
I think letting TC and econ run it behind the scenes is a good idea especially since we can still control avatar movement for some extent.
Stig's plan also has some merit and I have no doubts that some of it might end up being incorporated, but I wouldn't like to see the exact course of events being laid out before they happen to everyone, as that breaks the immersion and thus fun.
That said, Hans won't have long to live at that time anyway, so throw anything you like at him.
Also, as a personal suggestion, and you may ignore it, it would be interesting to lose all of Outremer or all except say Antioch. That way, it allows us to form a true crusade again later in game.
Further, if you need help with console, do PM me. move_character specifically can be quite useful and I can also mod the files to allow higher rebellion rates as Stig suggested and even force the AI to build certain buildings for instance or train specific agents.
Privateerkev
09-11-2007, 06:21
I love this idea overall. I am entirely in favor of it.
On to some finer points. I don't think we're at civil-war yet. Maybe later but lets just have this as us-versus-world.
As for Outremer, I don't mind if it is shrunk down to one province but have it at least be one province. We do have the "Oliphaunts" coming. :D
I'm up for trusting Econ and TinCow with the details and let them leak em out to us in-game.
As for my avatar, I feel there will be enough danger without asking for more. If I see something interesting in the game develop, I'll pm TC OCC and ask accordingly.
This is all I got for now.
AussieGiant
09-11-2007, 09:20
I'm strongly in favour of it.
More importantly and this is mainly directed to Stig, I think you're going to have to take a leap of faith mate.
The idea of anyone other than Econ or TC "knowing" what was going to happen would be like playing D&D and having one of the player characters sitting on the DM's side of the screen reading everything.
If you want to do that then...it wont really work in my view.
I have no idea what D&D is, but I simply don't like the plan of giving something to which I devoted some hours of my life and then letting him do what he wants with it.
FactionHeir
09-11-2007, 09:38
You can PM TC during the event and have almost complete control over your avatar's movements, so its not like you will die without having had any input.
AussieGiant
09-11-2007, 10:30
I have no idea what D&D is, but I simply don't like the plan of giving something to which I devoted some hours of my life and then letting him do what he wants with it.
I think you're holding on bit too tight Stig :yes:
You the player are more important than the avatar you control.
You'll always get a new one at some point.
D&D was a role playing game using a complex set of rules and kids/adults imaginations.
Kind of like this, but face to face and using a gaming system to generate characters and skills. These characters would be controlled by real people. One person would then run the "world" you played in creating stories and advantures for you to act out in.
It was either that or a secret cult brain washing kids and teaching them about the devil...*joke*
Ituralde
09-11-2007, 10:42
I am completely in favour of this. I have to stress that from my past experiences there wouldn't be a lot of people I would trust with pulling this through, but TinCow and econ21 are definetly among them. The vote will get a yes for me.
As to the concerns Stig, voiced. I agree with you completely. It's a frightening thing to give the game away and loose all control over it. Like AussieGiant said it really is a leap of faith. It is necessary though, because otherwise an implementation of it would be either impossible or just simply boring.
If every action gets decided OOC, before it is implemented IC in every detail, the OOC discussions will just get tremendous. Votings will bog the game down, as every little piece has to be disected and voted on. Furthermore, while the timeline you suggest would certainly be fun, the specifics of it won't be. Having an argument in the Diet whose outcome is pretty much predetermined looses much of its appeal. Instead of creating excitement it would create boredom, as everyone would just be going through the motions.
For this to be pulled off, I think there is no other way as to giving one player complete control. Otherwise it just won't work and that's what this poll is for.
There's also another thing that has not been touched upon. While TinCow plans to orchestrate this whole thing, I don't think he wants his actions to reflect directly on Lothar. So while the Reich goes to ruins, this will be because of outside influence, not because of an incompetent Chancellor, who would surely be stopped by impeachment. I hope everyone understands the last part and acts accordingly should the event occur. And for those afraid of the consequences, TinCow and econ21 have always shown that they are ready to listen to people, and they will definetly do this during the catastrophe. Trust them, I do! :beam:
Warmaster Horus
09-11-2007, 11:29
I'm all for it. I also trust TC and econ21 to make as much chaos as possible, while keeping it fun for the players involved.
There's also another thing that has not been touched upon. While TinCow plans to orchestrate this whole thing, I don't think he wants his actions to reflect directly on Lothar. So while the Reich goes to ruins, this will be because of outside influence, not because of an incompetent Chancellor, who would surely be stopped by impeachment. I hope everyone understands the last part and acts accordingly should the event occur.
Yes, this will not be "Lothar Gone Wild!" For most of it, I will simply be the 'narrator' telling a story about what is happening to the Reich. The way we are working on it now, a third party character, not controlled by anyone, will be 'responsible' for the actions that spark the crisis. Perhaps Lothar will take over the Chancellorship after that, perhaps not, but even if he does the majority of what happens will be beyond his control.
