OOC Thread and Chatroom

[TinCow]

When did TC promised to come back??

I just noticed that the Senate Library haven't been updated :no:

Updating the Library is a lot of work, so I only do it during normal Senate sessions. Between sessions, I will update changes in the feudal structure if I see them or if they are pointed out to me, but that's all.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Oh.. I just thought that you have missed it or forgot to do it :)

[Privateerkev]

We have (another) problem with the traits.

The Emperor has "offends the nobility." Basically, the game is gearing up for a civil war. It has given a lot of the avatars either "obedient to his liege" or "disobeys his liege" which raises or lowers their loyalty trait.

I think that is why Savvas keeps rebelling. (and it is also the same trait Tristan brought up earlier today.)

I recommend we take that trait off of the Emperor and make sure the other two traits aren't on any avatars before proceeding. Otherwise we're going to start losing avatars. Not just Savvas, but Nathanail is down to 0 loyalty because of this. I'm sure ATPG's avatar is probably in the negatives... :laugh4:

[deguerra]

Ouch.

It seems the game has given us a full on civil war. All characters have been labeled either disobedient or loyal, with severe effects.

Personally, I think we should just remove these traits from the game once and for all. This whole mechanic, while nice for SP, does nothing for us in LotR.

[ULC]

I expect Ramses to dash in any moment now...

:clown:

[_Tristan_]

Methodios is also down to 0 loyalty and lost 2 command stars due to the Disobedience trait :furious3:

[AussieGiant]

I'm starting to get a little concerned with the amount of "On the fly" modding we are doing.

It's all understandable but it's becoming quite invasive at this point of the game.

[Privateerkev]

Methodios is also down to 0 loyalty and lost 2 command stars due to the Disobedience trait :furious3:

Yeah, the disobedience trait is a direct result of the civil war mechanic going into full swing. It's basically picking sides for our avatars. (I'm amused that Mak has "Obedient." Apparently he will side with the Emperor during the civil war.) o_O

[ULC]

And I am the only one totally unaffected by this? My Avatars loyalty hasn't changed one bit...

[AussieGiant]

I also seem to be immune for the most part.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

At least I am Obedient to the Liege :beam:

And I found out that ATPG's avatar is Obedient too! Go figure :beam:

[ULC]

At least I am Obedient to the Liege :beam:

And I found out that ATPG's avatar is Obedient too! Go figure :beam:

o_O?!

The game has officially lost it's last thread of intelligence...

:clown:

[pevergreen]

Last I checked I had unwatched by the king but nothing else. I'm happy to leave it there though.

[Cecil XIX]

I'm starting to get a little concerned with the amount of "On the fly" modding we are doing.

It's all understandable but it's becoming quite invasive at this point of the game.

It's inevitable. A lot of the big mods like this have traits that are designed designed to make it easier to roleplay your generals in single-player. For games like LOTR, that often leads to contridiction and redundancy.

[AussieGiant]

It's inevitable. A lot of the big mods like this have traits that are designed designed to make it easier to roleplay your generals in single-player. For games like LOTR, that often leads to contridiction and redundancy.

Good to know that is the "concept" behind what we are seeing.

Thanks Cecil.

[_Tristan_]

The "concept" turns out to be more of an impediment than an help in RPing our characters...

[AussieGiant]

The "concept" turns out to be more of an impediment than an help in RPing our characters...

That seems to be the case. But at least I now know what is going on. It was starting to become a little mystifying to me.

[_Tristan_]

The more so, than checking the triggers, I couldn't find one that got Methodios his "Disobedience" trait...:inquisitive:

[TinCow]

I have looked through the game files and Offensive to Nobles is the trigger to the entire Civil War system that makes loyalty go crazy and eventually causes people to become 'locked' and rebel. If that trait was removed or neutered in the proper fashion, the Civil War system would essentially be switched off.

If you would like, I would be willing to do a new version of LotRMod which does the following:
Prevents the Civil War system from operating by removing or altering Offensive to Nobles
Removes all positive and negative effects from the Unwatched by the King and Has the King's Eye line of traits - or as an alternative, just remove them altogether.

These changes would be a one-time thing which would have to be re-installed by anyone who is hitting the end turn button (and preferably everyone) but we would never have to deal with these problems again if we did this. I would also edit the current save game to remove all of the Civil War traits that have popped up, to ensure that it does not occur this time either.

If you want this, just call an Emergency Session and we'll put it to the vote. Since I will be away for this afternoon, if someone wants to get this going, just propose the following Edicts and we'll move directly to a vote ASAP. Voting on each of these individually will allow the changes to be customized as desired:

Edict E3.1: TinCow will create a new LotRMod which will remove all of the Civil War trait mechanics from the game.

Edict E3.2: TinCow will create a new LotRMod which will remove the Near Loyalty and Far Loyalty (Unwatched by the King) traits lines from the game.

Edict E3.3: TinCow will create a new LotRMod which will remove Title Stripped! line of traits from the game.

Edict E3.4: TinCow will create a new LotRMod which will remove Pagan Magicians from the game.

Edict E3.5: TinCow will prevent the current game from going into Civil War by removing all of the relevant traits from all avatars.

Here are all of the triggers that result in the Basileus getting Offensive to Nobles. These would have to be removed to prevent the system from triggering:


;------------------------------------------
Trigger civil_war_or_not1
WhenToTest BecomesFactionLeader

Condition Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 0
and SettlementsTaken >= 5


Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 1

;------------------------------------------
Trigger civil_war_or_not2
WhenToTest BecomesFactionLeader

Condition Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 0
and SettlementsTaken >= 10


Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 2

;------------------------------------------
Trigger civil_war_or_not3
WhenToTest BecomesFactionLeader

Condition Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 0
and SettlementsTaken >= 20
and FactionIsLocal ;If the ai gets this big it deserves to STAY this big.


Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 3

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Usurper1 ;usurper or asserting newly blue hued blood.
WhenToTest BecomesFactionLeader

Condition Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 0
and SettlementsTaken >= 5
and Trait SonofKingPrince <= 0
and FactionIsLocal

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 3

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Usurper1ai ;usurper or asserting newly blue hued blood.
WhenToTest BecomesFactionLeader

Condition Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 0
and SettlementsTaken >= 8
and Trait SonofKingPrince <= 0
and not FactionIsLocal

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 1

;------------------------------------------
Trigger civil_war_or_not_progress
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsFactionLeader
and Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 1

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 2

;------------------------------------------

Trigger civil_war_or_not_progress_expedite ;since the king isn't around... let's check again...
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsFactionLeader
and DistanceCapital >= 50
and Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 1
and FactionIsLocal ;not for the AI

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 3

;------------------------------------------
Trigger civil_war_or_not_progress_expedite_1 ;The King is a Bad Fink!
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsFactionLeader
and Attribute Chivalry < -5
and Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 1

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 2

;------------------------------------------
Trigger civil_war_or_not_progress_expedite_2 ;The King is a Fink, sorta...
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsFactionLeader
and Attribute Chivalry < 0
and Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 1

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 1

;------------------------------------------
Trigger civil_war_or_not_progress_stop ;The King is a Truly, truly nice guy; reverse the possibility of war if it's not too late...
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsFactionLeader
and Attribute Chivalry > 4
and Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 1

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles -1 Chance 4

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Disgust_with_King's_Unreasonable_Finances ;Despite his burdensome taxes to support war and other strange notions and we are still in debt!
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsFactionLeader
and Treasury < 0
and Attribute Authority <= 5


Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 5

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Disgust_with_King's_Religiona ;The King is not looking out for the salvation of our souls
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition FactionExcommunicated
and IsFactionLeader
and Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 0
and CharacterReligion catholic
and Attribute Piety <= 4 ;so it isn't just a political thing the Pope is perpetrating but truly, disgustingly, a deserved Excommunication!
and FactionIsLocal ;AI has a lesser chance

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 5

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Disgust_with_King's_Religionb_ai ;The King is not looking out for the salvation of our souls
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition FactionExcommunicated
and IsFactionLeader
and Trait Offensive_To_Nobles = 0
and CharacterReligion catholic
and Attribute Piety <= 4 ;so it isn't just a political thing the Pope is perpetrating but truly, disgustingly, a deserved Excommunication!
and not FactionIsLocal ;strictly AI

Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 2

;------------------------------------------

[TinCow]

The more so, than checking the triggers, I couldn't find one that got Methodios his "Disobedience" trait...:inquisitive:

Once the Basileus gets Offensive to Nobles, all avatars eventually become Loyal or Disobedient. It's part of the Civil War system:

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Loyalstarta
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition FactionLeaderTrait Offensive_To_Nobles >= 1
and IsGeneral
and Trait Disobedient = 0 ;as this is the initial step- no returning back...
and Trait Obedient = 0
and Attribute Loyalty >= 6
and not IsFactionLeader

Affects Obedient 1 Chance 25 ;tended this way

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Rebelstarta
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition FactionLeaderTrait Offensive_To_Nobles >= 1
and IsGeneral
and Attribute Loyalty <= 5
and Trait Disobedient = 0
and Trait Obedient = 0
and not IsFactionLeader

Affects Disobedient 1 Chance 25 ;tended this way

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Rebelstart
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition FactionLeaderTrait Offensive_To_Nobles >= 1
and IsGeneral
and Trait Disobedient = 0
and Trait Obedient = 0
and not IsFactionLeader

Affects Disobedient 1 Chance 33 ;about a third of the rest of the nobility goes down this path

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Rebelend
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition FactionLeaderTrait Offensive_To_Nobles >= 2
and IsGeneral
and Trait Disobedient = 1
and not Trait Obedient >= 1

Affects Disobedient 1 Chance 33 ;eventually you WILL gain it it's just a matter of time...

;------------------------------------------
Trigger Loyalstart
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition FactionLeaderTrait Offensive_To_Nobles >= 1
and IsGeneral
and Trait Disobedient = 0 ;as this is the initial step- no returning back...
and Trait Obedient = 0
and not IsFactionLeader

Affects Obedient 1 Chance 66 ;about two-thirds of the rest of the nobility goes down this path

;------------------------------------------

[_Tristan_]

Missed them altogether...

[Rowan]

I think this is what triggered the rebellion:



trigger Disgust_with_King's_Unreasonable_Finances ;Despite his burdensome taxes to support war and other strange notions and we are still in debt!
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsFactionLeader
and Treasury < 0
and Attribute Authority <= 5


Affects Offensive_To_Nobles 1 Chance 5


But this time it's actually the faction heir that has driven the empire into debt... :laugh4:

If this were a single player campaign I would actually like the mechanic but now it just messes up the game.

