PDA

View Full Version : KotR Cataclysm Mechanics Draft



TinCow
10-06-2007, 00:17
[edit] Changes to the FAQ since the initial posting are in red for ease of identification. The entire 'final' FAQ will be reposted at the start of the relevant thread when the Cataclysm begins.

Since 1320 is rapidly approaching, I have been ironing out the system I am going to use to run this thing. I have written up the following Cataclysm FAQ as a draft. These are the general blueprints that I am planning on following, but they are not 'rules' in any hard sense and I will break them if I think I need to in order to do what I want.

Comments are welcome and I am open to changes.

----------------------------------


Cataclysm FAQ

Overview:

At the beginning of every game turn, I will make a Status Post with all information needed for the players that turn. At the start of the post will be a general overview of significant events, such as AI army movements, city conquests, etc. This will be followed by a situation report for each player. The situation report will include any pertinent results from the previous turn, a basic description of the player’s current situation, provinces the player controls, the player’s personal wealth, the Direct Recruitment units available to the player, 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:

Controlled Provinces: Pfarphenplatz (rioting), Somewhatnearbyville
Personal Wealth: 3
Units Available: Town Militia, Spear Militia, Crossbow Militia, Free Company Longbowmen, Free Company Men-at-Arms

The city is rioting and half of the garrison has been killed or deserted. You have two units of knights with you and a large Polish army is nearby. The Poles will likely attack Pfarphenplatz next turn.

(A) Garrison Pfarphenplatz with your knights, recruit 3 Town Militia, 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. You cannot recruit more than 1 Militia unit if you do this, but the garrison will join your army for free.
*(C) Abandon Pfarphenplatz and ride immediately for Somewhatnearbyville. You cannot recruit any Militia units if you do this.

After I have made this post at the beginning of each game turn, players may send me their action choices. This can be something as simple as "B" (indicating you want to do multiple choice option B corresponding to your character) or a 4 paragraph explanation of what you want to do and why. ALL PLAYERS MUST SEND ME THEIR CHOICES BY PRIVATE MESSAGE. This is to ensure secrecy, since some choices can harm other players. I do not want other players to see what you are going to do before you do it, because it might effect their own decisions. The * will indicate the option that I think is the safest for the avatar. If a player does not respond with their choice of action within the time allotted for the turn, I will always use the * choice. PLEASE NOTE THAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE CHOICES I LIST. IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE, YOU SIMPLY NEED TO SAY SO. I will figure out a way to implement nearly anything you can think of, so long as it makes sense and would be realistically possible for your avatar.

Specific Game Mechanics:

Income:
Money will be very tight during the Cataclysm and each player will have to accumulate money for their own personal use. Their current wealth will be represented by a simple number, which has no relation to in-game prices. There will be two kinds of income:

1) Fixed Income: Each player will receive an income of 1 for each city that is under their control, not rioting, and has an uninterrupted path to the player’s location. Castles do not generate Fixed Income. If an enemy army is blocking the route, you will not get the income. If you are besieged, all routes are considered blocked and you will get no income except for the settlement you are in (unless that is rioting too). Each player will be told which provinces are under their control each turn.

Provinces that belong to a Count who remains loyal to their Duke will provide 1 income to BOTH the Count and the Duke. Counts that rebel from their Dukes will receive an income of 2 from the province they declare as their 'Capital' for the rest of the Cataclysm, provided that all other requirements for the income are met. Rebel Capitals that are Castle settlements will receive an income of 1; this is the only way that a Castle settlement can produce Fixed Income during the cataclysm. Rebel Capitals cannot be moved during the cataclysm, even if your capital is held by the AI or has fallen under the control of another player; if you care about the extra income, you had better protect it.

2) Event Generated Income: Extra income can be created in nearly any way imaginable, but the methods will have consequences. The amount gained from an Event will vary, but will generally range from 1 to 10. For instance, you can disperse your army to tax the surrounding lands for 2, but if you are unlucky, a regiment could be attacked by bandits and destroyed while away from the main army. Doing this would also prevent you from moving out of the province, so it would be best to do it when you know you won’t be attacked or will be able to win if you are attacked. The safest and most profitable method of gaining Event Income is to plunder any destructible buildings in a settlement. Doing this will destroy the building for good, but it will produce an income equal to the number of turns required to build the structure from scratch and there is no limit to the number of buildings you can knock down per turn. Please note that destroying buildings in a province will probably make the people of that province hate you. This will make it difficult to recruit new soldiers and will limit your options in some other regards. Of course, you could always plunder the buildings from a neighboring province whose Lord is not around to protect it…

Construction/Repair:
Players can only build or repair buildings in the province they are physically located in at the beginning of a turn. Construction cost will be equal to the number of turns required to build the structure from scratch. Repairs will cost 1 per building being repaired, except for walls and towers, which will cost 2.

Recruitment:
Armies are the lifeblood of the Cataclysm. The larger your army, the more territory you will be able to successfully control and the better off you’ll be in general. I don’t think I need to explain why. THERE WILL BE NO RETRAINING DURING THE CATACLYSM. There will be multiple ways for players to recruit new units.

1) Direct Recruitment: Each player can recruit any unit type that is available in the province they are physically located in, to include settlement units and mercenaries. Please note that events and player choices may ‘disable’ recruitment of some unit types temporarily or even permanently. Each player will be told which units are recruitable in their current province each turn. Unit costs will vary according to my whims, but will generally be as follows:

Poor Quality Infantry or Militia: 1
Medium Quality Infantry or Militia/Low Quality Missile: 2
High Quality Infantry/High Quality Missile/Low Quality Cavalry: 3
Medium Quality Cavalry/Low Quality Artillery: 4
High Quality Cavalry/High Quality Artillery: 5

2) Event Generated Recruitment: Extra recruits can be created in nearly any way imaginable, but the methods will have consequences. One option could be to use press-gangs to levy civilians into your army. This will obviously make the people unhappy (which has its own consequences), reduce the population, and won’t provide you with high quality units, but it will let you raise a small force quickly and for free. As another example, if you have high piety and chivalry and are in a city with a Teutonic Knights guild house, you may be able to convince them to join you for free. A third option would be to bribe away the soldiers from another player’s army or settlement. Since there will be no retraining during the cataclysm, bribing will be the only way to gain new veteran units. The cost of bribing will vary based on the traits of the avatar who owns them. An avatar that is well-loved (via traits) by his troops will greatly increase the bribe price of his men (i.e. High Quality Infantry cost 5 instead of 3). In contrast, units will require less money to desert from an avatar that they do not like (High Quality Infantry cost 2 instead of 3).

Movement:
There will be no captain-led army movement during the Cataclysm. If you want to move forces around, you'll need to do it yourself or find an ally who will do it for you. Avatar led armies will generally be constrained by normal in-game movement limits, but not always. Exceptions to movement:

1) Avatar Only Armies: Avatars that move alone without any other units can move anywhere on the map that is not blocked by enemy (AI or HRE) forces. If the route is clear, you can get there, including by boat. The only possible exception to this could be the sea route from the Reich to Outremer. If someone wishes to cross that distance, they should discuss it with me first and I will figure out how to implement it.

2) Cavalry Armies: Avatars that move with only cavalry can cover long distances on land, so long as the route is not blocked by enemy (AI or HRE) forces and does not cross out of HRE-held territory. If there is a continuous safe road from Ragusa to Caen, a cavalry force can ride there in 1 turn.

3) Individual requests: I will consider making other exceptions for movement restrictions if people request them. You'll have to give me a good reason why, but I will seriously consider it if it makes sense. For instance, players could attempt to cross an otherwise impassable mountain range as a short-cut, but will risk losing men to avalanches and rock slides. If you want to move in a non-standard fashion, you must specifically request it.