FactionHeir
09-11-2007, 12:27
Perhaps Lothar will take over the Chancellorship after that
Now that would be Steffen Gone Wild. (Assuming you meant consecutive)
No, the next Chancellorship will definitely be Siegfried's.
FactionHeir
09-11-2007, 13:30
Hmmm the way I understood it:
1300-1320 Ituralde
1320-1360 TinCow
You'll always get a new one at some point.
That's the point, I've put so many hours into Ansehelm that I don't want a new one if I can make sure Ansehelm survives
he way we are working on it now, a third party character, not controlled by anyone, will be 'responsible' for the actions that spark the crisis.
Don't like that, I'd rather have an avatar who gets responsible for this.
Hmmm the way I understood it:
1300-1320 Ituralde
1320-1360 TinCow
I will be playing a 10 turn Chancellorship, like normal, so that would be 1320-1340. The crisis that sparks the event will develop during Ituralde's term and probably begin shortly before the end. Once the first few basic moves have been made, I will take over and the effects of the earlier actions will be implemented.
That's the point, I've put so many hours into Ansehelm that I don't want a new one if I can make sure Ansehelm survives
I promise you that no avatar will die unless you make the choice to place yourself in danger. If you want to play it safe until things cool down and rebuilding begins, I will guarantee your survival.
Don't like that, I'd rather have an avatar who gets responsible for this.
I'm sorry, but I am not going to write a story where Lothar destroys the Reich. The actions that we are planning cannot possibly fit into the character I have created for him. You are not aware of everything that goes on in his life, but he believes himself to be a defender of the Reich, not an evil man. I don't see why I should have to destroy my avatar simply because I have volunteered to engineer this event for the benefit of all the players. Just as you are fond of Ansehelm, I am fond of Lothar and I do not want to see him wrecked. If you want to blame him for the events that happen under his watch, feel free. He is more than capable of responding to slander. However, I simply will not use a plot that makes him the arch-villain of the Reich.
I don't see why I should have to destroy my avatar simply because I have volunteered to engineer this event for the benefit of all the players.
On the other hand, if anyone does want to destroy their avatar helping to engineer this event - do PM TinCow or I. I am sure together we can work you into the story. :evilgrin:
More generally, we will provide opportunities for players to shape events - either suggesting general ideas to us OOC; or, when the time comes, organising things in the Diet, in their Houses or providing specific instructions for how their characters will react. We've had some interesting PMs already that we are digesting. And when the event comes, you will not be passive spectators, but will be able to affect how it plays out - probably in ways we can't anticipate.
Hopefully when this takes off, it will spark lots of stories, speeches and side-plots, like the Civil War in WotS.
FactionHeir
09-11-2007, 15:01
Hmm maybe Wolfgang wants to run the empire in Lothar's stead? He is very accountable and reliable :grin:
[edit]
Just saw econ's post.
Actually, I wouldn't mind having a somewhat disgruntled Hans (depends on the next diet and the one after of course) becoming a villain later on.
I'm most interested to see how the Houses react to this... Crisis points in history generally lead to the resolution of problems that are completely unrelated to the catastrophe -- the 12th & 13th century plagues, for example, lead to a massive increase in trade due to inheritances and general democratisation of the field.
I have a feeling some of the difficult questions of recent years will be solved rather permanently.
Privateerkev
09-11-2007, 17:42
This is more of a communications logistics question.
I'd like to work out a way to keep separate TC's IC and OOC actions. The things he would have to do OOC to engineer this, are things we would gut a person IC for doing normally. I still want Jan to interact with Lothar IC but I don't want to be nailing him for things that are completely OOC like how TC is planning to engineer rebellions. I check the save game at least once a turn. Normally, if I see a city in red face or an army is moved somewhere I don't want, I PM the Chancellor IC and ask for things to be changed.
I guess the point is, there will be things happening that we need to pretend aren't happening. Like, tax levels, capital placement, army composition, and the like. I want to know which of these things to ignore and which to take up with Lothar IC.
I'm assuming through all of this that Lothar will very much be trying to run things as Chancellor and I would like to have Jan interact with him IC. In the meantime, I understand that there will be a lot going on OOC in order to bring about IC effects and I don't want to accidentally confuse the two.
I'm most interested to see how the Houses react to this... Crisis points in history generally lead to the resolution of problems that are completely unrelated to the catastrophe -- the 12th & 13th century plagues, for example, lead to a massive increase in trade due to inheritances and general democratisation of the field.
I have a feeling some of the difficult questions of recent years will be solved rather permanently.