Btw does anyone know if there are any other surprises lurking in the traits system we should know about?

[Ramses II CP]

Ramses dashes by at the speed of sound trailing a brief, doppler distorted;

'ttttoooooolllldddd yyoooouuuuuu ssooooooooo.'

:clown:

So if we're hotseat enabled could we just let the civil war proceed and actually play the rebel characters?

:egypt:

[Privateerkev]

3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 should definitely pass in my opinion. The civil wars are something we should do in the game ourselves IC and we have rules for it. And the title switching is something we do IC and we shouldn't be punished traitwise for it.

I wouldn't mind seeing 3.2 and 3.4 pass but I acknowledge that some people want the traits to reflect their loyalty and some people want to RP pagan magicians. In my opinion though, the near/far loyalty system and pagan magicians are far more trouble than they are worth.

[_Tristan_]

3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 should definitely pass in my opinion. The civil was are something we should do in the game ourselves IC and we have rules for it. And the title switching is something we do IC and we shouldn't be punished traitwise for it.

I wouldn't mind seeing 3.2 and 3.4 pass but I acknowledge that some people want the traits to reflect their loyalty and some people want to RP pagan magicians. In my opinion though, the near/far loyalty system and pagan magicians are far more trouble than they are worth.

Very much my own opinion...

[Rowan]

Very much my own opinion...

Agreed.

It seems quite a lot of people have some trouble with installing mods without installers. I could volunteer to try to make an installer for a new LotR mod if people feel that would help.

[GeneralHankerchief]

I'm back.

From what I've read, the game is getting wacky, but can anybody tell me how the actual Crusade is going?

[Privateerkev]

I'm back.

From what I've read, the game is getting wacky, but can anybody tell me how the actual Crusade is going?

7 people went. 3 Order, 2 Asteri, 1 Tapeki, and Methodios.

6 of them boarded their ships and are docked off of Constantinople. 1 Asteri was sabotaged and is still waiting on the dock to board.

[Zim]

I think we have seven characters going on crusade. 6 have their fleets (Efstathios' was sabotaged and lost a turn) and they should set forth this turn. :yes:

Edit: Curses, one minute off. :clown:



I'm back.

From what I've read, the game is getting wacky, but can anybody tell me how the actual Crusade is going?

[GeneralHankerchief]

All right, so the potential civil war thingy isn't messing it up?

[Privateerkev]

All right, so the potential civil war thingy isn't messing it up?

Well, if they are on boats, they won't rebel. So no, the Crusade has not been affected by the Civil War mechanic. Plus, I think we're going to strip the whole civil war trait system out of the game before we continue.

[Ituralde]

A big yes, yes from me for removing the Civil War mechanics. Anything except the Pagan Magician thing would get a clear yes vote from me. This should be the last you hear from me for roughly a week or two, that's why I put it out here! Don't want to come back to see my character gone Rebel...

[Ibn-Khaldun]

3.1, 3.3, and 3.5 should definitely pass in my opinion. The civil wars are something we should do in the game ourselves IC and we have rules for it. And the title switching is something we do IC and we shouldn't be punished traitwise for it.

I wouldn't mind seeing 3.2 and 3.4 pass but I acknowledge that some people want the traits to reflect their loyalty and some people want to RP pagan magicians. In my opinion though, the near/far loyalty system and pagan magicians are far more trouble than they are worth.


Very much my own opinion...

Looks like we share the same opinion then ..

[GeneralHankerchief]

BTW, AG and OK, since the story we were planning fell through, and since it was mentioned in the Magnaura, I'm going to do a little bit of a retcon and say that the Patriarch sent a high-ranking official to the baptism instead of going personally. You'll see why in time.

[AussieGiant]

BTW, AG and OK, since the story we were planning fell through, and since it was mentioned in the Magnaura, I'm going to do a little bit of a retcon and say that the Patriarch sent a high-ranking official to the baptism instead of going personally. You'll see why in time.

You're setting me up GH!

Don't go and play dirty pool now fella. :balloon2:

What is 'retcon'?

[GeneralHankerchief]

I'd explain it, but Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retcon) does a better job.

[AussieGiant]

Sounds fascinating. :egypt:

Can I send my identical twin brother to this 'retcon'...

you know, nothing like 're-retconning' just to be sure things go fine in version 2...:beam:

[TinCow]

I'm back for the evening now. Since no one else has started this thing going yet, I'm just going to declare it myself and put it right to the vote. No need to delay this any longer than necessary, and this is exclusively an OOC issue anyway, so not much need for the usual Senate system. Thread will be up in a moment.

[GeneralHankerchief]

OK, that was an absolutely brilliant post in the Magnaura just now. :laugh4:

[deguerra]

I second that sentiment :beam:

[Privateerkev]

That was funny.

But the Illuminati make the Organization look like amateurs. :clown:

[ULC]

On the surface it does, but none of you know of my master plan, muahahahahahahahahahaha!

:clown:

[GeneralHankerchief]

That was funny.

But the Illuminati make the Organization look like amateurs. :clown:

Well, duh.

Better name (seriously? "Organization"?), more secret, more effective...

The list goes on and on...

Plus we thought of it first. :yes:

[woad&fangs]

OK, that was an absolutely brilliant post in the Magnaura just now. :laugh4:

I third that:laugh4:

[ULC]

Aw cmon you guys are just ganging up on me now :clown:

[Rowan]

I made a .exe installer for the current version of LotR Mod. It is available here (http://iki.fi/rowan/lotr-mod). I'm hoping this will make it easier for people to apply the future updates to the mod.

At the moment the installer applies the changed files on top of Stainless Steel and creates a LotR shortcut on desktop. M2TW installation directory is detected using registry.

I'd like to get some feedback on the installer, especially if there is anyone using Vista. You can test it without messing your M2TW installation by choosing a different install path.

[Ramses II CP]

Well, I'm digging the Organization. Truth is 'secret' societies were very rarely secret in terms of their existence, just secret in terms of how they operate, and I think we're all in the dark there.

:egypt:

[TinCow]

As a result of Hypatios' expulsion, Kalameteros no longer meets the requirements for promotion to Dux once his time-in-rank is achieved. Fortunately, the timer itself has not been disrupted, as Asteri had two Antypatos. Conversely, Hypatios is now a Comes and has had his timer for Patrikios reset, as he did not reach the total number of turns before he lost the rank of Antypatos.

[deguerra]

yep. that was noted. once iconium and hopefully caesarea are given to house members we should be set again :2thumbsup:

let me just say OOC that I quite liked this little episode even if it hurt IC. Certainly keeps things interesting.

Are the votes obvious enough for you to change the save TC?

[Privateerkev]

As a result of Hypatios' expulsion, Kalameteros no longer meets the requirements for promotion to Dux once his time-in-rank is achieved. Fortunately, the timer itself has not been disrupted, as Asteri had two Antypatos. Conversely, Hypatios is now a Comes and has had his timer for Patrikios reset, as he did not reach the total number of turns before he lost the rank of Antypatos.

This is going to sound like a weird nitpick but I try to keep track of these things so I need to ask.

What constitutes 5 turns?

Ampelas met the requirement for Antypatos at the beginning of 1110.

Makedonios met the requirement for Antypatos during 1110.

Do the both meet the required 5 turns in that position by the beginning of 1117?

(turns will go 1110, 1111, 1113, 1114, 1116, 1117.)

So, for both men, does 1110 count as a full turn even though they made the rank at different points in the turn? Or does Mak have to wait until the beginning of 1119? And this is pertinent because both avatars will probably gain land-holding vassals this term.

[TinCow]

5 turns from the turn they got it, no matter when they got it during that turn. The only reason I mark the date they got the position rather than the date their time-in-rank will be up is because the 1.5 years per turn makes the math a bit less even and I would prefer to use the more exact measure of the starting point.

On another note, I am now back home and will be able to resume my usual duties without any proxies or further delays.

[Privateerkev]

5 turns from the turn they got it, no matter when they got it during that turn. The only reason I mark the date they got the position rather than the date their time-in-rank will be up is because the 1.5 years per turn makes the math a bit less even and I would prefer to use the more exact measure of the starting point.

Sorry but I usually have a hard time grasping this kind of thinking.

Does 5 turns mean 5 including the one where you get the rank, or 5 more turns? Will it take affect the turn after the 5 turns are met?

Will Mak have his "time in rank" requirement at 1116, 1117, or 1119?

Again I apologize but for some reason I have always struggled at this kind of thinking... :dizzy2:

[TinCow]

Assuming that the rank was first achieved in 1110 and this (1110, 1111, 1113, 1114, 1116, 1117) is the proper date list (the questionable nature is the reason I don't post the end date) then the time in rank will be achieved in 1117. Think of it like your birthday. The day you are born is not year 1, it is year 0. The date that a person achieves their rank is turn 0, not turn 1.

[Privateerkev]

Ah thanks. Believe it or not, I've always been confused by how birthdays worked too. It's just the way my brain is wired. :embarassed:

But the way you explained it made sense. Plus, if it didn't, I can just use your example and apply it to all future instances of this.

And as far as I know, the way SS numbers the years seem pretty constant. Meaning, it goes 1 year, 2 years, 1 year, 2 years, ect...

So, once you know this pattern, you can figure out the year of the end point with accuracy.

[Andres]

Forgive me if I sound like a complete idiot right now or if this has been posted somewhere, but do we have to uninstall/re-install something for LoTR 1.2 or can we just install it like that?

[_Tristan_]

Just install it over your present install

[TinCow]

Forgive me if I sound like a complete idiot right now or if this has been posted somewhere, but do we have to uninstall/re-install something for LoTR 1.2 or can we just install it like that?

No, you can install right over the top of the old one, you do not have to uninstall anything.

[_Tristan_]

Is there some simple way of checking if the install works correctly such as the "Arnold test" in KotR ?

[TinCow]

Sure. Hit the end turn button a few times. If none of the avatars get Unwatched by the King or Has the King's Eye, it has worked. Alternatively, you could add the trait Overconfident to an avatar with the console. If the text description says it gives a -1 to Command, it worked. If the text description says it gives a -3 to Command, it did not work.