Controlling Provinces:
At the start of the Cataclysm, Dukes/King will control all of their corresponding Duchy's/Outremer's provinces which still belong to the HRE, unless otherwise noted. Counts will control the provinces officially allocated to them. After the Cataclysm begins, control of provinces can be gained and lost through the choices made by the players. Obviously, losing it to an enemy faction will result in your loss of control. However, other players can seize control of your territories as well by marching an army into it and formally declaring that they are seizing it. Depending on the circumstances, the settlement might resist the attack and fight back, or it might simply surrender without a fight.

Fighting Other Players:
Since players are free to sack and seize each others lands, bribe each others armies, and generally do things that will make other people mad, it is possible that some players may seek to fight each other. This will be allowed, even if one party wants to avoid the battle (though it may be difficult to corner a player who is trying to avoid you). If you don’t want someone to fight you, you probably shouldn’t do things to anger them. If two players end up engaging in battle, the situation will be resolved as follows:

1) If both players agree, the battle will be fought in multiplayer. I will create a specific list of the units each player will have available to them in the multiplayer battle and state the type of map on which the battle must be fought (i.e. open field, Player A defending a Castle, etc.) and the battle must be fought under those conditions. The results must then be sent to me and I will disband units to reflect the casualties.

2) If either player cannot or will not fight a multiplayer battle for any reason, I will decide the end result of the battle on my own in any way I see fit. I will disband units to reflect the casualties.

In both cases, the loser will become the prisoner of the victor. The loser’s surviving units will join the victor’s army and the victor will gain control of all of the loser’s provinces. NO AVATAR WILL DIE IN PVP BATTLE, NO MATTER HOW IT IS FOUGHT OR WHAT THE RESULTS ARE. However, victors can execute their prisoners if they so choose. Players who become prisoners will continue to have choices to make every turn, just like everyone else, but their options will reflect their new circumstances. These would likely be things such as attempting to break out of prison or proclaiming loyalty to the victor and offering to serve him.

Ignoramus
10-06-2007, 00:22
Sounds fantastic TinCow! I'm certainly glad that I stuck it out this long.

When do we send our PM's to you?

TinCow
10-06-2007, 00:28
After the Cataclysm starts, which is still a week or so away. I'm just trying to iron out the way it's going to work.

GeneralHankerchief
10-06-2007, 00:36
-edit- Nevermind, I really need to read more carefully.

The rest of it looks great. :yes:

*I need to make sure to conserve the army during Papal Smackdown II...

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 00:36
So how do you define city under your control? Being a Count of it? Having your avatar inside? Just a free road to you?

What about historical army limitations during the cataclysm?

Ignoramus
10-06-2007, 00:39
I think TinCow works out which settlements declare for the various factions when the cataclysm hits.

TinCow
10-06-2007, 00:55
There will be no army limits at all during the cataclysm. Use whatever you can get your hands on. My concern is armies being too weak, not too strong. If you get too strong, I can always create some act of God to balance things out. (Though I will admit, FH's ridiculous skill with cavalry was a factor in their 'price.')

I started writing rules about who will control what, but it got confusing so I deleted it. Let me try again:

At the start of the Cataclysm, Dukes/King will control all of their corresponding Duchy's/Outremer's provinces which still belong to the HRE, unless otherwise noted. Counts will control the provinces officially allocated to them. Provinces that belong to a Count who remains loyal to their Duke will provide 1 income to BOTH the Count and the Duke. (Should there be a bonus income for Counts that rebel?)

After the Cataclysm begins, control of provinces can be gained and lost through the choices made by the players. Obviously, losing it to an enemy faction will result in your loss of control. However, other players can sieze control of your territories as well by marching an army into it and formally declaring that they are siezing it. Depending on the circumstances, the settlement might resist the attack and fight back, or it might simply surrender without a fight.

Cecil XIX
10-06-2007, 03:22
This is extremely impressive work Tincow, I'm quite looking forward to the end of the world. :beam:

Alas, would that Sigismund were here...

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 04:03
Something tells me that half of the fun will be enacting political vengeance after the cataclysm on anyone who has !@#$'d with you during the cataclysm. :yes:

remember, we'll all have to figure out how to work with each other after this is all over. :beam:

GeneralHankerchief
10-06-2007, 04:05
Work with? Work with???

Pah, you and your high-minded chivalrous mannerisms...

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 04:07
yes, there will still be a diet after this is all over. there will be edicts when this is all over. there will be a chancellor when this is all over. and there will be a charter to constrain us again when this is all over.

I say, have fun, but don't be surprised if your actions bite you in the arse later. :yes:

Ignoramus
10-06-2007, 04:12
I think the Romanists are slightly outnumbered.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 04:14
romanists?

TinCow
10-06-2007, 04:15
Part of the reason I wrote all this up was to create a method for people to rebel effectively. There seems to be a lot of desire to do that lately, so I wanted to show people how they could do it, and warn them of the possible consequences that could result. I have no idea how much anyone will make use of the rebellion system, but at least it's an option.

Remember though, even if you're a rebel you'll still have to deal with the enemy AI. They're going to be launching major attacks and they won't care what the internal politics of the Reich are. Also, keep in mind that cooperation will pay off as well. Players will be able to give their resources to others if they want to. This includes wealth and military units. A few people pooling resources will likely be able to assemble a stronger force than the same number of people working independently. Even if you're rebelling, it might be good to find some friends...

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 04:19
Yeah, and I think it's cool that people have the option. It just would be good for people to keep in mind that we're playing the same game, just with different rules for 10 turns. Since we can't kill each other's avatars, we're going to have to live with the consequences of our actions.

I for one will keep track of every person who !@#$'s Jan over or helps him. I think players should have the ability to rebel and !@#$ people over, and I think those of us who wish to, should make them pay political consequences afterwards. :D

While the Reich will look different, the power relationships enshrined in the Charter will be relatively the same when this is all over. If you rebel against your Duke in the Cataclysm, you shouldn't whine if you lose your county at the next Diet. (unless your freehold, but there are other ways your duke can mess with you) ^_^

Ignoramus
10-06-2007, 04:20
Would Lothar care in swearing allegience to Wolfgang?:laugh4:

And why is Matthias Steffen near Timbuktu?

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 04:24
Econ put Matthias there to get him out of the way. He is in "prison" but since you can't put an avatar in another faction's settlement, econ would have to leave him outside. But that would put Matthias in danger since the Reich is at war with the Byzantines. So, he is in prison.

But if he is in Morocco, I ask that he bring Jan back some gold as a souvenir. ^_^

OverKnight
10-06-2007, 04:30
I'm gathering Matthias is in Timbuktu to see who's using fow_off. :laugh4:

It's all part of my "Heart of Darkness" meets "A Conneticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" storyline that will soon be unveiled.

I don't want to spoil anything, but there will be Elephants with Frickin' Lasers on their tusks. It's going to be sweet.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 04:31
Be sure to bring the Kaiser some "Arnolds".