I am very curious as well. It's entirely possible that the crisis could unite the Houses (and Outremer) and have them cooperating on a level never before seen. At the same time, with the extreme pressure on all fronts and insufficient resources to meet all needs, it's also possible that the fractures will become even greater as the Houses squabble to seize whatever resources they can to save themselves.
This is more of a communications logistics question.
I'd like to work out a way to keep separate TC's IC and OOC actions. The things he would have to do OOC to engineer this, are things we would gut a person IC for doing normally.
I am planning a three tiered system to inform you IC what is going on. Anything that I do not list IC can be assumed to be due to OOC actions and should thus be ignored. The system will be as such:
First, major phases or events will be introduced with a story in the Story thread. These will give background and a plot about what is happening and why. I expect somewhere in the region of 3 to 5 of these during my term, depending on the plot that is chosen.
Second, every game turn will use a modified system of the battle-list postings that Chancellors have been making in the OOC thread for some time. This will include the current status of each avatar in the game, a brief description of the challenges they find themselves in, and a short multiple choice description of possible actions. These multiple choice descriptions will not be definitive by any means, they will merely provide examples of options that are open to you. For example:
Johnny von Hindenburg:
You are the Count of Pfarphenplatz. The city is rioting and half of the garrison has been killed or deserted. You have two groups of knights with you and a large Polish army is nearby. There is no way to hire mercenaries or recruit new garrison units.
(A) Garrison Pfarphenplatz with your knights and attempt to restore order and hold the city.
(B) Ride to Pfarphenplatz and rescue the garrison before they are overwhelmed, then attempt to flee to the safety of Somewhatnearbyville. This will slow you down and you may be caught in the field by the Polish army.
(C) Abandon Pfarphenplatz and ride immediately for Somewhatnearbyville.
People may tell me they want to follow one of these paths or give a path of their own. If a person gives me no information for a particular turn, I will always choose the path that I deem to be best for keeping them alive. If an avatar's situation has not changed much from before, I will likely not give any info on them or simply write a "Proceeding as before" type note. Please note that since I cannot find a way to control the enemy AI, I will sometimes artificially create battles for you. Thus, if in the above example you chose (B) but the AI did not attack you and I want it to, I will move the Polish army near you and have you attack it. Even though the battle will be setup as you attacking, it will be roleplayed as a defensive battle and you will still have to fight it.
Also, the results of every action will not be guaranteed. If you chose (B) you could be attacked in the field, but you could also get lucky and escape without a battle. If you chose (A) you could be successful and restore order, perhaps opening up a new possibility to recruit one new garrison regiment. On the otherhand, you could fail to restore order, and rioting could continue, resulting in the destruction of a further garrison regiment and one of your knight regiments. I will be using a combination of factors to determine the results, including your character traits (i.e. avatars with "popular" traits will have a better chance at restoring order than ones with "unpopular" traits), the arrangement of the armies and the Reich, and my own imagination. I am even toying with the idea of actually rolling a die to determine the result (i.e. "unpopular" avatar succeeds in restoring order on a 1 or 2 on a d6. "popular" avatar suceeds in restoring order on a 1 to 4 on a d6). econ21 did something similar to this with the WOTS Civil War battles and it was excellent.
Finally, the last area will be Chancellor's reports. These will be the only real interaction Lothar has with the game. I will summarize any previous events of significance not covered by the previous areas here. This will also be where Lothar's decisions about how to allocate resources will be made. I do not anticipate there being many resources available to allocate for the majority of the event, so the decisions Lothar has to make will likely be minimal and infrequent. I want to concentrate mainly on the story (the first section) and the 'choose your own adventure' style actions for the players (the second section) rather than a traditional Chancellorship.
Privateerkev
09-11-2007, 19:28
Ok, so for ten turns we are drastically changing the elector/chancellor relationship. Thanks for making that more clear to me. What you laid out is probably the best way to administer this. Otherwise, you'd have to think of ways to answer questions as Lothar and which to answer as "engineer of Reich's destruction." If I understand this correctly, Lothar is gonna kind of going into the background. He'll still talk in the other threads and still technically be Chancellor, but most things will be outside of his IC control. You will be replacing that with a largely OOC Chancellor that will run this much more as a RP'ing game or a "choose your own adventure" type story.
So, we can keep PM'ing Lothar IC during this but his own responses will most likely be less-than-helpful due to his own lack of information and control over the situation. Things we would normally notice in the save-game and pounce on IC should probably be ignored IC (except for what you list) and we should interact with you OOC about them.
As an example, if you make Antioch revolt by removing the garrison and raising the taxes, I should do this IC:
Chancellor Lothar,
I am alarmed at the revolt in Antioch. Please send me what resources you can spare to help me ward off the rebellion.