[TinCow]

Since I have been doing this for the 'Organization' for a short while now, I want to publicly announce that I am available to assist in completely anonymous IC communications. If you want to contact someone, but do not want them to know your identity, simply send me a PM with the text you want me to forward and a list of the players you want the message sent to. I will forward the PM with your identity removed and also forward to you any replies.

[Cecil XIX]

All the more reason you should go back to using Lothar as your avatar. :laugh4:

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Now ..

When can we go on?

Shouldn't Igno push the end turn button already?? or TC doing that because of the Crusade thing??

I think everyone who have wanted to move their avatars have done that already..

Everything is so confusing :shame:

[Privateerkev]

Basically, Igno needs to download the new fix, redo his 1111 moves, and then post the 1113 save for us to make our 24hour moves.

So, we're waiting on him.

[anelious phyros]

Hi, sorry to but in or anything but Pk said this was one of those places I should ask. Well my main question is during 1111 A.D. who were the greeks? I know they were the Byzantines but who would be a good character for them?:grin3:

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Basically, Igno needs to download the new fix, redo his 1111 moves, and then post the 1113 save for us to make our 24hour moves.

So, we're waiting on him.

Oh .. and that's all??

Where is he then?! :whip:

[flyd]

Impeach him, I say!

[Privateerkev]

Impeach him, I say!

your the one that voted for him. ~;p

[Ibn-Khaldun]

your the one that voted for him. ~;p

That does not mean that he can not impeach him! :clown:

[Privateerkev]

That does not mean that he can not impeach him! :clown:

The last time Ig's avatar was impeached, FD's avatar eventually filled out his term. Therefore, I claim with no evidence that FD really has less-than-pure intentions with that comment. :clown:

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Yey .. more drama! :beam:

This year could be the funniest if Igno is impeached!:beam:

[Privateerkev]

This year could be the funniest if Igno is impeached!:beam:

This is where I get on my soapbox and say that this kind of thing should really be discussed IC. :soapbox:

[Ibn-Khaldun]

This is where I get on my soapbox and say that this kind of thing should really be discussed IC. :soapbox:

I can not discuss this IC because Efstathios is going on a Crusade and his scribe has already made a fool out of himself :laugh4:

Although .. Efstathios is still near Constatinople :devil:

EDIT: And PK .. how did you managed to get 4000 posts within a year??:dizzy2:

[Ferret]

What possible IC reason is there for impeachment?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

What possible IC reason is there for impeachment?

If you don't find one then you can always think one up! :clown:

[Privateerkev]

I can not discuss this IC because Efstathios is going on a Crusade and his scribe has already made a fool out of himself :laugh4:

Although .. Efstathios is still near Constatinople :devil:

EDIT: And PK .. how did you managed to get 4000 posts within a year??:dizzy2:

Keep in mind that currently the only way to impeach the Megas is to convince the Emperor to call an emergency session. In a couple turns, Kalameteros may also have the ability to call an emergency session if he gives land to someone in his chain without it.

As for my posts, I credit mafia games... :beam:

[OverKnight]

Igno should get a pass due to the chaos surrounding the civil war mechanic, the emergency session and the continuing Crusade moves and plots. I'm sure play will resume shortly. I can only imagine what it is like to be Megas with all this happening in the background. I got a taste of it at the end of the Matthias's second term, but this is an entirely different animal.

I'm also a bit confused on how to handle IC sabotage within the Crusade. Do we know who does it? Or is it meant to be the usual jockeying for position and importance that ocurred within the real Crusade? Granted, Aleksios has washed his hands of the matter, but I'd still like to know.

[Privateerkev]

I'm also a bit confused on how to handle IC sabotage within the Crusade. Do we know who does it? Or is it meant to be the usual jockeying for position and importance that ocurred within the real Crusade? Granted, Aleksios has washed his hands of the matter, but I'd still like to know.

There seems to be actual sabotage going on. As for IC knowledge, there is a chain of IC information (think of it as a chain of custody) that can be traced so Mak is using info that he got using IC means.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Igno should get a pass due to the chaos surrounding the civil war mechanic, the emergency session and the continuing Crusade moves and plots. I'm sure play will resume shortly. I can only imagine what it is like to be Megas with all this happening in the background. I got a taste of it at the end of the Matthias's second term, but this is an entirely different animal.

I'm also a bit confused on how to handle IC sabotage within the Crusade. Do we know who does it? Or is it meant to be the usual jockeying for position and importance that ocurred within the real Crusade? Granted, Aleksios has washed his hands of the matter, but I'd still like to know.

TC said in one of his posts that it is possible that the saboteur could come out.
Also I think that in the real Crusades there was some kind of sabotages around cause everyone wanted to be the first one to take the Crusade target .. usually Jerusalem.
But this is my opinion ..
How to handle this IC?? Depends what kind of character you have there.. I think ATPG's avatar would welcome every sabotage attept that occur. :beam:

[TinCow]

I'm also a bit confused on how to handle IC sabotage within the Crusade. Do we know who does it? Or is it meant to be the usual jockeying for position and importance that ocurred within the real Crusade? Granted, Aleksios has washed his hands of the matter, but I'd still like to know.

All info posted about the sabotage is public IC knowledge. For instance, this post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1975362&postcount=312), gives you the following information: (1) a sabotage was attempted on Efstathios Laskaris (Ibn-Khaldun) and succeeded, the identity of the saboteur was not revealed (2) a sabotage was attempted on Stavros ek Amarinthou (Knights_of_Palma) and failed, the identity of the saboteur was not revealed. All of this information is known to all players IC. If a saboteur has a bad die roll and is IDed during a sabotage, his name will be specifically included in the sabotage write-up and will be known publicly IC.

Only one sabotage attempt may be made per turn per Crusader. So, 2 sabotage attempts indicates that 2 people tried it in 1111 AD. It is not possible for there to be a sabotage attempt which does not appear in the write-up. As noted above, even a failure where the saboteur was not IDed will be shown.

[Ignoramus]

Sorry about the delay guys. I got a bit confused about the civil war issue and the new patch. I'll download the patch and upload the save game as soon as I can. I may be some hours, as I have some visitors due to arrive at any minute, but as soon as they've left I'll do it.

[Kagemusha]

I slaughtered the over 500 strong rebel army near my character and i got man of the hour for Kantakouzinos!:2thumbsup:According to charter, who decides if it will be accepted, or can i accept it myself before making the new save. I wont dare to press esc, incase that refuses the man of the hour.:sweatdrop:

[Rowan]

The benefactor gets to decide. Who is it?

"If a Man of the Hour adoption is offered to an avatar, the choice of whether to accept it is entirely up to the avatar who is the adopter."

[Kagemusha]

Since it is not an adoption it seems the message does not show any benefactor.Here is a screenshot from the message:

https://img185.imageshack.us/img185/3354/rbb16xd0.jpg

[_Tristan_]

There is always a benefactor to MotH offers...

For Methodios, it was Kosmas (Zim's avatar)

EDIT : and you can save the game... On reload, the offer wil still be available... I did it...:2thumbsup:

[Kagemusha]

There is always a benefactor to MotH offers...

For Methodios, it was Kosmas (Zim's avatar)

EDIT : and you can save the game... On reload, the offer wil still be available... I did it...:2thumbsup:

Well where exactly it should say who is the benefactor and did you press esc and then saved the game or how you did it? Im just asking because getting that last name in the lineage was the only reason i picked this character, so its kind of important to me.:yes:

[_Tristan_]

yes, you just press Esc and save the game... On reload the MotH offer will be presented to whoever opens the save... Or at least this is how it happened to me...

In case you're afraid of losing it I suggest you save the game, then the offer shoudl still be visible to you... Accept it and save anew... Thus if ever the first save doesn't work, you'll still have one where Ionnais is MotH and accepted...

EDIT : And accepting it should allow you to see who is the benefactor : it can be either Ionnis Komnenos, Ioannis kalameteros, Kosmas Mavrozomis or Methodios Tagaris...

EDIT 2 :I cannot see your screenshot (My browser prevents image upload :wall:) but it shoudl appear somewhere on the offer...

[Kagemusha]

yes, you just press Esc and save the game... On reload the MotH offer will be presented to whoever opens the save... Or at least this is how it happened to me...

In case you're afraid of losing it I suggest you save the game, then the offer shoudl still be visible to you... Accept it and save anew... Thus if ever the first save doesn't work, you'll still have one where Ionnais is MotH and accepted...

EDIT : And accepting it should allow you to see who is the benefactor : it can be either Ionnis Komnenos, Ioannis kalameteros, Kosmas Mavrozomis or Methodios Tagaris...

EDIT 2 :I cannot see your screenshot (My browser prevents image upload :wall:) but it shoudl appear somewhere on the offer...

Allright il do as you say, thanks!:2thumbsup:

edit: The benefactor is Caesar Ioannis.Going to upload the save.

[Rowan]

I think you can press the square at the top-right corner of the message and then save.
And I think you get the benefactor at least by then accepting the MotH and seeing who you got attached to.

edit: I knew I should have reloaded...

[_Tristan_]

Then it will be up to Igno to accept your MotH...

[Kagemusha]

Then it will be up to Igno to accept your MotH...

Well hopefully my house leader will do so.:smash:

[TinCow]

I'm pleased that these adoptions are being offered semi-regularly. I far prefer to see existing avatars put on the family tree than new ones spawn without someone to play them.

[Kagemusha]

I updated the battle report, now its up.:yes:

[AussieGiant]

Igno...can you clear your PM box?

First time I've had to ask that...seems strange after so long :balloon2:

[Privateerkev]

Yes there does seem to be a relative lack of requests for Ig to clear his PM box. Perhaps he regularly deletes at least a couple of his 500 pm's that he has packed in there.

:clown:

[AussieGiant]

Yes there does seem to be a relative lack of requests for Ig to clear his PM box. Perhaps he regularly deletes at least a couple of his 500 pm's that he has packed in there.

:clown:

That is really the first time...ever. I was really shocked. :2thumbsup:

[Privateerkev]

Well, PM box clearing requests can now be made on people's profile pages so I think we'll see less of them in here. :yes:

[AussieGiant]

did know that. i'll put one there also.

[Andres]

Yes there does seem to be a relative lack of requests for Ig to clear his PM box. Perhaps he regularly deletes at least a couple of his 500 pm's that he has packed in there.