The King would like some too if you can spare some. :yes:

:elephant:

RoadKill
10-06-2007, 05:10
So just to make sure I understand this is basically what I do. I pm tincow about what I want to do, without asking any permission at all, so I can go rampaging throughout the Reich and do what ever I want? Also, After I pm you the things I want to do, and then tincow sends me the options I have? :idea2:

Ignoramus
10-06-2007, 05:12
I for one will keep track of every person who !@#$'s Jan over or helps him. I think players should have the ability to rebel and !@#$ people over, and I think those of us who wish to, should make them pay political consequences afterwards. :D

Remember you're "the Merciful". :yes:

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 05:19
So just to make sure I understand this is basically what I do. I pm tincow about what I want to do, without asking any permission at all, so I can go rampaging throughout the Reich and do what ever I want? Also, After I pm you the things I want to do, and then tincow sends me the options I have? :idea2:

You can ask to do whatever you want. Doesn't mean you'll be successful at it though. ^^


Remember you're "the Merciful"

lol

Merciful does not equal doormat. :no:

taking men in order to survive a perilous journey would be forgiven

taking men to carve out an independent kingdom would not be as forgiven

taking men in order to exterminate and execute a path through the Reich would probably bring about political retribution as soon as it could be arranged.

:yes:

AussieGiant
10-06-2007, 09:56
Ahhh, Roadkill, I see you have aspirations my fine young friend...

:beam:

...your Duke will be watching.

econ21
10-06-2007, 09:56
Some thoughts on three issues related to the cataclysm:

(1) On the issue of rebellions, one point to bear in mind is that in 1340 we will be back to business as usual so that the Diet, through the Chancellor, will control most of the resources. I don't think it would be right to say that rebel settlements and armies suddenly fall under the Chancellor's control. But they presumably will be severely outgunned. Hence any rebellions that want to last should try to build up the support for a political settlement in 1340.

Additionally, from 1340 onwards, the Kaiser will control the allocation of settlements to Houses. If a House loses control of a settlement and the HRE takes it (whether by reconquest from the AI or by one player taking it from another player), then on paper it will become Imperial (it not automatically revert to its original House). This gives the Kaiser some power to frustrate [EDIT: or reward!] Houses or players who try to grab others' settlements. Although again, the Kaiser allocating a settlement on paper does not de facto suddenly make a rebellious province loyal or redistribute it to another House. If there is a conflict between the Kaiser's de jure allocation and the de facto facts on the ground, we will find a realistic/in character way of resolving that.

(2) On Swabia:

TinCow is taking over in 1320, but it looks like the Swabian rebellion has been announced at the end of 1312. Hence we have to confront the issue of how control of Swabian settlements is decided now.

The initial control as of end 1312 is:

Controlled by Hummel (controls SHA1):
Metz as [EDIT: de facto] Count

Controlled by Hans (controls Prinz's army):
Staufen as Capital
Bern as settlement with no Count
EDIT: Bruges as settlement with no Count
EDIT: Rheims as settlement with no Count

Controlled by von Salza (controls SHA2):
Paris - de facto
Dijon as Count

Controlled by Elberhard:
Rheims as Count
Bruges as Imperial
Caen as Imperial

As TinCow indicated, a character can seize control of a settlement by moving his avatar into it. The garrison may fight, disband or join the occupier based on some modified random determination. Paris is occupied by SHA2 and cannot be occupied by another avatar until Warluster comes back to the PBM.

I won't be implementing TinCow's economic model - although that will come into effect in 1320. I will recruit soldiers for players from the settlements they control, although there will be some desertion and resource constraints.

(3) Ducal succession. This is a fairly pressing issue given that Hans is getting on a bit. Factionheir has indicated that he wishes to take Ruppel as his next avatar and make him his successor. I am happy for him to take Ruppel (that's why I adopted the chap) but am leery about allowing players to tie up the position of Duke throughout generations. It does not seem quite fair and also risks making things rather boring.

What I propose is that if a Duke nominates as their successor an avatar that is of age when the current Duke dies and is controlled by another player, then that avatar will be a Duke. Any other nomination, and the succession becomes disputed and is determined by CA11.1. This means that Factionheir could nominate Ruppel as his successor and could become the next Duke, but that it would require the agreement of the Council.

This also applies to the Franconian succession which I don't quite understand, but seems to involve making Peter Steward. If, when the current Duke of Franconia dies, there is no player controlled avatar who is of age and is the nominated successor, then the Council will decide the succession. They may approve a Stewardship arrangement or they may choose a new Duke.

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 10:02
By the looks of it, after the cataclysm, Swabia will have exactly 0 counts and 1 Duke if Warluster also decides to rebel.
That should be interesting, huh? :laugh4:

Btw, if we take someone prisoner, can we force them to work on a galley which happens to have an accident? :grin:

[edit]
Ignoramus is no longer count of metz. He lost it by declaring his intentions.

econ21
10-06-2007, 10:11
Ok, Hummel is "de facto" Count of Metz - the settlement will be loyal to him initially.

Until 1320, I won't let players kill other players, but if I read his first post correctly, it looks like TinCow will after that.

AussieGiant
10-06-2007, 10:15
I'd like to add publicly that I'm very grateful to TC and Econ for investing what is clearly a large amount of their personal time into this game.

Guy's, a BIG THANKS and well done.

Warmaster Horus
10-06-2007, 10:44
I echo AG's thanks. As I opened this thread and saw Tincow's post, I realised just how big (and great!) this was going to be, as well as how much investment TC and econ were going to put in. Thanks a lot, guys!

I've got a question: I didn't read the earlier cataclysm thread entirely, so the main plot would still be a surprise for me. However, it seems this cataclysm is only going to last 10 turns (from 1320 to 1340). So, won't that make it slightly... problematic? Suppose Jan wants to go and conquer Bavaria (for example, I'm not saying he should!). Well, because of the game's mechanisms, getting from Outremer to Rome will take the majority of those 10 turns, no?
What I'm asking is, if the situation requires it, could the cataclysm last longer? I realise it would ask more time investment from TC and econ, but it would be ridiculous to cut a good rebellion short, no?

econ21
10-06-2007, 13:52
That's a good question, Warmaster Horus. I think we need a kind of scripted end to the cataclysm - I have an idea that I will PM to TinCow. I doubt TinCow will want to run things beyond 10 turns - what he proposes is far more time intensive than what I have been doing and I am devoting an awful lot of time to this. So what I suggest is that we have a scripted return to normalcy in 1340. If rebellions etc continue beyond that point, then I will oversee them as gamesmaster but they will have to contend with a fully functional Chancellor, Diet and Charter. So it will be in the rebels interests to get things sorted out by then.

Another point on the post-cataclysm stage. I am pretty relaxed about tearing up large parts of the Charter. If people want a Fifth House, want to move their avatar to a different House, want to make their Counties in to "Reichsgrafs" that are independent of any House etc etc that is all fine by me OOC. The only constraint will be that such changes will need a Charter Amendment - ie 2/3 support. Elberhard may even support such changes, if they buy peace, and weigh in with his mighty two influence. :laugh4:

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 13:57
The joys of being shamelessly lewd, huh? :laugh4:

GeneralHankerchief
10-06-2007, 14:16
(3) Ducal succession. This is a fairly pressing issue given that Hans is getting on a bit. Factionheir has indicated that he wishes to take Ruppel as his next avatar and make him his successor. I am happy for him to take Ruppel (that's why I adopted the chap) but am leery about allowing players to tie up the position of Duke throughout generations. It does not seem quite fair and also risks making things rather boring.

:no: That's lame, dude.

TinCow
10-06-2007, 14:23
So just to make sure I understand this is basically what I do. I pm tincow about what I want to do, without asking any permission at all, so I can go rampaging throughout the Reich and do what ever I want? Also, After I pm you the things I want to do, and then tincow sends me the options I have? :idea2:

No, you've got that backwards. It won't be practical to send me what you want to do until I make the mega-post for the turn. That post will tell you what the results are from the previous turn, tell you the resources (wealth, etc.) at your disposal, and give you a few basic options that I think are consistent with your situation. After that, you send me a PM with what you want to do. The options I list are simply suggestions to help people think of the various things they can do. They are also useful for people who do not have a whole lot of time on their hands to get involved in this. You will be able to easily get through the entire crisis by doing nothing more than PMing me "C" "B" "X" etc., if that is what you want.