Instead of this which is what I would normally do:
Chancellor Lothar,
I have noticed that you have pushed my city into open revolt by raising taxes and disbanding the garrison. You are endangering the lives of thousands of Imperial citizens as well as imperiling our mission out here in Outremer. I demand that you stop Antioch from rebelling or I will call for an emergency session in the Diet to call for your impeachment.
So, during the 10 turn cataclysm, do option 1 in communicating instead of option 2. How am I doing so far?
Yes, that would be preferable. Also note that I will even be posting situation reports for Lothar himself. He will be no more safe than anyone else and it will be good for other people to see what he is doing as well. Maybe I'll have my wife roll the die or something. :juggle2:
Actually... maybe we can just say there's no Chancellor for the entire period. Perhaps the Diet (or the Kaiser?) declares a state of emergency and every House, province, and Elector has to fend for themselves. Then I wouldn't even have to worry about the Chancellor thing. Resources and reinforcements will become available to you based on your own actions, rather than politicing.
Keep in mind that even when this is all done with, there will still be a massive rebuilding effort required. The game doesn't just go back to it's old state of HRE world dominance after 10 turns, so there will still be a massive struggle for resources as soon as the crisis is over. That is for the Diet to work on as a group, though.
StoneCold
09-11-2007, 19:45
How about during this period, the only resources, aka florins available to each city are those profits the cities make for themselves? To simulate to breakdown of order over the entire Reich?
Also how about letting every assigned avatar and their armies moved by their player and TC not using up the said avatar's movement point? That I think may slow down the game somewhat, but could allow for more individualistic play, i.e. for people who wants their avatar to survive rather than to help out the situations on the whole?
Privateerkev
09-11-2007, 19:45
Building off of what TC said, it might be simpler if there is no Chancellor. Make it where at the end of Siegfried's Chancellorship, the cataclysm starts and there is no IC Chancellor at all. Just have TC as a strictly OOC Chancellor. This would allow TC the ability to just wear "one hat" and not worry about confusing us or himself. This would also open up the chance for Lothar to become a real Chancellor some day later and TC would be able to play the role for real.
What does everyone else think about that?
Kagemusha
09-11-2007, 19:51
Im against it. I think we should just simply take the role playing effort to the next level. Currently the Diet is acting like we would be acting in real game. In another words we are playing to win, not for the personal ambitions of our characters. There should be lot more radical ideas within character and hostility between houses, ofcourse this can be only done if people can clearly see whats inside character and whats outside.:yes:
Privateerkev
09-11-2007, 19:54
I think part of the fun of this will be the suspense. I don't want to know much OOC. I want to discover things IC and maybe know a little extra OOC to help with my own planning.
Unless people want a totally separate "spoilers" thread for this during the 10 year reign of terror but I won't read it until after its all done.
How about during this period, the only resources, aka florins available to each city are those profits the cities make for themselves? To simulate to breakdown of order over the entire Reich?
Resources (for construction/repair of buildings, recruitment of new units, hiring of mercenaries, and repair of units) will only be given when I want them to be. This is to ensure that the crisis remains challenging. If it's based exclusively on profit, Bavaria will an easy time of it, while Swabia will get wrecked. I don't want that to happen. It should be hard, and fair, for all.
In general, resources will be rare and mainly given out for significant achievements. Similarly, the situation will deteriorate for players who fail or get unlucky.
Also how about letting every assigned avatar and their armies moved by their player and TC not using up the said avatar's movement point? That I think may slow down the game somewhat, but could allow for more individualistic play, i.e. for people who wants their avatar to survive rather than to help out the situations on the whole?
Interesting, but too slow and it won't let me do what I want. First, it would require that every player download and play the save every turn, which would take absolutely forever. Second, I may not want a person to be able to move anywhere they wish. I may want them to get ambushed along the way or get lost and move in the wrong direction. I can't do those things if the players are moving themselves.
Kagemusha
09-11-2007, 20:05
Maybe we should just add the power of Kaiser and Dukes significantly. Also maybe give Kaiser the power to remove Dukes from office. In order for this to be interesting, i think there should be more internal strife. By that i dont mean only arguing in Diet, but increased role of houses, so much that if a member of rival house would be elected as Chancellor,that would mean trouble for your house immediately. Damned if we just could have civil wars in this game.:wall:
In order for this to be interesting, i think there should be more internal strife.
That's a very good point. In order to implement this, I will include options such as:
(X) The nearby Franconian castle of X is not currently governed. You can use your authority as a Swabian Count to enlist some of their regiments into your own army. They will join you, greatly increasing your strength, but making the Franconian castle vulnerable.
Again, my 'option' list will not be definitive. If you want to do something (like stabbing a neighbouring House in the back) that I have not listed, simply tell me and I will implement it.
Kagemusha
09-11-2007, 20:24
That's a very good point. In order to implement this, I will include options such as:
(X) The nearby Franconian castle of X is not currently governed. You can use your authority as a Swabian Count to enlist some of their regiments into your own army. They will join you, greatly increasing your strength, but making the Franconian castle vulnerable.