:clown:

I have 1149 pm's in my inbox and still room for 351 more :smug:

[Privateerkev]

I have 1149 pm's in my inbox and still room for 351 more :smug:

I'm surprised your that popular. Do you PM yourself? ~;p


:clown:

[Kagemusha]

Privateerkev, i find it pretty amusing why your character is trying to miss credit what happened in the battle of Transylvanian hills and after it. First only 10 rebels got out from the battle alive, so there were not many to start rumours around, specially when they were in hostile territory after pillaging the countryside prior the battle.
Second Hector was the first messenger to bring the message to the capital and only Ioannis men were present in the battle from the other side.
Third i wrote the executions in the battle report, so i cant understand your motive, other then that your character is trying to make Kantakouzinos to look like a liar in front of others, without shred of evidence from your part, quite reckless for a man in your position.:clown:

[Privateerkev]

Privateerkev, i find it pretty amusing why your character is trying to miss credit what happened in the battle of Transylvanian hills and after it. First only 10 rebels got out from the battle alive, so there were not many to start rumours around, specially when they were in hostile territory after pillaging the countryside prior the battle.
Second Hector was the first messenger to bring the message to the capital and only Ioannis men were present in the battle from the other side.
Third i wrote the executions in the battle report, so i cant understand your motive, other then that your character is trying to make Kantakouzinos to look like a liar in front of others, without shred of evidence from your part, quite reckless for a man in your position.:clown:

It's the nature of fighting rebel stacks. In the game, you don't get the option to ransom/release/execute rebel stacks. So, there are no prisoner treatment traits that come from fighting rebel stacks. Therefore, it's basically up to us to make up what happens. Mak's version of events is one plausible explanation. Ioannis's version is equally plausible.

Regardless, someone with Mak's chivalry is not going to like sitting there and listening to someone boast about executing prisoners.

Whether that is reckless or not is a matter of opinion. :beam:

[Kagemusha]

It's the nature of fighting rebel stacks. In the game, you don't get the option to ransom/release/execute rebel stacks. So, there are no prisoner treatment traits that come from fighting rebel stacks. Therefore, it's basically up to us to make up what happens. Mak's version of events is one plausible explanation. Ioannis's version is equally plausible.

Regardless, someone with Mak's chivalry is not going to like sitting there and listening to someone boast about executing prisoners.

Whether that is reckless or not is a matter of opinion. :beam:

What i mean is that Mak doesnt have shred of evidence to back his claims what happened in the battle and killing the captured rebels would not have been anything out from the ordinary. On the other hand, miss crediting a noble man and also an eye witness who was present in the battle is calling them both liars, which is a serious offence against the honour of the said individuals, wouldnt you agree? Specially when Mak doesnt have anything other then his own speculations to prove anything he is saying.:smash:

[Privateerkev]

What i mean is that Mak doesnt have shred of evidence to back his claims what happened in the battle and killing the captured rebels would not have been anything out from the ordinary. On the other hand, miss crediting a noble man and also an eye witness who was present in the battle is calling them both liars, which is a serious offence against the honour of the said individuals, wouldnt you agree? Specially when Mak doesnt have anything other then his own speculations to prove anything he is saying.:smash:

:shrug:

Take it up with Mak in the Magnaura. :yes:

[Kagemusha]

:shrug:

Take it up with Mak in the Magnaura. :yes:

Nah. Ioannis is not present there and wont be for a while, while his shieldbearer knows better then start to argue with the Grandmaster inside the senate, his status does not entitle him to such a luxury.:smash:

[Cecil XIX]

For the love of god, let's never have an arguement OOC about what was said IC. It's never worth it.

Besides which, the last time this happened Becker lost a lot of potential fun in the Cataclysm. :no:

[Kagemusha]

For the love of god, let's never have an arguement OOC about what was said IC. It's never worth it.

Besides which, the last time this happened Becker lost a lot of potential fun in the Cataclysm. :no:

You must have completely misunderstood. Those couple posts before yours were in no way any kind of argument. Just friendly observations. Why is everyone being so serious in this game? Its not like we are dealing with here anything more serious then bit of role playing.:yes:

[Cecil XIX]

My mistake. :2thumbsup:

On another note,


Kosmas shrugs.

I prefer to hang only the ring leaders myself, unless I think doing so will create martyrs.

Was that perhance an M:TW reference, Zim? If we weren't on the internet, I'd high-five you. :yes:

[Privateerkev]

Why is everyone being so serious in this game? Its not like we are dealing with here anything more serious then bit of role playing.:yes:

Some of us, like myself, would like for stuff to be as IC as possible. When I see OOC posts on here talking about IC debates, or goading people for IC fights, it takes something out of it for me. I'm in this for the IC interaction. Something that gets totally spoiled for me if the drama is then arm-chair quarterbacked on the OOC thread.

There is plenty for all sides to chew on in the Magnaura regarding the treatment of rebel prisoners and I'd prefer to see the debate in there. :bow:

[Zim]

Yep. All the talk about about how to deal with rebel prisoners had me nostalgic for M:TW. :beam:

:clown: No high five smilie, we'll have to settle for these guys. ~:cheers:




On another note,



Was that perhance an M:TW reference, Zim? If we weren't on the internet, I'd high-five you. :yes:

[Privateerkev]

:clown: No high five smilie, we'll have to settle for these guys. ~:cheers:

Playing someone sober makes me need even more of these: ~:cheers:

:clown:

[Kagemusha]

Some of us, like myself, would like for stuff to be as IC as possible. When I see OOC posts on here talking about IC debates, or goading people for IC fights, it takes something out of it for me. I'm in this for the IC interaction. Something that gets totally spoiled for me if the drama is then arm-chair quarterbacked on the OOC thread.

There is plenty for all sides to chew on in the Magnaura regarding the treatment of rebel prisoners and I'd prefer to see the debate in there. :bow:

I only brought it up in this thread, because it was not plausible to do so in the IC thread. It should not have spoiled anything. I think it would have been lot more strange for a lowly shieldbearer to start arguing with an grandmaster of a religious military sect in a senate building. Ioannis would have,but Hector would not have under any circumstances. I tried to bring up issues which to me seemed unnatural to happen in IC, which i thought the OOC thread would be perfect for. I am sorry if such sentiments seem like spoiling the IC experience, so i will refrain from doing so in the future.:bow:

[Cecil XIX]

Yep. All the talk about about how to deal with rebel prisoners had me nostalgic for M:TW.

It's funny how many great features that game had which aren't part of the series anymore. I really loved how each level of castle had two sub-upgrades you could purchase before the full level-up, that kind of customization would be perfect for LOTR.

[ULC]

It's funny how many great features that game had which aren't part of the series anymore. I really loved how each level of castle had two sub-upgrades you could purchase before the full level-up, that kind of customization would be perfect for LOTR.

I'm intrigued, how so?

[Zim]

Oh yeah, I remember that. :yes:

It's kind of interesting they didn't bring anything like that back for MTW2, which was supposed to make sieges so much better.

The Civil Wars were really cool as well, although I suppose for LOTR that would cause as many problems as SS's Civil War script. :sweatdrop:


It's funny how many great features that game had which aren't part of the series anymore. I really loved how each level of castle had two sub-upgrades you could purchase before the full level-up, that kind of customization would be perfect for LOTR.

[Cecil XIX]

I'm intrigued, how so?

Minor changes mostly, but they were profound. When you first built a Fort, (Level 1 Castle) it's just a wooden keep with a palisade around it, so it looked sorta like this: (o) and it was pretty cramped. You could either upgrade it to the next level, or you could spend a few turns improving it as is. The first improvement was a motte, which of course just meant the building was on top of a hill. The next upgrade was a 'bailey', which added a curtain wall. A fully upgraded Fort looked more like this, and was made completely of wood: (forgive my ASCII)
- ______
/------/--\
|===|-K-|
\____\__/

The level two castle (Keep) has the same structure, except the keep proper and the innermost wall are stone. The two upgrades for that level are to make the outer wall stone as well, and to add ballistas to some of the towers. After that my memory fades, partially because it's been so long and partially because the others were more expensive and thus I didn't build them as much. They were generally extra walls, artillery on the towers, and in at least one case in improved 'barbican' or gatehouse. Good stuff, and it would have looked gorgeous judging by how great MII's settlements look.

Suffice to say, a castle of level 'x' took 'x*4' turns to build. Each level had two improvements each which took 'x' turns to build. What's interesting is that the improvements you build are just stuff you'd get anyway by upgrading to the next level of castle. To use the fort I mentioned earlier as an example, if you just went straight to the next level of castle without making improvements you'd save time, money and have a better castle.

So why bother? Well, if you don't build the improvements and you're besieged while upgrading your Fort then it will just barely have enough room for a half-stack. Taking the two turns to fully improve your fort will give you extra room, more walls, and it would let your fort last longer in a siege. Also, if you're going to take the 20 turns necessay to upgrade your Citadel into a Fortress (don't ask me why they switched the names in MII), taking four or eight turns to make sure you don't lose the massive investment in time and money is quite tempting.

Of course, usually you're not going to upgrade to the next level immediately. Some provinces you won't even upgrade to the next level at all. In those cases, improvements provide a cheap way to make your castles more siege resistant without going all the way and upgrading the settlement. And finally, sometimes you just want to take 30+ turns necessary to make a fully improved Level 5 Castle.

tl;dr - We went from two improvements for each level of castle to two improvements for each castle, period. Also Keep, Curtain Wall and Ballista Towers ftw.

[Privateerkev]

That felt good. I haven't screamed in a "governing body" in some time. :beam:

Alright, I just had Mak drop the "I-bomb." Let the games begin... :2thumbsup:

[Ramses II CP]

Isn't filling an army an OOC requirement? There shouldn't be any choice in the matter since we know there was massive spending last turn and not all of it was required by OOC rules to go ahead of filling out the army in question.

I guess the question I'm asking is what form the rule enforcement will take for violating an OOC rule for IC purposes?

:egypt:

[GeneralHankerchief]

Honestly, I can't see any way to enforce OOC army requirements aside from the usual Senate/Diet discipline. I was waiting for it to come up in KotR but it never did (it came close a few times...). Unless TC does a quick rewrite, we're just gonna have go with the old standby and impeach Ignoramus.

[woad&fangs]

You're going to pay for that, IK!!!:jester:

[Ibn-Khaldun]

w&f .. I have no idea what you are talking about! ~:rolleyes:

[Privateerkev]

Isn't filling an army an OOC requirement? There shouldn't be any choice in the matter since we know there was massive spending last turn and not all of it was required by OOC rules to go ahead of filling out the army in question.