Btw, if we take someone prisoner, can we force them to work on a galley which happens to have an accident? :grin:.

Yes, I would consider that an 'execution'. I don't really expect any player to kill another player, but given the routes some people are taking, it is possible that people could commit crimes that are so horrid that keeping them alive wouldn't make sense IC. So, I will allow this, but do not really expect it to occur.

Also, I will consider making exceptions for movement restrictions if people request them. You'll have to give me a good reason why, but I will seriously consider it if it makes sense. I am also considering making an exception for avatar-only and cavalry-only armies. I am thinking that if the path is clear of enemies (AI or HRE) and you take only your avatar, you can move anywhere you want, including overseas. If you take only cavalry, I will probably allow for faster movement than even the game would otherwise permit. I see no reason a cavalry force from Ragusa could not ride to Caen in 1 year.


I've got a question: I didn't read the earlier cataclysm thread entirely, so the main plot would still be a surprise for me. However, it seems this cataclysm is only going to last 10 turns (from 1320 to 1340). So, won't that make it slightly... problematic? Suppose Jan wants to go and conquer Bavaria (for example, I'm not saying he should!). Well, because of the game's mechanisms, getting from Outremer to Rome will take the majority of those 10 turns, no?
What I'm asking is, if the situation requires it, could the cataclysm last longer? I realise it would ask more time investment from TC and econ, but it would be ridiculous to cut a good rebellion short, no?

I would be willing to consider extending the cataclysm for longer under two conditions. (1) It is again authorized by a non-weighted 2/3 vote in 1340. It shouldn't continue going if a large number of people don't want it to. (2) I (or someone else) wants to keep running it. This is probably going to be very time-consuming for me to organize, and I suspect I may simply be exhausted when it is over.

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 14:31
As soon as Peter is Prinz, he plans to use his iron fist to restore some manner of order.

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 15:05
As soon as Peter is Prinz, he plans to use his iron fist to restore some manner of order.

In his closet? :grin2:

TC: Quite interesting proposal regarding cavalry armies. So we get lightning strike forces everywhere unless we build a few forts along the way?

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 15:09
In his closet? :grin2:



hes in jail, he has all the time in the world to do that now :laugh4:

but theres gonna be some arse-kicking once hes loose

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 15:10
You ain't Peter the Merciless for nothing, eh?

Will be interesting to see how Peter will act and change his allegiances if he becomes Prince.

TinCow
10-06-2007, 15:15
I have made several changes to the FAQ and marked them in red for ease of viewing. All the changes are things that have been discussed in this thread (which is why I posted in the first place) except for one. I want rebellions to have a legitimate chance of surviving for more than a turn or two, since they seem to be a potential source of a lot of fun for both the rebels and the loyalists. So, I have given them an extra source of Income. It is listed under the Fixed Income section, but I will paste it here for ease of reference:

Provinces that belong to a Count who remains loyal to their Duke will provide 1 income to BOTH the Count and the Duke. Counts that rebel from their Dukes will receive an income of 2 from the province they declare as their 'Capital' for the rest of the Cataclysm, provided that all other requirements for the income are met. Rebel Capitals that are Castle settlements will receive an income of 1; this is the only way that a Castle settlement can produce Fixed Income during the cataclysm. Rebel Capitals cannot be moved during the cataclysm, even if you capital is held by the AI or has fallen under the control of another player; if you care about the extra income, you had better protect it.

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 15:16
i got some ideas...

and btw, im actually Peter the Scarred now. but im still 8 dread, merciless conqueror, and etc. im brutally scarred and bastion of health. that is a lot of hit points there.

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 15:17
What happens if a Rebel Capital is lost? Do they get to declare a new one then?

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 15:18
i got some ideas...

and btw, im actually Peter the Scarred now. but im still 8 dread, merciless conqueror, and etc. im brutally scarred and bastion of health. that is a lot of hit points there.

Yeah, autocalc makes the BattleScarred trait crop up very easily. Like +1 for each battle autocalced. And even when losing a battle it never gives you the Coward trait. Wonder how the autocalc reads the traits file really.

TinCow
10-06-2007, 15:19
What happens if a Rebel Capital is lost? Do they get to declare a new one then?

Nope, it's still their capital. They have to re-conquer it if they want the extra income back. I will add that to the FAQ.

edit: Rebel Capitals cannot be moved during the cataclysm, even if your capital is held by the AI or has fallen under the control of another player; if you care about the extra income, you had better protect it.

Ferret
10-06-2007, 15:31
In that case is it possible to have rebel settlements before declaring a capital? For example if at first you only had a castle but you wanted a city as the capital could you conquer that and make it your capital?

TinCow
10-06-2007, 15:42
Sure, I don't see why not.

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 15:43
is it possible that lutherans, so inspiring the peasantry, can recruit a quick army of zealous peasants (kinda like crusaders get religious zealots and pilgrims) for catapult ammo?

peters gotta use his newfound star power somehow

TinCow
10-06-2007, 15:45
I would say that prominent Lutheran supporters such as Dietrich, Fritz, Peter, and Tancred could certainly attempt to exploit that position. Of course, it's likely to make non-Lutherans in the province angry...

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 15:47
So how do you determine the percentage of Lutherans in a region? As measured in heresy percent? Couldn't this Lutheran recruit peasant ability be abused to cause unrest in a high non Lutheran region?

What do loyalists get btw for being totally outnumbered? ~:)

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 15:48
they get factionheir, the best general in this game. :bow:

OverKnight
10-06-2007, 15:49
What do loyalists get btw for being totally outnumbered?

They get Duchies and noble deaths? :laugh4:

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 15:51
i am literally afraid of hans. i feel like somehow hes really going to kick my @#$. peter is an inferior commander, maybe i could night attack

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 15:51
Meh, overall Arnold is better because he has dread rather than chiv. (At least my belief is that Dread is better than Chiv due to command giving you a huge morale boost anyway)

Still, Hans is nothing without a decent force that can be replenished and/or fast movement. And he's pretty much alone and with Bavarians, Austrians and rebel Swabians knocking at his door from all directions.

Personally, I think that a conversion/appeal would be a nice ability to make non loyalist troops desert more frequently (and possibly over to the loyalist force rather than being disbanded)

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 15:52
i am literally afraid of hans. i feel like somehow hes really going to kick my @#$. peter is an inferior commander, maybe i could night attack

In either attack or defense, either will have 10 command, so yeah.
If command wasn't limited to 10, then you really should be afraid (especially so if command gave +ability as it did in RTW)

I wouldn't advise a night attack. Hans has max points in night battle (+3, Nocturnal), not that it matters though with command limit

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 15:59
yeah, peter reaches ten in a night attack. my strategy is to not be so violent in battles. just to try to restore order. remember, peter is something of a political dynamo, getting the vilnius edict through and all.

TinCow
10-06-2007, 16:00
So how do you determine the percentage of Lutherans in a region? As measured in heresy percent? Couldn't this Lutheran recruit peasant ability be abused to cause unrest in a high non Lutheran region?

What do loyalists get btw for being totally outnumbered? ~:)

For the first question, I don't know. I'll figure it out if someone tries it.

As for the second, I am going to do my best to make sure everyone starts off relatively equal in power and main focus of the challenges will still be the AI. This is not KOTR Civil War, after all. I see the rebellion options more as a way for people to gain extra strength to fight the AI by backstabbing other players. If a player concentrates exclusively on fighting other HRE players, he will likely lose his provinces to AI attacks.