Again, my 'option' list will not be definitive. If you want to do something (like stabbing a neighbouring House in the back) that I have not listed, simply tell me and I will implement it.
How about an idea which would make this possible permanently. Lets call it Imperial reform. Currently we have Dukes and houses that are determined by the family tree. How about if we would free the characters to join any house? Also maybe there could be Imperial counts. Il try make some sense how this would work. Basically the reform could return all the current settlements back to Kaiser, except maybe the Ducal capitals and Jerusalem, which would be left to the Dukes and King of Outremer. Then based on their contributions towards the Kaiser, Dukes could get settlements from Kaiser and offer them to any characters thus gaining supporters. Kaiser could also give settlements to his trusted men straight, thus creating Imperial counts that would be ofcourse in dept to Kaiser and should follow his policies. Both Kaiser and Dukes should have the power to take the countship away. This could create a situation where the Houses and Kaisers party would be based on same politics, rather then family tree. I think this could turn the political aspect of the game pretty much. Also it would strengthen the Kaiser´s role very much. The houses would turn unbalanced in their power,based on the politics of the Duke´s, also Kaiser could basicly decide how much power he would give to Dukes, which depending on his politics, could turn certain Dukes to Kaiser´s lapdogs or even more powerful then him.
What do you guys think about that kind of idea?
EDIT: Also to continue the idea. We could start electing the Kaiser like it was done many times in HRE. This would no doubt give boost to the internal struggle also.
I think this sort of reorganisation will be inevitable in the aftermath of whatever is going to happen.
We're obviously going to lose a number of territories (perhaps even ducal capitals?) and it would be surprising to have it turn out that all houses are equal at the end. And who knows, perhaps there will be major losses of avatars, etc? Keeping exactly the same structure as currently may not make sense given that.
However, I do think that these sorts of changes should be regulated by the Diet at the time the world stabilises. I do like the idea Kagemusha.
Privateerkev
09-11-2007, 21:05
From where we're standing right now, I am against reforming the patronage system for the rest of the game. I rather we wait till the next game to figure that out.
Having said that, Tamur is right in pointing out that we might have a totally different situation after the 10 year cataclysm. At that point, it may be more practical to reform some things. But, I rather we figure that out IC afterwards and not OOC beforehand.
Kagemusha
09-11-2007, 21:11
From where we're standing right now, I am against reforming the patronage system for the rest of the game. I rather we wait till the next game to figure that out.
Having said that, Tamur is right in pointing out that we might have a totally different situation after the 10 year cataclysm. At that point, it may be more practical to reform some things. But, I rather we figure that out IC afterwards and not OOC beforehand.
Well i think that it will only turn back the same after a while. If we start now thinking about the next game at this point,we might aswell end this one. I want for this to be a thrill to the end. And it seems bit boring if the only means towards that goal are artificial bumbs on the road until the end of the game.
RoadKill
09-11-2007, 23:28
Second, every game turn will use a modified system of the battle-list postings that Chancellors have been making in the OOC thread for some time. This will include the current status of each avatar in the game, a brief description of the challenges they find themselves in, and a short multiple choice description of possible actions. These multiple choice descriptions will not be definitive by any means, they will merely provide examples of options that are open to you. For example:
Johnny von Hindenburg:
You are the Count of Pfarphenplatz. The city is rioting and half of the garrison has been killed or deserted. You have two groups of knights with you and a large Polish army is nearby. There is no way to hire mercenaries or recruit new garrison units.
(A) Garrison Pfarphenplatz with your knights and attempt to restore order and hold the city.
(B) Ride to Pfarphenplatz and rescue the garrison before they are overwhelmed, then attempt to flee to the safety of Somewhatnearbyville. This will slow you down and you may be caught in the field by the Polish army.
(C) Abandon Pfarphenplatz and ride immediately for Somewhatnearbyville.
People may tell me they want to follow one of these paths or give a path of their own. If a person gives me no information for a particular turn, I will always choose the path that I deem to be best for keeping them alive. If an avatar's situation has not changed much from before, I will likely not give any info on them or simply write a "Proceeding as before" type note. Please note that since I cannot find a way to control the enemy AI, I will sometimes artificially create battles for you. Thus, if in the above example you chose (B) but the AI did not attack you and I want it to, I will move the Polish army near you and have you attack it. Even though the battle will be setup as you attacking, it will be roleplayed as a defensive battle and you will still have to fight it.