I guess the question I'm asking is what form the rule enforcement will take for violating an OOC rule for IC purposes?

:egypt:

Yes, OOC, Ignoramus the player has to fill those armies or completely halt ALL recruitment.

Completely regardless of his avatar's feelings towards some of the army owners.

But, I felt it was entirely appropriate to rant IC about this. Also, I have mentioned this to him OOC in a PM so I didn't want to be too hard on him OOC. IC however is another matter... :evil:

All I want to see OOC is that the rules are followed with regards to army fulfillment. Besides that, the rest of my rant was IC and should be taken as such. :beam:

[OverKnight]

Question for my history thread: Was there a Megas Logothetes report for the beginning of 1113? I looked around and I haven't seen it.

Now I could simply be missing it due to the confusion surrounding the pause in play, but if anyone spots it, could they send me a link?

Edit: If new troops are being recruited and aren't making their way into mandated armies, we got problems. Its hard enough to fund all the mandates without extras on top.

However, as an ex-Megas, it is difficult to keep track of who gets what. With the recent marked increase in mandated armies I'm sure this is even more diffcult.

[flyd]

Yes, OOC, Ignoramus the player has to fill those armies or completely halt ALL recruitment.

The good news is that at the current treasury level, he won't be able to start much recruitment in the first place to even have the chance to break that rule. :laugh4:

[ULC]

I'm letting everyone here know, I may not be on this week, or the next, or as indefinitely for that matter. I'm having RL issues with housing and school that may rob me of internet or more. Just wanted let eevryone know so if you have any questions about the Organization, defer them to GH for right now.

[Ignoramus]

Isn't filling an army an OOC requirement? There shouldn't be any choice in the matter since we know there was massive spending last turn and not all of it was required by OOC rules to go ahead of filling out the army in question.

I guess the question I'm asking is what form the rule enforcement will take for violating an OOC rule for IC purposes?

:egypt:

The rules says all recruitment. Ioannis interpreted that not to include the hiring of mercenaries. :clown:

[Privateerkev]

Question for my history thread: Was there a Megas Logothetes report for the beginning of 1113? I looked around and I haven't seen it.

Now I could simply be missing it due to the confusion surrounding the pause in play, but if anyone spots it, could they send me a link?

first report but Savvas rebelled. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1975472&postcount=314) second attempt but Savvas rebelled again. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1976116&postcount=318) 3rd attempt and the save we are working off of currently. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1978009&postcount=326)


The good news is that at the current treasury level, he won't be able to start much recruitment in the first place to even have the chance to break that rule. :laugh4:

Well, it is still an appropriate thing to complain about IC. Especially since he neglected to recruit anything for Cecil at all when he was recruiting for everyone else. :beam:


The rules says all recruitment. Ioannis interpreted that not to include the hiring of mercenaries. :clown:

"If a Private or Royal Army falls below the minimum strength level, all military recruitment must be allocated to restoring the Army to minimum strength before money can be spent on other recruitment, unless the owner agrees otherwise."

We can wait for TC to make a ruling on this but I'm pretty sure you can't recruit mercs to get around filling armies. And if that is why the Empire just slid into debt, the IC aspect just got even more interesting. :evil:

[Ignoramus]

Also, things are ridiculously hard to untangle of who requires what and who owns what. The fact that players can "hoard" units by getting them into garrisons means that army upkeep skyrockets.

The second report is completely true regarding the 3rd save. The problem was that I accidently uploaded the wrong save.

[Privateerkev]

Also, things are ridiculously hard to untangle of who requires what and who owns what. The fact that players can "hoard" units by getting them into garrisons means that army upkeep skyrockets.

That's why there needs to be some IC politicking on who disbands what. One of the few good things about the Order having almost nothing, is that we don't have any fat to trim. :laugh4:

[Ignoramus]

At least you're historically accurate. Shortages of manpower were commonplace among the Crusader states.

[OverKnight]

Cool, found the report. Sorry, I'm in the middle of a long and blurry work day.

History should be up to date.

[Privateerkev]

At least you're historically accurate. Shortages of manpower were commonplace among the Crusader states.

True but that will do little to placate me IC. :beam:

[Cecil XIX]

Honestly, I can't see any way to enforce OOC army requirements aside from the usual Senate/Diet discipline. I was waiting for it to come up in KotR but it never did (it came close a few times...). Unless TC does a quick rewrite, we're just gonna have go with the old standby and impeach Ignoramus.

It's gotten me thinking. Since their's no clear criteria for how to go about fulfilling the army requirements, why not have the Houses do it themselves? They could select where and what to recruit from their own lands only, and tell the Megas what they've done to prevent confusion. I fear that without any clear OOC criteria for how to go about it, it will be difficult to avoid reverting to IC criteria. Of course, that could exacerbate the 'hoarding' problem, but it could also bring things to a head and force us to find a solution. How does that sound to everyone?

[Privateerkev]

Alright, in light of Ig's IC comments, I am now a little confused as to how much of this issue is IC or OOC.

As TC has laid out before, private armies are important planks to our rule system. Therefore, a Megas can't just refuse to build one. No matter how much the character hates the army owner, the player has to gather troops for the army. TC said to RP it as an influential lord calling for local levies.

Now, Ig has admitted both OOC and IC that he did not build the army on purpose. This issue now has elements that are both IC and OOC.

IC, the Megas is basically refusing to do his job.

OOC, the player did not follow the rules because he thought he found a loophole to get around them.

So, while I'm more than happy to keep pushing this IC, what do we do about it OOC?

I find Cecil's idea interesting but I see great potential for people getting their wires crossed. It's one of those things that sounds good in theory but I can see confusion over who recruits where and for what. And I don't know how it would affect the player that is the Megas. The job already sounds pretty confusing as it is.

[OverKnight]

Ignoramus, clear some space for PMs. I want to talk about puppies and sunshine.

[AussieGiant]

Igno can you PLEASE get your inbox in order. :balloon2:

[AussieGiant]

Igno can you PLEASE get your inbox in order. :balloon2:

Did I mention sleeping is no excuse Igno!! :beam:

[Ramses II CP]

The good news is that at the current treasury level, he won't be able to start much recruitment in the first place to even have the chance to break that rule. :laugh4:

The point is that he did break it, just now, for IC reasons. In a turn when he spent three turns worth of Crusader support funds on various other stuff.

I want it to be absolutely clear that if we hand out a pass here this rule is going to be ignored in the future. It's difficult to keep track of and it goes against a character's IC inclinations. If there's no enforcement this time it would be better simply to take the rule out.

Oh, and FYI we settled the mercenaries being recruitment bit during the test game. They are, and yes you have to do the required armies first, even if it means hiring mercenaries. This isn't a matter of interpretation and I find it very annoying that we're required to remind our Megas of rules matters that are long settled. Furthermore there couldn't be any non-prioritized construction unless there was recruitment done first, nor building ships, watch towers, forts, etc.

:egypt:

[Ignoramus]

Sorry. People keep Pming me. Space now, guarenteed.

[_Tristan_]

The point is that he did break it, just now, for IC reasons. In a turn when he spent three turns worth of Crusader support funds on various other stuff.

I want it to be absolutely clear that if we hand out a pass here this rule is going to be ignored in the future. It's difficult to keep track of and it goes against a character's IC inclinations. If there's no enforcement this time it would be better simply to take the rule out.

Oh, and FYI we settled the mercenaries being recruitment bit during the test game. They are, and yes you have to do the required armies first, even if it means hiring mercenaries. This isn't a matter of interpretation and I find it very annoying that we're required to remind our Megas of rules matters that are long settled.

:egypt:

Exactly the reason why I sued for impeachment IC...

[TinCow]

Ig, since you are online I would be greatful if you could decide on the adoption issue right now while I'm working on the save.

[AussieGiant]

Well there seems to be a technicality now with TC's last post.

We'll have to wait and see what the final situation is before continuing IC.

[Kagemusha]

Tincow, while you are working with the save, could you move my character towards Constantinopole, so i dont have to take the save for that:beam:?

[TinCow]

Sure thing.

[Ignoramus]

I'll adopt Ioannis Kantakouzinos.

Sorry TC. I didn't know you'd put a special save up. Sorry for all the inconvinience. I'm really sorry to everyone if I'm mucking up the game OOC.

[TinCow]

Sorry TC. I didn't know you'd put a special save up. Sorry for all the inconvinience. I'm really sorry to everyone if I'm mucking up the game OOC.

Not a problem, and relatively easily fixed. I'm glad the solution to the treasury problem was this simple.

[Kagemusha]

Thanks TC.:bow: Igno, can you make a public statement about the adoption in the Magnaura, so my character can thank yours.~:)

[Cecil XIX]

I find Cecil's idea interesting but I see great potential for people getting their wires crossed. It's one of those things that sounds good in theory but I can see confusion over who recruits where and for what. And I don't know how it would affect the player that is the Megas. The job already sounds pretty confusing as it is.

That's why I said the nobles should tell the Megas when the do so. Something like "Here's the save back, I recruted two units of peasent archers at Nicosia for my private army." Having Lords choose their own soldiers seems to be in the spirit of the OOC interpretation of what is happening IC.

[AussieGiant]

I've done that when I was Chancellor Cecil...in the end I requested people send me their recruiting orders...because...again the order in which it is done in relation to a finite amount of money is that there is "The Quick and The Dead." :beam:

[Ramses II CP]

Is it now our plan to proceed with matters as though the rules were not ignored with respect to the filling out of the private army? If we do so I believe we should simply propose a CA striking the private armies from the rules at the next session and allow the Megas to recruit whatever he wants.

Igno has freely admitted he broke an OOC rule for IC purposes. This suggests to me that either we shouldn't have OOC rules at all, or we should have some method for their enforcement.

:egypt:

[Privateerkev]

I'm glad the money situation is figured out.

But the Megas still broke the actual Rules. Not just mamby-pamby edicts.

I'll lay out the case IC. Stay tuned... :evil:

[Ramses II CP]

Frankly I think handling it IC sends the wrong message. OOC rules should not be available for debate. The foundation of the game is the respect all players are required to show to those rules. We're talking about the same rules that prevent us from moving each other's avatars at will here.

If the OOC rules are negotiable IC then we're going to see a lot more chaos. What's to prevent me from grabbing the save and moving all the crusaders except myself away from Egypt? An OOC rule... but if I can explain it IC does that make it okay?