OverKnight
10-06-2007, 16:11
As for Ducal succession, I feel we might need an OOC CA to address this. Not only Swabia, but from the looks of it Franconia, plans to have the same player as Duke over two Avatars. This is, as GH succinctly put it, "lame".

I'm all for avatars being ambitious title hungry bastards, but we shouldn't cross that line in our OOC playing style. Switching off who is Duke provides a fresh perspective and increases fun for more players. Why compete for the Duke's favor if he's just going to pass the Title on to himself as another avatar? (Which might explain the mutinous nature of Swabia and Franconia at the moment).

There should, at least, be a one player gap between reassuming the title of Duke.

AussieGiant
10-06-2007, 16:17
As for Ducal succession, I feel we might need an OOC CA to address this. Not only Swabia, but from the looks of it Franconia, plans to have the same player as Duke over two Avatars. This is, as GH succinctly put it, "lame".

I'm all for avatars being ambitious title hungry bastards, but we shouldn't cross that line in our OOC playing style. Switching off who is Duke provides a fresh perspective and increases fun for more players. Why compete for the Duke's favor if he's just going to pass the Title on to himself as another avatar? (Which might explain the mutinous nature of Swabia and Franconia at the moment).

There should, at least, be a one player gap between reassuming the title of Duke.

I agree. It's absolute nonsense to keep the position of Duke OOC: You have to hand it on.

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 16:50
why, was stig planning on taking dieter von kassel or whoever is the heir of the day? lol

econ21
10-06-2007, 17:28
Also, I will consider making exceptions for movement restrictions if people request them. You'll have to give me a good reason why, but I will seriously consider it if it makes sense. I am also considering making an exception for avatar-only and cavalry-only armies. I am thinking that if the path is clear of enemies (AI or HRE) and you take only your avatar, you can move anywhere you want, including overseas. If you take only cavalry, I will probably allow for faster movement than even the game would otherwise permit. I see no reason a cavalry force from Ragusa could not ride to Caen in 1 year.

I don't have a problem with relaxing movement restrictions when players fight the AI. We will be rigging things a little for the sluggish AI anyway, so helping out players in extremis or for the sake of a good story is fine.

But relaxing movement restrictions will be problematic for any player vs player contests, as it makes it hard for players to know the rules of the game. For example, in the current Hummel vs Hans contest for Swabia, they both can see where their avatars can move and work out how best to claim provinces, bring the enemy to battle etc. I can imagine Ignoramus might be a bit put out if I teleport Hans from Ragusa to Caen at the start of 1314. (I know you are saying he could not bring his army, but still...)


Provinces that belong to a Count who remains loyal to their Duke will provide 1 income to BOTH the Count and the Duke. Counts that rebel from their Dukes will receive an income of 2 from the province they declare as their 'Capital' for the rest of the Cataclysm, provided that all other requirements for the income are met.

I was wondering about just letting the rebels get TWO income per province, like the (combined) loyalists - not just from their capitals. An economy does not double just because the Duke takes a slice. And making it in the short term self interest of the Count to rebel creates a nice tension to the proceedings. Do they stay loyal to get Ducal support and long term intangible benefits or do they rebel to get more stuff for their own armies now?

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 17:39
im pretty sure hans, with only his bodyguard, could raise some serious hell.

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 18:03
Not in a MP battle where command, chiv/dread and other traits do not count and bodyguard sizes are even, but against the AI for sure ~:)

As for succession, the suggestion was brought forward because none of the other Swabians seem loyal at all, so it would be unlikely that ICly, Hans would consider giving them the title over someone he knows he can trust to run the Duchy.

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 18:04
true, but ur still one of the better commanders in this game, i'd say. how many famous battles do you have? i think i should have one, cuz i got a heroic victory against the poles, but idk if the crossed-swords popped up.

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 18:06
Quite a few HVs, but only 1 battle marker. Rest were too small to get one (like BG + 1 unit against several hundred doesn't seem to count). I think you need some 12+ full regiments involved in a battle for it to pop up a marker.

Btw, what happened to Peter's title in your sig

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 18:08
i change the title periodically lol. peter is obviously not Supreme Commander of the Army of Immortals while he rots in prison and the army of immortals is disbanded. i should say "Herzog der Wahrheit". Tancred is the "Lord of Wahrheit" and "Lieutenant der Wahrheit", being the commander of the garrison of Wahrheitburg, nee constantinople nee byzantium.

TinCow
10-06-2007, 18:21
I don't have a problem with relaxing movement restrictions when players fight the AI. We will be rigging things a little for the sluggish AI anyway, so helping out players in extremis or for the sake of a good story is fine.

But relaxing movement restrictions will be problematic for any player vs player contests, as it makes it hard for players to know the rules of the game. For example, in the current Hummel vs Hans contest for Swabia, they both can see where their avatars can move and work out how best to claim provinces, bring the enemy to battle etc. I can imagine Ignoramus might be a bit put out if I teleport Hans from Ragusa to Caen at the start of 1314. (I know you are saying he could not bring his army, but still...)

Good point. I think I'll simply revert it to a "normal movement, but ask if you want to do something special" kind of thing.


I was wondering about just letting the rebels get TWO income per province, like the (combined) loyalists - not just from their capitals. An economy does not double just because the Duke takes a slice. And making it in the short term self interest of the Count to rebel creates a nice tension to the proceedings. Do they stay loyal to get Ducal support and long term intangible benefits or do they rebel to get more stuff for their own armies now?

This is a problem I've been trying to consider. I want there to be benefits to being loyal AND benefits for being a rebel. I am very much open to suggestions on how to improve the economics system. I want it to be simple enough so that it's easy to understand and implement, hence the basic integers as measures of wealth. I was originally thinking of making castles have a small income with cities a larger income... something like 1 for castles and 3 for cities, but that would make recruitment far too easy to do under my current 'pricing' system. I suppose I could increase the cost for everything (doubled?) but I want to make sure that recruitment of new units is HARD. I generally want there to be only two possible ways of assembling large, high quality armies: multiple players pooling their resources (cooperation) or solo players sacking everything in sight for lots of wealth (rebels).

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 18:28
I prefer TC's economics. It is more balanced and also encourages Dukes to appoint Counts among others.
Looking at Swabia for instance, Hümmel would have more economical output if he had the same number of settlements as Hans due to the +1 Capital bonus. Hans would maybe get +1 from Salza, but Salza might well be a rebel without having come out just yet.

Of course when you then compare that to Bavaria where there are a lot of Counts and all rather united more or less, the current method makes rebellion more difficult.

Having 2 different systems could be considered, but might be too much work.

econ21
10-06-2007, 18:37
As for succession, the suggestion was brought forward because none of the other Swabians seem loyal at all, so it would be unlikely that ICly, Hans would consider giving them the title over someone he knows he can trust to run the Duchy.

I know. My first instinct - like GH, Overknight and AussieGiant - was to rule it out on OOC grounds. But as you say, given the in character situation for Hans, it makes sense. In the whole of Swabia, he has two open rebels - Dietrich and Hummel - plus one no show - von Salza. What's he going to do? I think letting the Council decide might be a way out of the impasse.

I will think more about TC's economic system - we have a little time to fine tune it. One impression was that demolishing buildings seemed rather too lucrative. Once we get out of the cataclysm, the HRE may be flush with money and anyway, it's all the Chancellor's problem then as the Dukes/Counts no longer directly receive the economic and military benefits of buildings. I'm also concerned about destroying buildings where the AI is going to take the settlement - ie keeping them in the stone age. Right now we have some elite AI armies (such as the Egyptian one that killed Elberhard's elephants; or the French that killed Xdeathfire's chap) that actually out tech our balanced forces. If we had rushed their citadels and destroyed all buildings, we would be facing waves of garbage, which would be less fun.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 18:39
Ignoramus is no longer count of metz. He lost it by declaring his intentions.