Also, the results of every action will not be guaranteed. If you chose (B) you could be attacked in the field, but you could also get lucky and escape without a battle. If you chose (A) you could be successful and restore order, perhaps opening up a new possibility to recruit one new garrison regiment. On the otherhand, you could fail to restore order, and rioting could continue, resulting in the destruction of a further garrison regiment and one of your knight regiments. I will be using a combination of factors to determine the results, including your character traits (i.e. avatars with "popular" traits will have a better chance at restoring order than ones with "unpopular" traits), the arrangement of the armies and the Reich, and my own imagination. I am even toying with the idea of actually rolling a die to determine the result (i.e. "unpopular" avatar succeeds in restoring order on a 1 or 2 on a d6. "popular" avatar suceeds in restoring order on a 1 to 4 on a d6). econ21 did something similar to this with the WOTS Civil War battles and it was excellent.
Finally, the last area will be Chancellor's reports. These will be the only real interaction Lothar has with the game. I will summarize any previous events of significance not covered by the previous areas here. This will also be where Lothar's decisions about how to allocate resources will be made. I do not anticipate there being many resources available to allocate for the majority of the event, so the decisions Lothar has to make will likely be minimal and infrequent. I want to concentrate mainly on the story (the first section) and the 'choose your own adventure' style actions for the players (the second section) rather than a traditional Chancellorship.
Please marry me Tincow, I love your ideas.
Even tho I like the idea of people changing houses it may be dangerous, what if Karl Zirn leaves Austria? No more kids for it.
Northnovas
09-12-2007, 01:15
Even tho I like the idea of people changing houses it may be dangerous, what if Karl Zirn leaves Austria? No more kids for it.
Never, I can't it's somehow in my blood. Never been there but it is...:2thumbsup:
Ignoramus
09-12-2007, 01:56
Perhaps also we could make it "first come, first served" regarding rebellious provinces. Throw away the Kaiser's right to assign provinces and instead make it that whichever House take a settlement keeps it. That knock down the geographical assigning of the provinces.
RoadKill
09-12-2007, 03:15
A good way for the player to select how he wants his story to run is to, make the player be able to lower his loyal (if he wants to) slowly and slowly till his loyalty is really low, then the avatar can go gather other revolting generals and demand the downfall of king or something along the lines of that.
AussieGiant
09-12-2007, 03:52
In real time what is the likely start point for all this.
FactionHeir
09-12-2007, 04:02
Depends on how long it takes for people to pick up saves and play them and the chancellor's game speed in general.
OK's term seems to be dragging out for a very long time due to having to wait the full 48 (if not 96 at times) and other stuff.
May I suggest that minor battles be autoresolved where possible? During my term, if there were rebel stacks or small enemy stacks somewhere, I didn't bother sending a player avatar to fight it if a garrison or captain led stack could still get to it on the same turn. Saved a lot of time.
AussieGiant
09-12-2007, 05:00
I'm asking because I don't get back to Zurich until the 2nd of October.
I assume it will start before then?
FactionHeir
09-12-2007, 05:52
I doubt it'll start before then. Probably 10th Oct is a better estimate.
Privateerkev
09-12-2007, 06:40
I personally disagree with all the attempts to use this event to overhaul the game in the middle. I see this as an event and then we deal with its aftermath. We might pass a new CA or two but I assume that the Charter basically will look the same after this is all said and done. I like the game the way it is. After this game, I'm willing to talk about a new game thats a little different. I want this event because it will be fun, not as an excuse to overhaul everything right in the middle of the game. Maybe its because I'm new. I haven't gotten bored with how everything goes because I am still learning how everything goes. But, it seems like some of the more veteran players are chomping at the bit to remake the whole game or ditch this one and start new. I want to make clear that, that is not why I am supporting this event idea. If we want to overhaul the whole game, that is a whole other discussion in my opinion. There should be separate discussion about it. It does not need to be folded into this discussion. Yes, after this event, things will be different. But, they probably won't be drastically different. And if they are, I rather that we get there naturally and not pre-plan it because a few people got bored.
AussieGiant
09-12-2007, 08:33
I also don't want to overhaul everything right now.
Guy's the game will change due to the event in my opionion.
Again we are in danger of talking ourselves into a stand still.
Lets have Econ and TC go ahead and see where it takes us.
Both men have confirmed that nothing will happen to any avatar is a person has a problem with it.
I'm asking because I don't get back to Zurich until the 2nd of October.
I assume it will start before then?
Factionheir's estimate sounds about right. If we assume 2 days/turn and the event happens around the end of Siegfried's reign then we looking at around 5th-14th October.
Some of the ideas in this thread for reforming how Houses work etc are interesting, but at the moment my thinking is that we will have 20 turns where wierd stuff may happen (e.g. taxes may be raised against build queue orders), then we will be back to playing as usual (just in a more challenging environment). The advantage of keeping with the existing rules is that people know how things work. Issues like people switching Houses can always be dealt with when appropriate for in character reasons through OOC CAs. I think CAs provide a good way of incrementally changing the game rules.