:egypt:

[Andres]

I'm glad the money situation is figured out.

But the Megas still broke the actual Rules. Not just mamby-pamby edicts.

I'll lay out the case IC. Stay tuned... :evil:

Meh, it seems like there is plenty of money.

Money solves all problems. Mak will be nitpicking, but what else can you expect from a fanatic religious nutjob ~;)

Igno can recruit the required amount of troops in no time now.

[Ramses II CP]

Meh, it seems like there is plenty of money.

Money solves all problems. Mak will be nitpicking, but what else can you expect from a fanatic religious nutjob ~;)

Igno can recruit the required amount of troops in no time now.

You're missing the point. :beam:

Last turn he wasn't allowed to build anything or recruit anything for non-private armies until he recruited the required amount of troops. By his own admission he decided to ignore that rule. :yes:

:egypt:

[Andres]

Frankly I think handling it IC sends the wrong message. OOC rules should not be available for debate. The foundation of the game is the respect all players are required to show to those rules. We're talking about the same rules that prevent us from moving each other's avatars at will here.

If the OOC rules are negotiable IC then we're going to see a lot more chaos. What's to prevent me from grabbing the save and moving all the crusaders except myself away from Egypt? An OOC rule... but if I can explain it IC does that make it okay?

:egypt:

I understand and agree with your point of view.

Imo, TinCow is Gamemaster and it seems to me that this is entirely his decision. Maybe it's better if the OOC aspect of this matter is dealt with by TC, in private?

As for the IC aspect of the matter, let the games begin :2thumbsup:

Just my :2cents:

[AussieGiant]

Can I request that we keep OOC comments out of the Senate thread.

I agree Ramses, however as you will see from my posts I was also unaware of the exact details. I've tried to disguise that with BS, smoke and some mirrors, (Please note anyone using this OOC admission in an IC way will get me coming after them with an ice pick.:whip:)

While the rules are shortish and well written by TC, you still need to be extremely well organised and aware of all issues OOC to be the Megas.

I've brought this up before but if we've made the rules so detailed that if we can't resolve errors IC, then we are excluding a large number of people from running because they either don't want the pressure or are unaware of all the rules and how they relate to each other. You can't "wrote learn this stuff anymore". You need to 'understand' them and how they relate to a complex, fluid well simulate world.

In other words, I'm pretty glad I've done a politics and history degree so I can deal with this game from a fairly equal footing. That should not be the minimum requirements to run for Megas.

Plus...if there is an issue like this...impeach...likewise I'd speak to TC in private to find a resolution OOC if that is what people wish (I'd highly disuade people from doing this as the IC consequences are more than enough to find satisfaction in my opinion.)

[Privateerkev]

Ramses:

I'm talking about it IC because it seems appropriate to push for IC consequences. Plus, fits with my character... ;)

But yes, I would like a ruling on this from TC. We long established that the rules are set in stone. (until they are changed by CA's.)

If this was a misunderstanding by Ig, that would be different. But he admits to ignoring the rules on purpose.

And unlike KotR, it is actually against the Rules to break the Rules. (unless it is an event.)

[Andres]

Edited this out in the Magnaura:


OOC: Guys, we're talking about the rules of the game here. The ones TC has told us over and over, that they are not to be broken. Well, I can prove without a shadow of a doubt that they were broken.

OOC: True that, but that's OOC. IC, impeachment requires 2/3d votes. If 1/3+1 does not want to offend the Caesar IC for whatever IC reasons, then he will not be impeached. The impeachment is an IC "punishment" and should only be invoked for IC reasons. I'll try to explain: e.g. Senator X knows that the Caesar violated the Constitution, but since he's loyal to the Caesar or because he thinks he will gain political benefits by supporting the Caesar, he won't impeach the Megas who is Caesar. That same Senator X might vote for an impeachment of another Megas who violated the Constitution, because the other Megas is not on his side or is just a poor guy without real power or importance :shrug: It's politics, those in powerful positions can do more then others. OOC I agree 100 % with you: a rule that shouldn't have been broken has been broken, but that's OOC and it's up to TC to make a decision about an appropriate punishiment. I'm sure that a player who goes a step too far in breaking the rules, will face the "Wrath of God", i.e. TC will certainly throw some lightning bolts at that players' avatar...

[Privateerkev]

Well, in Mak's opinion there is more than enough reason to impeach. If the Emperor wants, we can get an emergency session underway and put the Caesar on trial.

As for myself, I just want the rules followed. They weren't. And if we are going to make the rules "unbreakable" then they need to be enforced.

If people want to keep that part OOC, I totally understand. But to me, there are more than enough IC reasons to push for IC punishment.

So, I will go two pronged on this. I will push for an IC punishment for IC reasons. And I will ask us to discuss OOC what to do about a clear violation of the rules and how we can prevent this from happening.

[AussieGiant]

For the record I'm going to keep myself focused on the IC stuff.

TC's the only one in a position to handle the OOC stuff and I'm sure he will handle that with aplomb as usual.

So, lets see if the father is willing to impeach his son...not a strong start for the Impeachment camp but hell, it will be fun.

[Andres]

And fun it is :2thumbsup:

[Privateerkev]

Watching Apionnas try to defend the Caesar is like watching Jan try to defend Siegfried... :laugh4:

[Dafuge]

I rather like it if rules like that are broken, but there need to be a really good IC reason.

[_Tristan_]

But where to stop ? If this rule is broken today, then tomorrow it will the SoT limitations that could be threatened or our capacity to prevent our avatar from being moved by another player...

Rules are rules... Unless they are not correctly worded and you can find one loophole in them that allows you IC to play on that misunderstanding... But here in the present case, there is non of it...

Ignoramus himself admitted that he pointedly chose to prioritize building and recruitment of certain armies to the detriment of others in contravention with the rules... This needs to be dealt with either IC or OOC...

[Dafuge]

I see what you mean and agree with you.

But one rule has been broken, if it is rectfied and none others happen I see no reason for a big debate.

[Andres]

But where to stop ? If this rule is broken today, then tomorrow it will the SoT limitations that could be threatened or our capacity to prevent our avatar from being moved by another player...

Rules are rules... Unless they are not correctly worded and you can find one loophole in them that allows you IC to play on that misunderstanding... But here in the present case, there is non of it...

Ignoramus himself admitted that he pointedly chose to prioritize building and recruitment of certain armies to the detriment of others in contravention with the rules... This needs to be dealt with either IC or OOC...

Yeah, but IC we can only use IC motivations. At the moment, I don't have any interest in seeing the Caesar removed from the position of Megas :shrug:

As far as OOC goes, I accept whatever decision TC takes. Out of experience as a mafia host, I know how unpleasant it is to deal with such matters, so let's not make it more difficult for him than necessary.

When you play games, things like this happens. I suggest we wait for TC's ordeal and in the meanwhile continue to have fun.

[AussieGiant]

Indeed PK...it's a gallant reguard action. Something all good generals must do before becoming real men :balloon2:

[Privateerkev]

One of the reasons the rules are set in concrete is because we can actually fight each other. If the Megas can ignore the rules, he can declare civil war, disband everything belonging to everyone who is opposed to him, destroy all buildings in those settlements, and recruit massive armies for himself and his side. Sure he would be impeached but in just one turn, a pissed off Megas can do a massive amount of damage if the Rules did not bind him.

Even with the Rules, the Megas is still massively powerful in civil wars, as we saw in the Test Game. He can freeze recruitment for one side and pump reinforcements into the other.

So, so the game doesn't get wildly off-balance, the Rules flat out need to be followed to the letter. If the Caesar declared war on the Order right now, we'd be toast. And it would partly be because the Megas broke the Rules.

And I would be very very unhappy...

[AussieGiant]

The precedent of break rules knowingly does not help the game. That is clear.

What people are ignoring is post 1644 by Igno.

He's apologised OOC. Which leads me to believe he will not do this again. I could be wrong but lets wait an see.

In my mind it's the IC stuff that needs to be handled, and it is being handled very well at this time. Although one man calling for impeachment is not a landslide by any means.

[_Tristan_]

I concur... I'm not particularly concerned because my avatar is far from having the prerequisites for having his own army but I know I'll be peeved if I was in you situation...

I admit that impeachment may perhaps not be the best solution as it would surely be better to reach an OOC solution if not punishment...

Though Methodios would not be against Ioannis getting impeached...

[Privateerkev]

AG:

Like I said before, OOC I'm doing pretty good. I just want the rules followed and I'll be happy.

IC however I am simply reacting to the situation as Mak would react.

And I think we're up to 3 or 4 people calling for impeachment... :yes:

[_Tristan_]

He's apologies OOC. Which leads me to believe he will not do this again. I could be wrong but lets wait an see.

The problem as I see it is that it wasn't some simple overlook of the rule (which could happen) but he pointedly ignored the rule to the detriment of factions he is "in competition" with... And that is sad...:no:

[Ramses II CP]

This is why I fundamentally oppose dealing with it IC, because the same characters who voted for Igno to be Casesar are, naturally, not going to care that he is breaking the rules to favor them. If you take that point of view you need to be careful that you always keep yourself in power, because your protests when the rules are broken against your favor will fall on deaf ears.

As Tristan points out above, if this rule goes by the wayside other rules will follow. It isn't as simple as 'Well, it's just this once, just this one rule, and nobody likes that guy anyway,' you have to ask yourself why any of the rest of us would follow the other rules either. The game will devolve into who can get to the save first to screw over their opponents with outrageous violations, or we'll simply have the Megas doing everything since his access to the save is presumably the start point.

I can immediately think of a few rules that I'd like to test the consequences of breaking, and I think that's the logical next step for all of us. If Igno can do it and get a joking pass, why can't I?

edit: In other news, as the Onion has it, today the Justice department announced that the Justice department had broken the law. The Justice department is reportedly discussing whether or not to idict the Justice department.

http://www.theonion.com/content/amvo/justice_dept_justice_dept_broke

:egypt:

[_Tristan_]

I can immediately think of a few rules that I'd like to test the consequences of breaking, and I think that's the logical next step for all of us. If Ingo can do it and get a joking pass, why can't I?

Yes... I think the last thing we want is to set a precedent...

[Kagemusha]

I think this whole affair is something which is for Tincow to decide.:yes:

[Privateerkev]

Yes, if this was an OOC mistake then I would just push for IC consequences. But, this was blatant OOC rule-breaking and needs to be addressed. We're all in competition here and stuff like this unfairly weights things for one side.