Wolfgang is freehold. His father was Duke.

Stig
10-06-2007, 18:47
Hummel a Duke?
Not when he died, sides this things about sons of dead Dukes still being freehold is rubbish imo.

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 18:48
ulrich had his dukeship removed by force, so i think that he should be no longer freehold or an official duke.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 18:50
Econ ruled that if your avatar's father was ever duke, then he is freehold.
and he told me specifically that there would be no exception made for Ulrich. So Jens was freehold as well. poor GH... :/

That makes Wolfgang, Peter, Fritz, and Matthias the current freeholds.

Hans, Elberhard, Ansehelm, Arnold, and Lothar would be freehold as well but their current titles make that pointless.

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 18:51
but in ulrich's case, with his dukeship stricken from him, he would no longer be able to have freeholds.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 18:53
this is what I got from big E.

I was curious a few weeks ago and asked him.

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 19:13
Hümmel is not freecount because at the time the the elder Hümmel died, none of his sons were Counts.
Wolfgang got his countship bestowed by Hans at the last diet, so he is just a bonded count.

TinCow
10-06-2007, 19:15
Thinking about the rebel mechanics and the Swabian Dukedom in particular has given me an idea: In the event of a PvP battle, the victor could actually gain the loser's title, if it is of a higher rank. If all of Swabia is in revolt against Hans, surely one of them would become Duke if Hans was defeated. This would also increase the temptation for people to rebel in every House, making the cataclysm a REAL test of loyalties. We could even allow it for Kaiser, Prinz, and King of Outremer.


I'm also concerned about destroying buildings where the AI is going to take the settlement - ie keeping them in the stone age. Right now we have some elite AI armies (such as the Egyptian one that killed Elberhard's elephants; or the French that killed Xdeathfire's chap) that actually out tech our balanced forces. If we had rushed their citadels and destroyed all buildings, we would be facing waves of garbage, which would be less fun.

There's no way people are actually going to be able to go on the offense against the AI. At best, they will be able to reconquer SOME of the ones they are going to lose in the beginning. Thus, the only settlements that will be available for plundering will be our own. If players knock down everything inside them and flee, they will be creating a wasteland of useless cities that will hamper HRE development after the cataclysm is over... which was my intention. Knock stuff down now and the HRE will pay for it big time afterwards. Also, I'll be sure to find ways to balance out the massive income people could get for totally razing every building in a city. With a decent enough army, an avatar could probably get away with knocking down the local Inn without causing an uprising, but if you burned down the entire city it would be a different story. The local populace wouldn't exactly be happy about that, would they?

gibsonsg91921
10-06-2007, 19:15
but he's in metz, right? so he seized it by force anyways. he took his settlement with him in rebellion

i dig these mechanics, btw

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 19:20
Last I checked Hümmel was somewhere near Bruges and doesn't control any town but possibly Metz due to being a former Count.
Of course you then get to wonder how loyal those people are to him with his father having exterminated it when he retook it from the French and the sons having held the county on and off and generally having a bad reputation.

As for taking and retaking settlements, I think that might actually be a big problem if Acre stays Capital. Unless you sack/exterminate, there is no way a huge city such as Paris will remain within the empire even with a full stack garrison (especially due to the extra 40% PO penalty on occupying for several turns).

TC's suggestion for taking titles is an interesting one, but who besides Jan is in a position to become Emperor? (I mean it takes too long to get to Outremer)
It would also be worthwhile clarifying whether one can only take titles within ones house and Imperial titles or also from other houses, like Dassel defeating Arnold and becoming Duke of Austria. Actually, since he's killing Abate, he might become Pope :grin2:

TinCow
10-06-2007, 19:31
Perhaps only within your House and only one rank at a time? i.e. A Count would have to defeat his Duke before he could challenge for Kaiser. Since we don't technically have a Prinz yet IC, we could just skip that one. King would be considered Duke level. Of course, I'm not expecting anyone to actually try and kill the Kaiser... though I suppose it's possible. That said, Elberhard may choose to return to the Reich. After all, the majority of his provinces are there and if they are lost he will be without an income. That's interesting actually... the Kaiser might be one of the more vulnerable people due to his absence from the Reich. He'll probably have to make alliances with someone in order to survive... unless he runs away from everything.

I will move the HRE Capital around whenever necessary to keep things balanced. Acre will not be the Capital forever.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 19:34
Though King would be picked at the next Diet session so you might not be King for long. The Kaiser might not like someone usurping his pick.

Duke is for life though. :yes:

Stig
10-06-2007, 20:46
Hümmel is not freecount because at the time the the elder Hümmel died, none of his sons were Counts.
Wolfgang got his countship bestowed by Hans at the last diet, so he is just a bonded count.
Heh, that makes Fritz a Bonded Count as well, as Ansehelm made him Count (back then as Steward afaik).

StoneCold
10-06-2007, 20:48
But his father, the duke is still alive then, right?

Stig
10-06-2007, 20:48
But his father, the duke is still alive then, right?
Don't remember, I think Ansehelm was Steward, but not sure.
But Ansehelm made him Count, Gunther didn't.

econ21
10-06-2007, 21:24
The whole freedhold vs bonded Count issue is a bit of a mess. For most of the game, when everyone was playing "nice" it did not matter. Now when we are cutting each other's throats, it starts to be important. It's one of those vague things in the Charter that have crept up and bit us on the rear. We should have made it clear when announcing Counts who was freehold and who was bonded and we should have kept a record in the playlist.

I did try to clarify this issue in a PM to Privateerkev, but it looks like I may not have been fully successful. I will review it shortly.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 23:02
(3) Ducal succession. This is a fairly pressing issue given that Hans is getting on a bit. Factionheir has indicated that he wishes to take Ruppel as his next avatar and make him his successor. I am happy for him to take Ruppel (that's why I adopted the chap) but am leery about allowing players to tie up the position of Duke throughout generations. It does not seem quite fair and also risks making things rather boring.

What I propose is that if a Duke nominates as their successor an avatar that is of age when the current Duke dies and is controlled by another player, then that avatar will be a Duke. Any other nomination, and the succession becomes disputed and is determined by CA11.1. This means that Factionheir could nominate Ruppel as his successor and could become the next Duke, but that it would require the agreement of the Council.

This also applies to the Franconian succession which I don't quite understand, but seems to involve making Peter Steward. If, when the current Duke of Franconia dies, there is no player controlled avatar who is of age and is the nominated successor, then the Council will decide the succession. They may approve a Stewardship arrangement or they may choose a new Duke.

Let me try again to explain the very interesting Franconian heir situation. For the purposes of this, I will first define my terms. When I say steward with a little (s) I mean that the title is the Duke's 2'nd in command. They speak for the Duke when the player of the Duke is away but the steward does not get the extra influence. When I say Steward with a big (S) I mean like how Max Mandorf was in the beginning of the game. A Steward gets the extra influence plus all of the powers of Duke except naming an heir.

Ansehelm has Peter as steward. Ansehelm named Siegfried's daughter as heir which would go to her husband when she married. During the time between Ansehelm's death, and the daughter being married, Peter would be Steward. During the last Diet, Ansehelm changed the heir to the underage von Kassel but kept the rest the same. In the space of time between Ansehelm's death, and von Kassel coming of age, Peter will be Steward.

I totally agree with invoking CA 11.1 if the heir is not an avatar being currently controlled by a different player.


As for Ducal succession, I feel we might need an OOC CA to address this. Not only Swabia, but from the looks of it Franconia, plans to have the same player as Duke over two Avatars. This is, as GH succinctly put it, "lame".

I'm all for avatars being ambitious title hungry bastards, but we shouldn't cross that line in our OOC playing style. Switching off who is Duke provides a fresh perspective and increases fun for more players. Why compete for the Duke's favor if he's just going to pass the Title on to himself as another avatar? (Which might explain the mutinous nature of Swabia and Franconia at the moment).

There should, at least, be a one player gap between reassuming the title of Duke.

I completely agree that players should not be allowed to "lock up" the Dukeship over the course of multiple avatars.

I also want to caution us against allowing what I call a "Ducal loop". That is if Player A and Player B make a deal OOC. Player A has Avatar A which is Duke. Player A names Player B's Avatar B as heir. When Avatar A dies, Player A takes Avatar C which Player B names heir. Like if the past Duke takes the new Duke's eldest son as his new avatar. This would close the Dukeship between two players. Now, due to Houses only having 4 or so players each, this might not even be practical to prevent. But I think it is something we should keep in mind.


I know. My first instinct - like GH, Overknight and AussieGiant - was to rule it out on OOC grounds. But as you say, given the in character situation for Hans, it makes sense. In the whole of Swabia, he has two open rebels - Dietrich and Hummel - plus one no show - von Salza. What's he going to do? I think letting the Council decide might be a way out of the impasse.

Hans might want to consider dangling the "heir" title over Wolfgang and Dietrich. While both avatars are quite radical, they might moderate their politics in hope of becoming Duke. Just a thought.

So, I apologize for a lengthy post that seems to be off-topic. But, I think it is on-topic because clarification of the power-relationships pre-cataclysm, cataclysm, and post-cataclysm might influence how people RP during the cataclysm. I suspect some people might suicide their avatars just to avoid the consequences of what might happen to them when this is all over.

econ21
10-06-2007, 23:15
Going back to the freehold vs bonded Count issue again, I did try to check out the histories of when people became Counts but it was too hard to track things down.

The relevant section of the Charter is:


4.6 Counts who are not the natural sons of a Duke (e.g. adoptees and sons in law) may be lose their titles at the whim of the Duke. They are referred to as bonded Counts and are expected to act according to the wishes of their Duke. Natural sons of a Duke may not lose their settlements - they are referred to as freehold Counts.

I think I will stand by what I PMd to Privateerkev. If your father was ever a Duke, then you are a son of a Duke and so will be a freehold if you are made Count. What was envisaged in the Charter was that your dad makes you a Count and so its your inheritance. It gets messy if your dad kicks the bucket before you become a Count. But in that case, I think it might be easiest to show a little respect to an illustrious family and say that if you do subsequently become a Count, you are freehold.


That makes Wolfgang, Peter, Fritz, and Matthias the current freeholds.

Hans, Elberhard, Ansehelm, Arnold, and Lothar would be freehold as well but their current titles make that pointless.

I will add a column in the playlist for "son of a Duke" and work from the above list.

Stig
10-06-2007, 23:18
You still need to take Hummel out, he can't be a freehold if his father was a rebel, simple as that.

GeneralHankerchief
10-06-2007, 23:18
Also with the freehold issue, it encourages players to take game-spawned generals and not recruited avatars, which IMHO is a good thing. :yes:

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 23:21
Also with the freehold issue, it encourages players to take game-spawned generals and not recruited avatars, which IMHO is a good thing. :yes:

absolutly. I agree that it has been useful to have RBG's as an option but I like that there are bonus's for staying in the "family tree".

econ21
10-06-2007, 23:26
You still need to take Hummel out, he can't be a freehold if his father was a rebel, simple as that.

His father was a Duke, so he's freehold. There's nothing in 4.6 about rebellious fathers.

I am more worried about him being a rebel and still a Count. That was something I did not really consider in the Charter. I envisaged Counts not voting in line with their Dukes or something - not trying to usurp their Houses!

Let's see where it leads. We can regularise things with CAs etc when the Charter kicks back in, come 1340.

FactionHeir
10-06-2007, 23:48
Hans might want to consider dangling the "heir" title over Wolfgang and Dietrich. While both avatars are quite radical, they might moderate their politics in hope of becoming Duke.

Actually, what Wolfgang didn't know before he rebelled, was that Hans was considering to make him the next Duke if he stayed loyal as he had previously.
As for Dassel, its quite obvious that there is no way Hans will ever name him his heir even if he started doing whatever Hans wanted.
So at the moment its really down to Warluster or Ruppel. If Warluster leaves the PBM (or is inactive for extended amounts of time) or goes rebel, he obviously won't become heir. If he helps fight Hümmel, then that's a big plus.

OOC, its not like I don't want to give the title away, but my belief is that there must be significant reason ICly to give the title to someone rather than an OOC fairness rule. The game wouldn't be fun if one player (possibly the only other active member inside the house besides the Duke) would constantly attempt to undermine the Duke's authority and usurp the throne and yet the Duke player would be forced due to OOC considerations to name that player his heir rather than continuing to keep the title for his own next avatar.

Privateerkev
10-06-2007, 23:55
Those are good points FH. They illustrate why I like Econ's idea of invoking CA 11.1 when this kind of stuff comes up. It allows you to make that decision but it has to pass through 5 other players first so it is a little more fair.

GeneralHankerchief
10-07-2007, 00:03
Of course, Ignoramus could always win in his rebellion and the whole thing could be averted. :evilgrin:

FactionHeir
10-07-2007, 00:09
Of course, Ignoramus could always win in his rebellion and the whole thing could be averted. :evilgrin:

That's the alternative, but how likely is that, unless Dassel and Bavaria all march up to Swabia? :wink:

GeneralHankerchief
10-07-2007, 00:10
Don't give him ideas.

Privateerkev
10-07-2007, 02:04
Something tells me Bavaria is going to be plenty busy without spending valuable time and resources playing king-maker in Swabia.

As for Dassel, he is fairly far away and has an army to drag with him. If Hans just takes cavalry, he'll make it to Swabia before Dassel.

It will be interesting to see what Dassel does with his "Army of Papal Stompitude". He can always try to float it to Outremer. I am sure the Kaiser and King would give him a warm and friendly reception. ^_^

GeneralHankerchief
10-07-2007, 02:10
First I have to beat the damn Pope before we can get into aftermaths. Genoa was no picnic and we actually had a numerical advantage in that one.

Privateerkev
10-07-2007, 02:12
Good point

I hereby rename the army, "Army of Eventual Papal Stompitude".

I have every confidence that you will eventually prevail in your quest to rack up the most "Pope kills" in a PBM. :yes:

You can have little "funny hat" silhouettes on the side of your saddle.

Tamur
10-07-2007, 06:02
94 posts? on a Saturday? good heavens you people are lunatics (meaning, of course, that you post by the light of the moon, not that you belong in an asylum. Never that.)

err, so, anyone care to give a summary of the current state of The Draft for those of us with football-playing sons and swimming daughters?

Northnovas
10-07-2007, 06:11
94 posts? on a Saturday? good heavens you people are lunatics (meaning, of course, that you post by the light of the moon, not that you belong in an asylum. Never that.)

err, so, anyone care to give a summary of the current state of The Draft for those of us with football-playing sons and swimming daughters?

I was actually amazed at the amount for one day. It must be an important thread to the PBEM. Draft!? I don't read the fine legal print I will just hang on for the ride.

TinCow
10-07-2007, 15:14
Draft!? I don't read the fine legal print I will just hang on for the ride.

It is my intention that people won't ever need to read anything except the SPOILER section under their character's name. The rest of this is a simple explanation of the mechanics I will use to figure out how to implement peoples' decisions. It's more for my benefit than anyone else's. All you guys need to do is tell me what you want to do. I will use these mechanics (and some other stuff) to figure out whether you are successful and what happens.

Cecil XIX
10-07-2007, 15:52
Tincow, I think there needs to be some mechanism for constructing buildings. I know it might seem silly to build Alchemist's Labs and Cathedrals during a cataclysm but every avatar has different reasons and priorities that could make such decisions seem perfectly reasonable.

At the very least we should be able to upgrade our barracks, towers, and walls. Seems odd that our characters wouldn't do that, especially when some cities can't even produe crossbow militia.

TinCow
10-07-2007, 20:10
There already is. Read the section entitled Construction/Repair.

Cecil XIX
10-07-2007, 22:39
..Huh. Must have missed the construction part of that section.

econ21
10-11-2007, 14:08
I've been thinking a bit more about the economic model in the cataclysm.

It may be a bit parsimonious. I tallied up cities with players and most have 0 or 1. (Outremer has 3 players and no cities). With one city, you get one unit of militia per turn. That may be enough if we let the AI bumble along. But if we set up multiple Apollonia style battles, we will have to rely on the gamesmaster topping up armies. That's not such a bad thing, but it just means that the incentives for players to hold on to settlements is very low - one militia per turn probably does not warrant the garrison required to hold the city. Perhaps one point per castle and two per city?

I still think the rewards to scrapping buildings are too high. In the normal game, if you scrap a leather tanner you get 200 gold - enough to buy one militia. Under the cataclysm mechanics, you get 3 militia (takes three turns). It will also be a pain to implement as buildings that exist don't show you how long they take to build (if you scrap a market, you'd have to go to the browser to see how long it takes to build as you won't get the option to rebuild one - you need a grain exhange first). I would suggest a flat 1 point per building scrapped.

Personally, I think the best thing would be for TinCow to play it by ear, rather than feel too constrained by mechanics. It's only when he sees the armies the AI brings (which he may have to spawn) that he will be able to judge how much resources we should have.

TinCow
10-11-2007, 14:31
Part of the reason I wanted to make the destruction of buildings more profitable was because it would encourage people to do it. One of the reasons we decided to create the cataclysm in the first place was to set the HRE back a significant amount, and thus provide more of a challenge through to the end of the game. I figured that if we had to rebuild lots of structures, that would help.

I agree on the flexibility though. Maybe I'll make some places generate more income than others, or perhaps some people with nice financial traits will find themselves with more wealth. Also, I highly encourage people to think of different ways to recruit that do not involve money. Take a look at your traits and try to think of IC ways you could assemble armies without paying for them. As long as they are logical, I will allow them.

DO NOT PLAY THIS BY ANY STRICT RULES. USE YOUR IMAGINATION AND I WILL IMPLEMENT IT AS BEST AS I CAN.

TinCow
10-12-2007, 20:07
I have been thinking about people gaining the titles of their prisoners and other such things. That proposal was pretty rough and frankly I don't want to force a system on the rest of the game. Therefore I have come up with a solution that I think works pretty well.

The political situation will likely be very, very different at the end of the cataclysm in 1340 than it was in 1300 at the last Diet Session. We will likely need to reform a lot of the Charter to reflect any shifting of power that occurs. Therefore, I am going to implement changes to the influence system that will take effect ONLY during the 1340 Diet Session. They will be as follows:

(1) Avatars will gain ALL of the influence of any prisoner they have in 1340. Avatars who are themselves prisoners will have 0 influence in 1340. This influence can exceed the normal influence cap.
(2) Counts that rebel against their Duke will gain the +3 influence of a Duke, rather than the +1 of a Count IF: (a) They are free (not a prisoner) and (b) Still control their Capital settlement.

This will allow for a temporary shift in the balance of power to favor people who successfully sieze extra power for themselves during the cataclysm. This may help them meet the 2/3 requirements for a Charter Amendment which would be necessary to make any permanent changes to the game.

Opinions?

Ferret
10-12-2007, 20:22
I like that idea, it would certainly make something major happen easier (if only I could capture the Kaiser...) and not make the political positions change around too much (if evryone captures the poistion off the capturer etc).

GeneralHankerchief
10-12-2007, 20:30
(2) Counts that rebel against their Duke will gain the +3 influence of a Duke, rather than the +1 of a Count IF: (a) They are free (not a prisoner) and (b) Still control their Capital settlement.

What about non-Counts?

econ21
10-12-2007, 20:59
(if only I could capture the Kaiser...)

Crumbs ... I am glad I teleported you out of Outremer. :sweatdrop:

Ferret
10-12-2007, 21:11
Crumbs ... I am glad I teleported you out of Outremer. :sweatdrop:

:laugh4: I was only joking, plus you'd beat me anyway :yes:

AussieGiant
10-12-2007, 21:15
mmmm, very interesting idea TC, very interesting indeed

Privateerkev
10-12-2007, 21:42
As long as it is only for the 1340 session, I like it. :yes:

TinCow
10-12-2007, 22:07
What about non-Counts?

I meant it to include anyone in Dietrich's position. Let's revise it to "Electors that rebel against their Dukes will gain the +3 influence of a Duke, rather than the any other bonus they currently receive IF: (a) They are free (not a prisoner) and (b) Still control their Capital settlement."


As long as it is only for the 1340 session, I like it. :yes:

Definitely. The point is so that the entire group of players (rather than just econ21 and I) can figure out how to sort out this entire mess when it is all over. I don't want to tell people what the long-term ramifications will be for the Reich, I want us all to figure it out in the usual way. This simply gives the rebels a chance of changing the order of things. Without it, the Dukes could easily slap the rebels back into line, which wouldn't make sense if the rebels are actually successful. Of course, if the rebels aren't successful, the Dukes will not be threatened much by them at all. Notice that it will work both ways. If Hans captures both Wolfgang and Dietrich, he'll have a 100% guarantee of having all of Swabia's voting strength behind him. It also gives an added incentive NOT to execute an avatar.

Stuperman
10-12-2007, 22:34
Given that Fredericus is in a castle, on an island, his situation is unique, if I read the rules correctly, I'll have 1 income per turn if I stay loyal, and 0 if I rebel, and no chance of recruiting boats, ever?

TinCow
10-12-2007, 22:52
Actually, you would have 1 income if you rebelled, because it is a castle.

Don't worry, though. I will allow for people to trade wealth and send each other reinforcements. That's likely to be the best way for allies to help one another. One of the reasons I gave Dukes added income for each of their loyal Counts is so that they can in turn redistribute it to the men who need it.

For you specifically, Lothar will do his best to keep you alive if you remain loyal. Though remaining on Ajaccio might get... interesting. If you need to escape, I will make sure you have that option. Remember, there will ALWAYS be a 'safe' route every turn, though it might require you to lose some of your army, wealth, etc. in some circumstances. You won't get strong by running, but you'll be alive.

FactionHeir
10-12-2007, 23:05
As long as you otherwise don't give rebelling characters too many bonuses, such as extra troops (or higher chance of getting extra troops) or more positive random events, the influence bonus should be OK with me.

I suppose this bonus also requires them to actually announce a capital?

As for wanting all of Swabia behind me...Hans believes in Harsh Justice. Any who oppose him face the gallows. That allows for new blood to come in that knows what fate awaits a rebel.

Stuperman
10-13-2007, 03:27
I don't mind running to fight another day, and need some practice at sally battle's anyhow. I just didn't want to get stuck for all 10 turns with no re-enforcements.