Perhaps also we could make it "first come, first served" regarding rebellious provinces. Throw away the Kaiser's right to assign provinces and instead make it that whichever House take a settlement keeps it. That knock down the geographical assigning of the provinces.
We have an unwritten convention that when a province is lost and retaken, it automatically returns to the House that held it. I think we should end that convention and make things more up for grabs. The Kaiser can allocate them afresh - and rewarding their liberators would no doubt be one consideration. It will add spice to the game. Just destroying and exactly recreating what we have now is not so interesting.
FactionHeir
09-12-2007, 12:00
Quite.
Although with all those events, maybe the house taking the settlement gets to keep it rather than it being assigned.
Although with all those events, maybe the house taking the settlement gets to keep it rather than it being assigned.
I think central authority will break down for a while - so they could keep it during the Chaos. Afterwards, I would like the Kaiser to decide - keeping things ambiguous increases the role of politics and I don't want the event to just lead to a House vs House land grab (although some unscrupulous generals are free to push it in that direction).
FactionHeir
09-12-2007, 12:05
That would leave all of Swabia unassigned or assigned to another hose though :yes:
I'm asking because I don't get back to Zurich until the 2nd of October.
I assume it will start before then?
Definitely not. We will be working on many events to build up the story during Siegfried's term, but it will not actually begin until the end of his term (1320). So, we have the rest of OK's term and then all of Ituralde's term before the event formally begins. That doesn't mean it will be boring until then. The plot will start to roll as soon as Siegfried takes over and there will be plenty of surprises, with the situation growing more and more serious until it finally pops in 1320.
AussieGiant
09-12-2007, 12:36
Definitely not. We will be working on many events to build up the story during Siegfried's term, but it will not actually begin until the end of his term (1320). So, we have the rest of OK's term and then all of Ituralde's term before the event formally begins. That doesn't mean it will be boring until then. The plot will start to roll as soon as Siegfried takes over and there will be plenty of surprises, with the situation growing more and more serious until it finally pops in 1320.
Ok that's enough TC!! :)
I'm leaving again in the middle of November so I hope we can squeeze everything in there.
Kagemusha
09-12-2007, 14:48
Well it seems my idea is overruled by the majority. Maybe some other game.:candle: Although it seems to me some of you are not understanding what i proposed, but that could be just because of my limited grasp on English language. To me it is not very exiting to loose some cities,characters and buildings, since because after couple Chancellors we are back to square one. The AI simply is no match for us, without real internal struggle.:shame:
Privateerkev
09-12-2007, 19:59
That would leave all of Swabia unassigned or assigned to another house though :yes:
It seems the Swabians will just have to learn the art of "Kaiser butt-kissing", like a lot of us have. And, if you've been paying attention to how things are going in-game, throw in some "Empress butt-kissing" too.
:yes:
You can plot against the Kaiser all you want, but you better be really good and really sneaky about it. :laugh4:
TevashSzat
09-13-2007, 03:01
It seems the Swabians will just have to learn the art of "Kaiser butt-kissing", like a lot of us have. And, if you've been paying attention to how things are going in-game, throw in some "Empress butt-kissing" too.
:yes:
You can plot against the Kaiser all you want, but you better be really good and really sneaky about it. :laugh4:
Begins to hope that you can hire other factions to assasinate your faction leader....
FactionHeir
09-13-2007, 03:59
The Danes actually have tried but failed. Guess we have to pay them better :laugh4:
No, they failed against Fritz as well. I think what we need is to give the Danes enough money to establish a company which gives motivational speeches at assassin training institutions...
"Assassins from other countries are chased by their own snakes. Or stand exactly where their victims can break their noses with a suddenly opened door. Or hide in squeaky-lidded barrels with primitive blow-guns. But not you! You are good. You are great. You are totally in control. You are Danish assassins!"
As promised, tomorrow (Friday) I will be putting up a poll to see if the planned event is authorised. I am thinking about the following phrasing:
In the next 20 turns after the coming Diet, econ21 and TinCow are authorised to engineer a cataclysmic event and ensuing chaos. They will take control of the savegame (as Chancellors do) but may do things for out of character reasons to simulate the event/chaos that no Chancellor would do. For example, disbanding armies, raising taxes, limiting recruitment etc. This will involve suspending some parts of the Charter during this period (e.g. Emergency Diets will not be able to immediately undo what is being engineered).
Shout out now if you think the poll should be re-phrased. But it's not meant to be a very precise proposal, more a vote of confidence in TC and I acting as gamesmasters to create and oversee the event.
Privateerkev
09-13-2007, 22:38
Maybe something that makes clear that it will only be 10 turns of catyclysm after 10 turns of build up. So, only 10 turns where the rules are suspended and we interact with the special OOC only Chancellor. Also, has it been decided whether TC will be just an OOC Chancellor or will he have to play an IC one as well? He mentioned, and I support, an idea where there is only an OOC Chancellor for 10 turns.