It would be like me winning at monopoly because I stole from the bank.

[AussieGiant]

I agree with the hypothetical issues being outlined here. Please know that.

Given the civil war aspect of this game, following the rules are far more important than in the previous game.

Igno broke the rules and said he did with conscious intent. "Burn him at the stake."

He then apologised and he seemed sincere to me. "Perhaps life in prison."

This is the first time. "Definitely a long term in prison."

There are pro's and con's to zero tolerance guy's.

[Ramses II CP]

The precedent of break rules knowningly does not help the game. That is clear.

What people are ignoring is post 1644 by Igno.

He's apologised OOC. Which leads me to believe he will not do this again. I could be wrong but lets wait an see.

In my mind it's the IC stuff that needs to be handled, and it is being handled very well at this time. Although one man calling for impeachment is not a landslide by any means.

FYI if you read that again you'll find that he is apologizing to TC for using the wrong save and causing TC to have to redo all that work, and apologizing to us for slowing down the game. He is specifically not apologizing for violating the rules for IC purposes.

I don't want to be a nitpicker, and I'm trying to keep the tone light (See my previous edit) but I do not have the impression that Igno is remorseful for that act and the amount of support he is getting for breaking the rules makes it unlikely that he would need to be. Expect the same from the next person to break the rules deliberately, even if they don't confess it quite so openly.

:egypt:

[_Tristan_]

Let the punishment fit the crime

:yes:


:laugh4:

[Privateerkev]

Ig was actually quite happy that he tried to find a loophole to get around the army rule. He admitted to recruiting mercs so he didn't have to build Cecil's army.

But he has yet to address the no-construction-before-army-recruitment violation and that is where my real OOC and IC issue lies.

He knowingly and willingly built things before seeing to it that all armies were to legal standards. This is in clear violation of the rules of our game and basically puts the Order in a very precarious IC position with multiple armies bearing down on our provinces.

From what YLC has told me, there is the very real possibility of avatar death as a consquence of Ig's actions.

I don't mind losing avatars because of IC decisions. That is part of the game. But if we lose avatars because rules got broken, well then that just sucks. :no:

[Ramses II CP]

Let me put this out there too, when I was the Chancellor in KotR I had serious doubts about my ability to perform the technical aspects of the job. I screwed up giving the AI money for the first two turns of my Chancellorship, I (possibly) somehow cost NN his avatar in a battle where he didn't die, but was dead afterward, and I cost TC no small amount of work myself. I'm not commenting on Igno's mistakes in any way shape or form because I've been there and made them myself. Given the difficulties of the technical situation right now I think he's done better than I would have.

I did not, however, during the course of my Chancellorship, knowingly violate a single rule. I did not, despite my secret position in the Illuminati, abuse the rules to deny 'our' opponents resources or fair opportunities under the rules. I worked hard to keep an even hand OOC, even while my IC actions and posts were overwhelming malicious towards certain individuals (Ironically one of them was Cecil).

It can be a fine line. It is not, IMHO, acceptable to simply say 'I ignored the line because my character wanted me to.' If I had done so I would've expected to be punished OOC, and certainly would've apologized to the player I'd done it to.

I hope that clears things up, and makes it a little more obvious that I'm not attacking Igno, I just have a very exact idea of what he just did and I consider it to be a wedge into the break down of the whole game.

:egypt:

[_Tristan_]

I did not, however, during the course of my Chancellorship, knowingly violate a single rule.

And that is the single most important word in this situation... We're all human and bound to err but we can also choose to do it on purpose and that is not just the same...

[AussieGiant]

Understood Ramses. I agree with your last post.

I hope Igno is sincere with his apology. I thought his last sentence in 1644 was in this vein.

[TinCow]

Yeesh...

Yes, the rules about Private/Royal armies MUST be enforced in order for this game to work properly. As some have noted, if they are not the whole Civil War system becomes useless. At the same time, the rules are complex and breaches are inevitable here and there. Minor, unintentional breaches should be either ignored or pointed out and corrected as best as possible OOC because they will occur more often and making a big issue out of them will cause more problems than the breaches themselves. However, intentional breaches must be stopped very quickly because they are an attempt to circumvent the rules.

In this situation, Ignoramus has intentionally breached the rules, but in a relatively minor manner. The whole situation in the first place was caused by his innocent error in playing from the wrong save game file. Even then, it only amounts to the failure to recruit a couple regiments. While this could be a major issue in the middle of a Civil War or just prior to one, we're not in that situation as far as I can tell. Thus, the issue needs to be corrected, but I don't think Ignoramus needs to be flayed alive. He has already apologized and claims that he will fix the problem in the future. Let's leave it at that. If he does not fix the issue and problems continue to persist, then I will deal with it myself.

The IC issue of impeachment is just that: an IC issue. I will not get involved in it. If you want to impeach him, there are mechanisms to handle it. If I have to step in it will be for OOC reasons only.

[Kagemusha]

Yeesh...

Yes, the rules about Private/Royal armies MUST be enforced in order for this game to work properly. As some have noted, if they are not the whole Civil War system becomes useless. At the same time, the rules are complex and breaches are inevitable here and there. Minor, unintentional breaches should be either ignored or pointed out and corrected as best as possible OOC because they will occur more often and making a big issue out of them will cause more problems than the breaches themselves. However, intentional breaches must be stopped very quickly because they are an attempt to circumvent the rules.

In this situation, Ignoramus has intentionally breached the rules, but in a relatively minor manner. The whole situation in the first place was caused by his innocent error in playing from the wrong save game file. Even then, it only amounts to the failure to recruit a couple regiments. While this could be a major issue in the middle of a Civil War or just prior to one, we're not in that situation as far as I can tell. Thus, the issue needs to be corrected, but I don't think Ignoramus needs to be flayed alive. He has already apologized and claims that he will fix the problem in the future. Let's leave it at that. If he does not fix the issue and problems continue to persist, then I will deal with it myself.

Wise and considerate decision as usual from you.:bow:

[Privateerkev]

Alright, then I will simply push this as far as I can IC. :evil:

OOC, I am fine as long as this gets fixed next turn. IC, this isn't over... :2thumbsup:

[Andres]

For somebody who is usual rather strict about regulations, it is... refreshing to defend Igno's actions IC. I'm starting to like this roleplaying thingie :2thumbsup:

[AussieGiant]

Thanks for the feeback TC. The OOC summary is clear.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Crazy people!!! :furious3:

I just spent 30 minutes to reading all these posts!!

How did you managed to post 4 pages within 10 hours?? :dizzy2:

Crazy people I say!!




:laugh4:

[Privateerkev]

How did you managed to post 4 pages within 10 hours?? :dizzy2:

It's a gift... :2thumbsup:

[_Tristan_]

One of the many the LotR players have... (starts counting : starting heated debates : check, post 4 pages in 10 hours : check...)

[Cecil XIX]

I hope that a slap on the wrist does not become the standard punishment for willingly breaking the rules. We'll see how it goes.

[Rowan]

:no:

[TinCow]

I do not believe I am being too lenient. If Ignoramus corrects the problem immeditately, it will have existed for a grand total of 1 turn. If he does not, I will take further actions which I assure you will be more than a slap on the wrist. That seems fair to me.

[Privateerkev]

I hope that a slap on the wrist does not become the standard punishment for willingly breaking the rules. We'll see how it goes.

I would not be opposed to seeing Armatos's army appear out of thin air this turn. There are more than enough mercs on Nicosia, and recruitment options in the Order's territory to make this army right now.

This shouldn't even be considered IC. With such an unfriendly Megas, basically Armatos is putting out a call for troops to come and serve him. There is still the possibilty that if it is recruited IC, the Megas will just strand the army on an island or recruit things on the other side of the Empire. While these seem to be viable IC options for a Megas, I do hope for OOC reasons that this does not occur in this case. If the only thing that comes from this is a recruited army stuck on an island, I will feel dissapointed...

If we're not going to punish Ig OOC, (or even IC...) then immediate reperations seem to be the least we can do. :yes:

[Ibn-Khaldun]

I have announcement..

Because my 1,5 year old son scratched my medieval game disk then from tonight on I wouldn't be able to keep an eye on the game~:mecry:

So until I don't know how to go on from this..~:confused:

I like this character and like this game so..
Perhaps someone could fight the battles before me until the Crusade is over..
After that I would probably like to keep him in some city so I could still play him..

Need to buy a new game though if I want to be part of this game fully again..:shame:

[flyd]

You could get a no-cd patch thing. That's what I've been doing since the DVD drive on my desktop failed several years ago.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

You could get a no-cd patch thing. That's what I've been doing since the DVD drive on my desktop failed several years ago.

Yes, that I should have get before I uninstalled the game though:wall:
But looks like I need to get the new game cause I've been said that that is the only option:embarassed:

EDIT: Thanks to those who tried to help! I appreciate this!:2thumbsup:

[GeneralHankerchief]

You could get a no-cd patch thing. That's what I've been doing since the DVD drive on my desktop failed several years ago.

Wait wait wait, can you tell me more about this?

[Cecil XIX]

I do not believe I am being too lenient. If Ignoramus corrects the problem immeditately, it will have existed for a grand total of 1 turn. If he does not, I will take further actions which I assure you will be more than a slap on the wrist. That seems fair to me.

Ignoramus has been a part of the Throne Room for longer than I have and I've never noticed him causing problems like this before, so I'm not doubting his sincerity and I do agree that it's appropriate for this specifc instance though, as it's the first time it's happened in LOTR.

I'm just worried about the precedent, since there's no guarentee we'll notice a rules violation after the first turn it happens. If people think they can bend the rules and then avoid punishment merely by stopping after they've already been caught, it could be troublesome later on.




Wait wait wait, can you tell me more about this?

I believe those things are of questionably legality.

[_Tristan_]

It is against Org policy to talk about such things... Beware of Mod's wrath...

EDIT : No-cds, I meant..

[GeneralHankerchief]

Ah, all right. If it's not on the up-and-up then I'm not interested. Apologies to TC.

[TinCow]

I'm just worried about the precedent, since there's no guarentee we'll notice a rules violation after the first turn it happens. If people think they can bend the rules and then avoid punishment merely by stopping after they've already been caught, it could be troublesome later on.