We still have to work out the details, such as the timing of the event. I'd like the 20 turn flexibility, if only to allow us to ratchet up the tension and keep you all guessing about exactly when the @#$%^&!!! is going to hit the fan. At the moment, the thinking is that Lothar won't be Chancellor, so when he controls the save, TC will be acting as a disembodied Games Master fulfilling much of the role of the Chancellor rather than as Lothar. But I don't want to reveal the exact nature of TC's stint.
Privateerkev
09-14-2007, 00:21
I guess it doesn't matter how long or short the cataclysm is. I just want to know for sure when the interaction between us and the chancellor will change. It can happen during the Kaiser's term. Its just that, when it begins, I want to know it begins. Otherwise, I'll be pm'ing Ituralde IC about tax levels when its really part of the cataclysm.
So, I'm all for giving you guys 20 turns flexibility. But, I'd feel more comfortable knowing when we are suspending the Charter and when we are to interact with an OOC Chancellor. I'm not asking for that answer now. I just want it to be clear and obvious when it happens since we are so drastically changing the rules and chancellor/elector relationship for the duration of the event.
I guess the jist of what I'm saying is; If you need us to act different, we need to know when to act different.
:D
It will be like this:
For the first 10 turns (Siegfried's Chancellorship), the game will generally proceed as normal. This will be the time when we start building up the plot to explain the cataclysm. For the most part, normal Edicts and laws will be obeyed. The only difference will be that (1) we may have to do a few 'illegal' things a couple times to advance the plot and (2) there will be no possibility of impeachment. You will still be issuing build orders for your provinces, the Household Armies will still do whatever the Dukes want, and the Reich will generally proceed about normal business (though things will become increasingly tense). Keep on scheming and ploting like normal, you guys seem good at that. A few players may even have rolls to play in helping the plots develop, so normal interactions with other players will work smoothly.
At the end of the first 10 turns (1320), when we would normally have a Diet Session, the cataclysm will begin and continue for the next 10 turns. I will give specific OOC instructions to you at that point, but generally everything changes. There will be no election, no legislation, and the only thing you can count on is that the world isn't going to be a pleasant place. This will be the period when I am 'DMing' the game. You can give build queues for your provinces and orders for your armies if you want to, but it's unlikely that I will allow much construction at all and any army orders will quickly become totally obsolete. At the same time, you will have far more control over exactly what your avatars are doing, should you wish to. As I said before, I will give you a few general choices that I think represent logical decisions before you. However, you are also totally free to tell me to do anything you want with your avatar. Just remember that I will manipulate the game world around you, no matter what you do, so no result is guaranteed. For example, you can tell me that you're going to march south until you're out of movement, but I may toss an army in your way if I think I have reason to do so.
When the 10 cataclysm turns are over (1340), all laws and game rules will go back into effect. There will be a normal Diet Session and an election for Chancellor. Everything will then proceed as it always has, except that the Reich will be in a much more difficult and challenging position.
Northnovas
09-14-2007, 03:28
Too easy, very well explained TC. Looking forward to the Dark Age of the Reich.
AussieGiant
09-14-2007, 05:12
***ANNOUCEMENT***
Gentlemen,
It's a leap of faith...inherent with all leaps of faith will be your acceptance of removing the "CONTROL FREAK" part of your personality at the front door.
Please note there will be a "CONTROL FREAK" detector test at the front entrance to assist you with this process.
Anyone trying to sneak their said; "CONTROL FREAK" characteristic into this session of the game will be ask to leave or strip down naked for a full cavity search so the removal of the said; "CONTROL FREAK" part of your personality can be done without incident.
Please note, those that successfully circumvent the security procedures in place will be easily identified as they will be having a REAL BAD TIME PLAYING THE GAME.
Moments of frustration, screaming, crying, wanting their mommy, a security blanket and other such pacifying devices will be clear signs of a successful breach of the security system in place.
Those of you planning on doing this should be aware of this before hand.
A full set of Terms and Conditions will be sent to you in the near future.
Please have your legal council, mothers, sisters and other people warned in advance of the removal of you control freak personality by this game.
***END OF ANNOUCEMENT***
Privateerkev
09-14-2007, 06:24
Yes AG I totally agree its a leap of faith and I will take it. But, I am well within my rights to ask the parameters. They are asking for things from me. I asked for things from them. And they have answered quite well. No cavity search will be required, and if it is, it certainly won't be performed by you. :laugh4:
This was a useful discussion. The vote thread is now up. Further general discussion can continue in the OOC thread. Queries and proposals about specific avatars' roles in the cataclysm may be best done by PMs to TinCow or I.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.