Well, I'm the only person running this game and I have no problems being completely and utterly inconsistent in my rulings, so I don't think you need to worry about precedent. I will do whatever I think is best for the game in any particular situation, even if it blatantly contradicts something that I've done beforehand.

Also, there's a major difference between someone intentionally violating the rules with intent to harm someone else by doing so and someone intentionally violating the rules but without realizing the harm that it would cause. In law, we call this malice aforethought and it's the difference between murder and manslaughter, and thus between the death penalty and a very short prison sentence. In this case, Ignoramus definitely knew he was violating the rules, but it does not seem to me like he was trying to hurt anyone in the process. That's a significant factor to consider when determining a punishment.

Ironically, the latin term for malice aforethought (scienter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienter)) is my wife's internet handle. :laugh4:


Because my 1,5 year old son scratched my medieval game disk then from tonight on I wouldn't be able to keep an eye on the game~:mecry:

If the scratch isn't deep, you can remove it relatively easily with some normal household products. Toothpaste works pretty well. Just use a clean cloth, put some toothpaste over the scratch and rub until its gone. It might take a while, depending on how deep it is, but it's a lot cheaper than buying a new copy of the game.

[Privateerkev]

In this case, Ignoramus definitely knew he was violating the rules, but it does not seem to me like he was trying to hurt anyone in the process.

He was absolutlely trying to hurt us IC by his own admission. He was trying to find ways to get out of giving Cecil an army.

Of course what complicates it is that there was actually two rules in question.

Ig admitted to trying to hire mercenaries so he wouldn't have to recruit. He stated on here that he believed that could get him around recruiting an army for the Order.

But, he also broke another rule that is clear cut. And that is when he built things while armies still needed filling.

Now, whether he built things with the knowledge that he was breaking that rule is unclear. What is clear is that he was trying to find any way possible to avoid giving the Order their army.

In the course of his turn, he deliberately tried to circumvent the rules in order to punish his IC political opponents. (If you want, I can dig up his OOC comment.)

*edit*

Here it is. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1978601&postcount=1625)

[Ramses II CP]

So tomorrow I'm going to sail to the nearest landmass, recruit all available mercenaries, and hop back aboard ship. I'm not hurting anyone and it's my first time breaking the rules, so I think I can expect a free pass. :2thumbsup:

:clown:

:egypt:

[Privateerkev]

Please know that as much as I am telling people to break the rules IC, that is the last thing I am advocating OOC. :laugh4:

[Ignoramus]

I'd like to clear up a misunderstanding her.

I never knew that armies and construction were tied together. I thought that prioritised buildings had to be built before any other construction, so I built the Wooden Castle at Aleppo. I didn't seee the rule that you had to recruit for royal and private armies before prioritised buildings.

I really am sorry for breaking the "unbreakble" rules, because I know that they're an essential part of the game. I'll fix up the problems as soon as I can, with apologies to those affected. I never intentionally broke the OOC rules.

Also, please don't get too harsh on me. FLYdude as Megas hadn't strengthened my royal army to the minimum legal OOC requirement, and he voted for me, so it shows how confusing the Megas' job can be somethimes.

Once again, sorry, specifically to PK and the Order.

[Privateerkev]

Thanks for that Ig. Things are cool OOC on my end. :2thumbsup:

[flyd]

That's cool, but I really think people need to stop accusing me of not building up the armies.

Caesar's army was stated as under the command of Ituralde. It was missing a pair of horsemen. Igno told me to recruit some (expesnive) merc horsemen into his stack, and I did. There was now one royal army between him and Ituralde, which was all they were eligible for at the time.

[Kagemusha]

I have been looking at the armies in the game and for example Overknight´s royal army is lacking either one horse unit or a archer unit still. So it has been basically understrength from the beginning, but no uproar have been heard from him. I think that because Megas are human and human´s make mistakes, these kind of things will continue happening.
In my opinion it should be left to Tincow´s good judgement to judge which errors might have been intentional and which not.:yes:

[Rowan]

I'd like to point out that it is quite different if an already established army is one regiment short of regulations (especially after battles or if it is divided between two persons), or that a person that recently became eligible for private army doesn't get one after repeatedly being pointed out that one should be recruited.

Furthermore, it is an OOC rule. Impartial, set in stone, part of the mechanics. If you are looking for loopholes in OOC rules then you are by definition mixing IC and OOC aspects of the game. And that in my opinion is malice aforethought.

[AussieGiant]

If I ever, ever, ever, ever become Megas in this game, I'm going to employ a hat full of lawyers and have them guard my inbox 24 hours a day. :balloon2:

I'm sure there are some people who are going to disagree on this...but, I think the time spent on this topic OOC is becoming disproportional to what has occurred. TC has made his summary comment, Igno has made his. Everyone has made their position clear.

I'd like to propose moving on.

If anyone wishes to continue discussions then in the interest of amusement please do it here in the OOC with TC so I can watch.

I think we'd all learn a thing or two on formulating positions and legal process :clown:

[flyd]

If I ever, ever, ever, ever become Megas in this game, I'm going to employ a hat full of lawyers and have them guard my inbox 24 hours a day.

I think I'm gonna start an I'm a Participant in LotR without a Legal Background (IaPiLwaLB) support group. "Politics and history" majors will only be accepted as associate members, since that's still sort of related, as far as I see it. Having heard of "malice aforethought" before is grounds for immediate disqualification, regardless of educational background.

[Andres]

Maybe, just maybe, it's better if we first send a friendly pm to the Megas in charge if we think we noticed a mistake, something like:

"Hi there, When I examined the save, I noticed that army XX needs extra units. It's the army of YY and according to rule ZZ it should be prioritsed. Thanks in advance. Btw, I do realise that being Megas is alot of work and I really appreciate your efforts, so I'm not annoyed at all. This is just a friendly reminder. Thnx in advance and keep up the good work :2thumbsup: Cheers. P.S.: Naughty boy :whip: P.P.S.: :clown:"

If such a pm would be ignored, the next step should be contacting TC in private.

Of course, the culprits' pm box should be empty in order to follow that course of action :stare:

But then again, maybe you should just ignore me, since I'm one of those guys who doesn't qualify to join the IaPiLwaLB support group :shame:

:clown:

[AussieGiant]

Andres,

That is certainly what I hope is the future of this game. I'm totally sure I would miss things. There would be a standing order to contact me in the event of issues.

[Andres]

I received an email from Askthepizzaguy:



Because of computer complications, I must delay the launch of the Simpsons Mafia game. Couldn't start yet anyways.

Also, must drop out of Soviet Mafia game for the same reason. Please let everyone know I am sorry. Sorry everyone!!!

Guess he won't be around for LoTR either.

[TinCow]

Maybe, just maybe, it's better if we first send a friendly pm to the Megas in charge if we think we noticed a mistake, something like:

"Hi there, When I examined the save, I noticed that army XX needs extra units. It's the army of YY and according to rule ZZ it should be prioritsed. Thanks in advance. Btw, I do realise that being Megas is alot of work and I really appreciate your efforts, so I'm not annoyed at all. This is just a friendly reminder. Thnx in advance and keep up the good work :2thumbsup: Cheers. P.S.: Naughty boy :whip: P.P.S.: :clown:"

If such a pm would be ignored, the next step should be contacting TC in private.

Of course, the culprits' pm box should be empty in order to follow that course of action :stare:

This is an excellent idea. I would like to start implementing this for OOC problems with the game.

[Ferret]

So tomorrow I'm going to sail to the nearest landmass, recruit all available mercenaries, and hop back aboard ship. I'm not hurting anyone and it's my first time breaking the rules, so I think I can expect a free pass. :2thumbsup:

:clown:

:egypt:

I didn't get a free pass when I first broke a law... ~:mecry:

[Ramses II CP]

You didn't break a law, your character did, and obviously I wouldn't get a pass on the rules either; I was speaking sarcastically to emphasize the deliberate and harmful nature of the act which did get a pass. :beam:

:egypt:

[Andres]

Guys, please.


I'd like to clear up a misunderstanding her.

I never knew that armies and construction were tied together. I thought that prioritised buildings had to be built before any other construction, so I built the Wooden Castle at Aleppo. I didn't seee the rule that you had to recruit for royal and private armies before prioritised buildings.

I really am sorry for breaking the "unbreakble" rules, because I know that they're an essential part of the game. I'll fix up the problems as soon as I can, with apologies to those affected. I never intentionally broke the OOC rules.

Also, please don't get too harsh on me. FLYdude as Megas hadn't strengthened my royal army to the minimum legal OOC requirement, and he voted for me, so it shows how confusing the Megas' job can be somethimes.

Once again, sorry, specifically to PK and the Order.

Ignoramus said that he did not break the rule on purpose and he also apologised.

He got a slap on the wrist from TC and I think he understands by now how angry you all are/were. I'm sure this won't happen again.

Don't forget: we're all human and we all make mistakes.

Can't we just let it rest and move on, please?

If you keep continuing your mantra, you'll eventually ruin the game for some of us and that would be terrible, considering the effort and the amount of time TinCow is putting in this.

Let's concentrate on the fun, please.

[Dafuge]

I agree to just move this into the past OOC, but in IC it should obviously carry on untill deemed necersarry.

[Privateerkev]

I am convinced that Ig tried to find a loophole in the rules rather than actually break the rules. But, in the course of trying to find a loophole, he did actually break a rule on accident.

In light of this, I think the OOC response from TC is wholly appropriate in proportion to what happened OOC.

IC however, the Caesar tried to find a loophole to deny the Order a legally mandated army.

So, to me, this seems to now belongs solely in the IC world. And there is plenty to !@#$ about IC on this issue.

But OOC, to me, this issue is settled.

And Andres's suggestion to send a friendly OOC PM is a good idea and will stop many problems before they start. But Ig was on purpose trying to find a way out of fulfilling a Constitutional mandate so in that case, a "friendly reminder" might not have had the appropriate immediate effect. Him and I had talked about the army IC and OOC before this happened so he knew he had to make it. But his character really didn't want to so he tried to find a way out of it.

But he did try to do it legally. (He failed of course but it's the thought that counts.)

When I get home, I'll check the save. If I see the units are being recruited, then to me, the issue is over OOC. (IC however is different... :evil:)

[_Tristan_]

in the Magnaura
"Welcome, Senator Nikiphoros Manouelitis! Fresh blood is always good for the senate."

Reading this I can't help but picture Kantakouzinos with a pair of fangs and a black cape...

Maybe he remained too long in Transylvania...


:laugh4: