KotR Out of character thread XVII [Archive] - Page 2

Privateerkev

12-11-2007, 20:43

:laugh4: The funny thing is that I always felt having the timer on (in general, not in KOTR) was gamey. Humans can much more easily stall and run out the clock to survive an impossible battle than can the AI, or whittle them down until their missile units run out of ammo, let time run out, then whittle them again.

In SP, I find attacking is harder with the timer on and defending is easier with the timer on.

If I leave the timer off while attacking, I will pretty much always win by just engaging in a long missile feud with the AI and will not attack until every arrow, shot, bolt, and shell is gone.

If I leave the timer off while defending, I lose because of the passive AI. While defending a bridge or city, sometimes the AI won't even attack me and I have to counter attack or "lose" the battle.

So, if I want a challenge, I leave the timer on while attacking and turn it off when defending.

Ramses II CP

12-11-2007, 20:44

Hrm, I think I'm going to leave it as it is. It's not completely accurate, but for the purposes of communicating with non-Germans it'll be clearer if there is one Prinz and one seperate Duke of Franconia.

Also Fritz is the Steward, but I don't expect Peter will be away any time soon.

edit: Of course if any of the real Dukes have a problem with it feel free to issue a protest over the matter. No insult is intended, just an in house political matter. ;)

:egypt:

FactionHeir

12-11-2007, 20:45

Timer on is just for sanity as the AI tends to end up passive as PK noted or get stuck somewhere, and exiting the battle is not an option without you auto-losing it.

Econ was Price and Duke concurrently and this is possible.

TC: Could you please get back to me regarding the last few PMs? Thanks :yes:

Zim

12-11-2007, 20:51

Considering how long people have been playing KOTR, and how much effort has gone into making the game harder for the players, I assume any reasons to have the timer off have already been considered and discarded, especially when the AI gets passive or "stuck" due to pathfinding, as has been mentioned.

Also, with those Uberstacks around, whittling the enemy over a few battles isn't gamey, it's just good strategy. :clown:

FactionHeir

12-11-2007, 20:55

Those gold stacks very much do prolong a battle. I think it took over an hour and a half of prolonged melee on that hill slope for them to start routing or become obliterated. That fight between the footknights and their few aventuriers and scotsguards in melee wasn't exactly short either.

Ramses II CP

12-11-2007, 21:07

Privateerkev

12-11-2007, 21:09

I'm starting those two interesting battles and one note of consequence, Ruppel is 1 step from 'faltering courage' (Certainly undeserved) due to withdrawal, so FYI for anyone scouting the enemy don't save after scouting.

:egypt:

This isn't the first time this has been brought up. I wish people would stop saving after they "recon in force"... :no:

FactionHeir

12-11-2007, 21:14

I'm starting those two interesting battles and one note of consequence, Ruppel is 1 step from 'faltering courage' (Certainly undeserved) due to withdrawal, so FYI for anyone scouting the enemy don't save after scouting.

:egypt:

That's because he doesn't have the Brave trait, so he can't lose it and gains Coward instead. I think he ought to have the Brave trait after the last battle, but chance was not kind :no:

What PK said is true btw. That's what spies are for. Or captains.

TinCow

12-11-2007, 21:18

TC: Could you please get back to me regarding the last few PMs? Thanks :yes:

"last few"? I see only one question in all three of them. The answer is no, you cannot use battle plunder before the end of your turn. The cataclysm is over, time to get used to the old system again.

This isn't the first time this has been brought up. I wish people would stop saving after they "recon in force"... :no:

For the record, that was NOT me. I always left peoples avatars at least a tile away from the battle, unless a closer positioning was necessary to get reinforcements in. I was very careful about this.

econ21

12-11-2007, 21:41

Mini Econ's taking the save.

Privateerkev

12-11-2007, 21:44

For the record, that was NOT me. I always left peoples avatars at least a tile away from the battle, unless a closer positioning was necessary to get reinforcements in. I was very careful about this.

I have no idea who it is. Technically, it could be anyone who downloads the save and then uploads a new one.

I have no problem with people using my avatar as "recon". I just ask that they not save the game after they do so. I was annoyed to see Jan have "hesitant attacker" because it was given due to OOC reasons and is quite unlike the way I played him. Anytime I got a trait, good or bad, from something in the game, I tried to role-play it. But getting bad traits because of OOC reasons makes Kevin a sad panda... :shame:

Love him or hate him, Jan was not very "hesitant". And certainly not with regards to battles. :no:

Zim

12-11-2007, 21:49

Are people actually attacking enemy stacks and withdrawing to see what's in them? And then saving the game? :no:

Privateerkev

12-11-2007, 21:53

Are people actually attacking enemy stacks and withdrawing to see what's in them? And then saving the game? :no:

Yes. :yes:

And it could be anyone who downloads the save, and then uploads it. Which is basically everyone.

If it's not the chancellor/gm, then it could be someone who has a look around the map after they have fought their battle. And they get curious as to what is in certain stacks so they have our avatars attack.

But, if you save, the game records every withdrawal. Eventually you get negative traits because the withdrawals add up.

Zim

12-11-2007, 21:57

That's incredibly lame. :no:

On a more positive note, Mini econ's playing the final battle of the turn. That means tonight we may find out what AI turn battles are up, and pretty soon, we'll be on to the Diet! :2thumbsup:

Privateerkev

12-11-2007, 22:10

That's incredibly lame. :no:

I doubt they even realized the consequences of it. The trait doesn't pop up right away, so if you get it, it could be because of what someone or someones did months ago. (some of our avatars have been around awhile).

I seriously doubt it was malicious but I would appreciate if people be aware of it.

*edit*

Obviously if the trait pops up, it is because of something that happened recently. But what I meant was the first "points" towards the trait could have been applied long ago. It's cumulative.

Zim

12-11-2007, 22:20

If someone does get a trait like that and it's obviouly not from the players actions, for example Ruppel, can we eliminate it via console?

Ramses II CP

12-11-2007, 22:29

Ferret

12-11-2007, 22:55

The list of signatories includes "Duke Dieter Bresch." When did he become Duke?

actually Dieter did specifically ask to be listed as Count Bresch but looks like fritz has ignored him...again :clown: . And all these battles lately are just making me realise what a bad general I am compared to you guys :bow:

gibsonsg91921

12-11-2007, 22:56

same, same. and dieter ain't duke, that's péter.

Ramses II CP

12-11-2007, 23:22

Okay, changes will be up in a minute. ;)

I'll leave Peter as Prinz though, sounds more impressive. Dieter is Count of Madgeburg, correct? I'll include land titles in the listing where known.

:egypt:

FactionHeir

12-11-2007, 23:30

I don't know if the console can remove it, but I just make an additional save to goof off with and only fight my battle on the 'real' save. I have random snatches of time throughout the day to mess around with, so I've scouted and fought a lot of the interesting battles since I joined. Elberhard's fight is a good one, by the way. I had a few more casualties than Econ in that one (Too aggressive with my cavalry! As usual. :laugh4: ), but the terrain made it much clearer why the AI's 3x gold units got themselves into such morale trouble.

I wouldn't have fought the one FH got into, but I'm going to give it a try later anyway. The first stack doesn't look too bad, but the second will murder me. Maybe I'll turn the timer back on and wait for the tie. :beam:

:egypt:

Console could remove it, but since its an anti trait to other traits, each time you would normally get it to show up, it actually reduces its anti traits first.

I think this used to be a problem mainly before my chancellorship, where people still set-up the battles in the way of you loading up the save and being on the pre-battle screen. Now that we have players choose the angle of attack or whether to attack, this shouldn't be a problem anymore (and you can probably tell who did it because that stack's info will be highlighted and quite possibly your avatar standing next to it)

As for my battle, I was the attacker, so timer running out means you lose :tongue2:

Ferret

12-11-2007, 23:39

yes Dieter is Count of Madgeburg, which is why he has been sitting in it the past 50 years. :clown:

econ21

12-11-2007, 23:49

Mini-Econ's fought his battle. It was brutal.

https://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1866/palermo0lh9.jpg (https://imageshack.us)

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/kotr1338-8.zip

Northnovas

12-12-2007, 02:37

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/kotrBern.zip

Try at your own risk :grin2:

I did it twice, I put the timer on but it wasn't even a factor. No missile units to exchange fire was a handicap. So I charged at them in both plays using two different strategies and was soundly routed without the enemy reinforcements being a factor. I didn't have the patience to wait and be fired upon.

FH you truly have the mastery of the game in battle play and script.

Ramses II CP

12-12-2007, 03:31

I was able to 'trick' the first stack into engaging in a great big huddled mass after I swept their cannons, but I still lost almost half my men and Ruppel ate an arrow. I didn't go after the second stack without a general. Might try it again later, even if it's gamey. :laugh4:

Going to try out Palermo too. Should be interesting. :2thumbsup:

:egypt:

AussieGiant

12-12-2007, 09:26

Is it just me or are people starting to bend the rules?

_Tristan_

12-12-2007, 09:37

One question : If Tincow manages to recruit a general for me next turn, will I be able to take part in the Diet ? Or not ?

OverKnight

12-12-2007, 09:42

You will have a character in 1340. Even if you didn't, players without avatars can still participate in the Diet. They are "nameless Electors" and are able to propose and second legislation and vote. Granted they will have less influence than those who have avatars with titles, but you will be able to participate.

_Tristan_

12-12-2007, 09:45

Thanks OK...

I'll eagerly wait for my avatar before making any statements in the Diet (would like to play him according his (surely few) traits

Zim

12-12-2007, 10:06

Is it just me or are people starting to bend the rules?

Well, the inappropriately using other's characters to "recon" enemy forces is something that could have been done a long time ago, months as pk (I think?) pointed out, and my turning the timer off was a pretty specific situation with permission from someone running the game, so I'd say "not neccessarily". :yes:

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 10:10

AG might have meant the fact that people are playing the save and reporting "spoilers". I think there was a "gentleman's agreement" that people would keep it quiet if they checked stuff out like that. Or at least put it in spoiler tags.

Of course AG could much better explain what rules he thought we were bending than I could. :clown:

Zim

12-12-2007, 10:12

Ah, I had thought his question had some relation to his earlier comment about playing without the timer on, and then all this stuff about people giving points towards hesitant attacker traits by "reconning" and saving the game.

My mistake. :sweatdrop:

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 10:15

My mistake. :sweatdrop:

Maybe not.

Do not assume that I can somehow read AG's mind. I was just guessing. :laugh4:

Zim

12-12-2007, 10:15

Maybe not.

Do not assume that I can somehow read AG's mind. I was just guessing. :laugh4:

Wait, you can't read minds? I thought everyone could. :clown:

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 10:17

Wait, you can't read minds? I thought everyone could. :clown:

Sadly, no...

~:mecry:

econ21

12-12-2007, 10:36

I've updated Elberhard's record of the history of the provinces during the cataclysm in the IMS:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1712601&postcount=2

After my Ragusa/Zagreb gaff in the House of Austria, please can any corrections be out of character?

I am not very happy about the "secret" heirs to Austria and Bavaria. Unless the names of the heirs are deposited with a third party (not the heir) somewhere, it just amounts to leaving the succession open and could cause problems in future. I am thinking 1066 and all that, with both William and Harold thinking they were Edward's heir. Maybe TC and AG could PM me the names in spoiler tags and I won't read the spoiler until their avatars die?

Warluster: who is the heir to Swabia? BTW, I am taking Antwerp off the list of Swabia territories in the House of Swabia first post. It has not been allocated by the Kaiser yet and Ignoramus suggested the idea of making it Eue's dowry, which is a cool idea. (He's hoping she will marry Hapsburg, who historically received Antwerp as a dowry, but no promises.)

EDIT: I've also updated the Counts and provinces on the playlist.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 10:54

After my Ragusa/Zagreb gaff in the House of Austria, please can any corrections be out of character?

Brutal IC pouncing on OOC mistakes seems like part of the game. We got a ton of millage off of Siegfried giving a Sicilian Sardinia to the Bavarians.

I've learned the hard way to spell and grammar check my IC posts before I put em up, for fear of getting IC eviscerated. The "preview post" function has saved me plenty of times and I highly recommend it's use.

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 10:59

I think AG did mean playing other people's battles, but I don't think it is an issue if the battle has already been fought and uploaded before it is attempted by others.

AussieGiant

12-12-2007, 11:08

OK guy's sorry I wasn't more specific.

I am certainly not talking about Zim's authorised use of taking the timer off.

What I am absolutely unreasonable about is ANYONE using any character to recon a fight before it happens.

It's a gentlemen agreement but you fight these battles ONCE and you don't go scouting with any units before a battle by engaging said army with any unit. That in my view is total cheese!!

Using spy's and other characters to see the army composition is fine, but any use of the tactical battle map before the battle is total BS.

And I'm not apologising for this tone.

You gain situation awareness, lay of the land and a whole host of advantages by doing this and it's completely unnecessary. If you are that concern about one of these armies then don't fight it and that is how it should be.

This is not aimed at anyone but a general statement.

and yes...if you are going to play on with the save...which you really shouldn't do, then for godsake don't tell anyone.

Why anyone would want to spoil the game for themselves is beyond my understanding...

deguerra

12-12-2007, 11:53

ahem. Ludwig will not be best pleased if Antwerp is made part of any dowry, unless he gets both it and Eue. Which of course he is open for. But I will add more IC

econ21

12-12-2007, 11:57

ahem. Ludwig will not be best pleased if Antwerp is made part of any dowry, unless he gets both it and Eue. Which of course he is open for. But I will add more IC

:inquisitive: Ludwig is Count of Bruges, not Antwerp, no?

Please keep the dowry idea OOC only. Eue's only 12, IIRC, so it's a way off and there has been no IC discussion of it.

Zim

12-12-2007, 11:58

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 12:03

I don't think we need to make this game that historical as to have Antwerp given to Austria. Just give something else on the eastern border.
Afterall we haven't been keeping to history otherwise either, and it would make the house lines quite odd to have an Autrian territory this far west and not connected to another Austrian region.

deguerra

12-12-2007, 12:08

:laugh4: I kid only about the dowry, and yes Ludwig is Count only of Bruges, but considers Antwerp as of pivotal importance to Swabia, to Flanders and to his dead friend Jan.

econ21

12-12-2007, 12:21

If an Austrian noble(which Maximilian was going to be last time I heard) received a city so far from the House as part of a dowry, what would it's status be? An addition to the Austrian Duchy, Imperial Demesne run by Maximilian, some kind of odd quasi-independent city?

If I went through with the plan - which I am not committed to - I was just thinking of making it Austrian.

I was originally keen on a strict North, East, South, West division of Houses. But now that they have such a strong identity, I am rather attracted to Cecil's idea of making the Reich more messy.

There is a practical issue of how Antwerp could be defended by Austria and of course the Swabian negative reaction but these are things that can be resolved in IC. Indeed, I suppose the attraction of making the Reich more messy is that it will raise more problems and issues IC, making the game more interesting.

deguerra

12-12-2007, 12:24

while i still oppose this heavily IC, i agree fully OOC. In fact, I would still encourage more entities outside the main houses. but we shall have to see :D

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 12:24

Would also make life more difficult for the (partial) chancellor :tongue2:

Zim

12-12-2007, 12:27

That would be interesting, Econ :yes: , although as a Swabian and a citizen of the town saved from the vile French by Jan von der Pfalz, Andreas would probably be one of those people who would dislike the idea . Of course, he might be too busy just trying to survive in Outremer to care much. :clown:

I was rereading the last page or so and saw this post by OK. I'm curious about something. How does the influence system work for voting. For example, Andreas has 2 influence through stats (over 15 total, over 6 in one). Does this mean his vote is weighted double over someone with one influence? What would this mean for someone with 0 influence (like Jan would be if he hadn't been Count of Antwerp), or a "nameless elector" players?

Now that the Diet is coming up I'd like to figure these things out. :yes:

You will have a character in 1340. Even if you didn't, players without avatars can still participate in the Diet. They are "nameless Electors" and are able to propose and second legislation and vote. Granted they will have less influence than those who have avatars with titles, but you will be able to participate.

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 12:30

Everyone has 1 base vote (except for the emperor) that is not shown on the playtable.
The playtable (except for the emperor) shows only the numerical point bonus you get for casting your vote.

So say you vote for a certain piece of legislation and you got +2 from stats and +1 from being Count. That means +3 total. As you are also an elector, your vote counts as 4.

The emperor's influence equals his authority rating. Elberhard has 1. As emperor, he is no longer an elector, so gets no additional bonus. So his overall vote counts as 1.

deguerra

12-12-2007, 12:33

making him effectively less influential than pretty much everyone? shouldn't there be some sort of emperor bonus?

Zim

12-12-2007, 12:35

:yes: Ok, that makes sense. I was wondering what the influence system meant for 0 influence people. I'm glad to see they still get a vote.

deguerra, I think it's set up to represent that many Emperors had relatively little power to push through their agenda, while others were very powerful. Since there's no cap on the Emperor's influence, he can have anywhere from 1-10. Elberhard just has the disadvantage of some influence reducing traits (including lewd, I believe).

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 12:36

Well, they do unless they are emperor.
If Elberhard gains another trait (or advances a current one) that reduces authority, he would effectively have no vote at the diet. Well, he could still vote, but it would be symbolic only and he would be laughed at.

OverKnight

12-12-2007, 12:55

Looking back at previous Kaisers, they usually benefit from the influence system. Heinrich maxed out at 5 authority, Henry at 10 (!), Jobst at 4 and Siegfried at 9. Elberhard is the only Kaiser who's influence has actually fallen over time.

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 13:07

I'd relate this to several factors:
- Initially I had been too lenient with giving authority and the chances were slightly lowered over time. It is still possible to get 10 within a reasonable amount of turns, but not as easy as before
- Elberhard has always struggled with Feck, which reduces authority by 3 and is an antitrait to some authority raising traits
- (biggest factor) There has been little diplomacy/assassination/spying during Elberhard's reign

econ21

12-12-2007, 13:57

If Elberhard gains another trait (or advances a current one) that reduces authority, he would effectively have no vote at the diet.

He'll have one vote - his authority gives him bonus votes.

Initially I had been too lenient with giving authority and the chances were slightly lowered over time. It is still possible to get 10 within a reasonable amount of turns, but not as easy as before

:inquisitive: Do you mean you had been more lenient than the vanilla game but aren't now? Or do you mean you are tighter than the vanilla game? If the latter, how does kotorfix differ from the vanilla game in assigning authority?

- (biggest factor) There has been little diplomacy/assassination/spying during Elberhard's reign

Assassination and spying seem odd things to give you authority. Both are supposed to be covert and so are not obvious ways of increasing your standing. And assassinations are something a chivalrous King would wish to engage in. (I know this a criticism of the base game rather than kotorfix changes.)

Elberhard's low authority is fine given the history of the cataclysm, but the more I learn of how authority is gained, the less I like it. It would seem better to tie it to losses or acquisitions of the Reich's provinces, plus some personal traits (either bad ones like feck or good ones from battles etc).

TinCow

12-12-2007, 14:28

YIKES! I was just wondering why Warmaster Horus hadn't fought his battle yet and I realized that I completely left it out of the battle list. :oops:

Friedrich Karolinger (Warmaster Horus):
Your army stands ready to attack the Byzantine forces guarding Venice. It will be a difficult fight. You cannot use a night attack and must therefore defeat two armies defending a bridge.

econ21

12-12-2007, 14:46

You cannot use a night attack and must therefore defeat two armies defending a bridge.

:jawdrop:

Two armies AND a bridge?! Warmaster Horus: you may want to pass on that and wait for the start of normal play next turn.

I confess discretion rather than valour was one reason Elberhard rode to help Austria not Bavaria.

TinCow

12-12-2007, 14:48

To be fair, he has a VERY powerful army and the Byzantine armies are not upgraded.

Northnovas

12-12-2007, 14:52

WH"Damn the torpedos, Full speed ahead!":whip:

Warmaster Horus

12-12-2007, 15:19

"Damn the torpedos, Full speed ahead!"

My thoughts exactly. :laugh4:

Taking the save, and I'll tell you all about it later :smash:

Edit: Okay, logging off, and am fighting the battle.

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 16:05

He'll have one vote - his authority gives him bonus votes.

Not quite. So far, the emperor's vote has always been equal to his authority without +1 I believe. We also clarified a few months back that the emperor is not an elector. As only electors receive +1 base, the emperor does not get this unless I missed something.

:inquisitive: Do you mean you had been more lenient than the vanilla game but aren't now? Or do you mean you are tighter than the vanilla game? If the latter, how does kotorfix differ from the vanilla game in assigning authority?

Both actually. It used to be more lenient than vanilla somewhere in the second or third version and now is about equal to it (maybe a tiny bit stricter). However, the traits that give/remove authority have been increased slightly on the other hand, so that balances out.

Assassination and spying seem odd things to give you authority. Both are supposed to be covert and so are not obvious ways of increasing your standing. And assassinations are something a chivalrous King would wish to engage in. (I know this a criticism of the base game rather than kotorfix changes.)

See it this way: People might not know you are involved directly in spying/assassination, but someone is giving you that title "the Killer/the Watcher", right? So while you can hide clear facts that you were the conspirator, there are rumors and pointers that suggest they were ordered by you. So who would really dare oppose you openly if they know you make use of agents rather generously and accidents happen? :grin2:

Elberhard's low authority is fine given the history of the cataclysm, but the more I learn of how authority is gained, the less I like it. It would seem better to tie it to losses or acquisitions of the Reich's provinces, plus some personal traits (either bad ones like feck or good ones from battles etc).

I would like that if it were possible. You cannot check for both factionleader and number of regions in the same trigger. Sounds silly, but its true. Of course you could work around this and give everyone the trait and then remove it off those who are not leader, but there's a lot of other problems with that (such as the problem with not being able to compare region count of a previous turn to this turn, so the system would break down after a while)

On a sidenote, the PoliticallyStrong/PoliticallyWeak and FactionKiller/FathersLegacy traits sadly don't work and cannot be fixed because a certain condition (LeaderDestroyedFaction and FactionDestroyed) don't work and are part of the hardcode. Those would add a lot of flair (the former for successful/failed diplomacy the latter for destroying factions and being the son of such a father)

You'll be happy to learn though that today I managed to fix up the AdoredByPope and PopesEnforcer traits without having to include the descr_missions file in the fix (although that would be useful for other reasons)

Cecil XIX

12-12-2007, 16:26

Elberhard's low authority is fine given the history of the cataclysm, but the more I learn of how authority is gained, the less I like it. It would seem better to tie it to losses or acquisitions of the Reich's provinces, plus some personal traits (either bad ones like feck or good ones from battles etc).

Indeed, I've found it odd that "Legendary Commander" gives no authority bonus.

Ramses II CP

12-12-2007, 16:35

Since I'm the one who mentioned scouting and such, let me be clear that I'm not scouting my own battles (In fact if you look at the ones I've fought since I came in there are 2 sieges and a bridge battle where scouting would be pointless, and 2 field battles, one of which I fought from the bottom of a hill because I didn't know the terrain :laugh4: ). Not offended, not taking it as AG poking me specifically, or anything, just putting the information out there.

I read a lot about KotR before I started and followed the early years of the Cataclysm, so I had a decent idea how things worked before I jumped in, and even so I didn't expect to be a character of any importance or fighting battles every turn. There were plenty of things that took me by surprise still. I told FH this initially, and I'll tell everyone; don't be afraid to pm me advice or correct me if I'm screwing something up. I'm not the type to have ego tied up in this game so it's all entertainment.

:egypt:

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 16:43

Indeed, I've found it odd that "Legendary Commander" gives no authority bonus.

Personal preference.
Why should it give authority? You can be the greatest general and have no political influence whatsoever and can be stripped of command by the next higher noble.

Stuperman

12-12-2007, 16:53

Personal preference.
Why should it give authority? You can be the greatest general and have no political influence whatsoever and can be stripped of command by the next higher noble.

I thik that a "Legendary Commander" would/should have some influance bonous, name recognition alone should garner some influance (Hannibal In Antiochius III's court) and knowing fullwell that fighting a man known as a Legendary Commander will probably end in defeat should add to his influance.

AussieGiant

12-12-2007, 16:53

Stuperman

12-12-2007, 17:00

so, are all the re-conqured settlements automatically back in thier original Dutchies?

AussieGiant

12-12-2007, 17:08

Hi Stups,

We will have to work that all out IC in the Diet.

At the moment we have the legacy system which FH has mentioned. Once a province is conquered it must then be voted in using a 2/3 majority and then it's Imperial. Then it must be given to the various Houses by the Kaiser...which mind you is one of the MOST powerful relationship aspects of the game.

The Kaiser can "mess" things up by blurring the allocation lines this time around if he is so inclined.

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 17:11

For provinces already incorporated they automatically return to the house when captured by any HRE unit.

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 17:12

I thik that a "Legendary Commander" would/should have some influance bonous, name recognition alone should garner some influance (Hannibal In Antiochius III's court) and knowing fullwell that fighting a man known as a Legendary Commander will probably end in defeat should add to his influance.

Which is why it gives another command star (and that gives influence bonus in the diet as per stat)
As for reducing enemy morale. I wish there was a way of doing this without requiring that general to pick up dread for it.

AussieGiant

12-12-2007, 17:14

For provinces already incorporated they automatically return to the house when captured by any HRE unit.

Christ....I need a permanent lawyer in this game :wall:

econ21

12-12-2007, 18:34

For provinces already incorporated they automatically return to the house when captured by any HRE unit.

Well, that's more a pre-cataclysm convention than a rule. And it makes sense in a non-cataclysm context when only a settlement might be lost only very rarely.

In the context of the cataclysm, I had hoped to make recaptured settlements up for grabs, to make things more interesting politically post-cataclysm.

The Charter itself is rather ambiguous on the subject, as losing a settlement was frankly not something I had considered at the start of the PBM!

I suppose by the rules, the interpretation could be decided by the Council (the four Dukes) that is called when rules disputes directly concern the Kaiser's power. However, I rather suspect they would all prefer the conservative interpretation that they can keep what was once theirs. I guess we will play it that way unless I hear from two of them that they want the Kaiser to allocate recaptured settlements. (One can live in hope ... :tumbleweed: )

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 18:55

Third, Emperors allocate newly captured provinces to the Ducal Houses. When a province is captured, it comes under the direct control of the Emperor, who can control them in the same manner that the Dukes and the Counts can control their own lands. The Emperor may allocate any of his lands to any of the Ducal Houses. Once allocated, they cannot ever be returned to the Emperor. House provinces where are re-taken after being occupied by an enemy do not count as being “captured.”

Charter Amendment 10.2:
(a) No settlement will be captured without an Edict authorising its acquisition in advance.
(b) Captured settlements will be abandoned or given away unless, at the next Diet session, a Charter Amendment incorporates them formally as part of the Reich.
(c) The 33 existing provinces of the Reich are exempt from (a) and (b).
(d) This amendment overrides the constitutional right of Household Armies to conquer one neighbouring province.

I think the Charter is actually quite clear on this. It would also mean that Nuremburg cannot be Imperial.

TinCow

12-12-2007, 19:11

The first thing you quoted is the FAQ I wrote, not the Charter. It is for guidance only and is not legally binding. It specifically states that in italics at the top.

Stuperman

12-12-2007, 19:12

Well, part of me is glad that all previous settlements are returned to thier respective houses, but there could be some really interesting politics assosiated with re-distrobuting them. (imaginary: "Loyal Franconians I do bestow on you Naples, good luck defending it!)

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 19:14

Ugh, I'm going to get killed by arguing with a lawyer, but here goes:

If anything in these paragraphs conflicts with one of the Game Rules, the Rule takes precedent.

Since there is nothing in the rules conflicting this information, the FAQ content in this particular case would be in effect and binding until the rules (i.e. charter) are amended.

econ21

12-12-2007, 19:20

I think the Charter is actually quite clear on this. It would also mean that Nuremburg cannot be Imperial.

Your first quote is not from the Charter - it is from TinCow's preamble that is to provide a "simple understanding" of the rules. In this particular case, I think the preamble goes quite a bit further than what I can find in the rules proper.

Your second quote does not seem to bear on the issue.

As I said, I am not going to push this unless two Dukes back me up. Returning everything to it's House makes my role IC much easier. The only province Elberhard would really blanche at returning to its owner is poor Stettin.

On another subject, a battle report for Palermo is up. I can start to see Zim's point about the timer when it comes to siege assaults. Mini-Econ was really fighting against the clock - if you look at the last screenshot, there is no shaded area on the hourglass at all. However, we struggled to find an in-character rationalisation of why there was a need to hurry. (The best we could come up with was possible outside reinforcements and unrest within the city).

I still think we should keep the timer, but agree it can seem gamey in some situations.

BTW: the battle reports thread is getting rather full of screenshots, so takes a while to load. Please split your reports up into multiple posts if you are going to post a lot of screenshots. That way we will fill up the 30 posts/page quota without readers having to load over a hundred images. The WotS battle reports thread became unreadable to people with slow connections because of this problem.

TinCow

12-12-2007, 19:21

Since there is nothing in the rules conflicting this information, the FAQ content in this particular case would be in effect and binding until the rules (i.e. charter) are amended.

Possibly, but it's a pointless argument under the circumstances. Lothar wants to give Nuremburg to Elberhard until Rome is recaptured. If he needs to, he will point to the following rule language and say that this authorizes it:

4.4 Dukes can then grant a settlement to a player, making him Count of that settlement. The settlements remain nominally within the relevant Duchy.

If you argue against that, he will say that the rules are unclear and ask for the Kaiser to mediate. Since the situation directly involves the Kaiser, it will then turn to the four Dukes to decide. Lothar knows that Arnold will support his decision, thus meaning that at worst it is an even split. In the event of a tie, the Kaiser's vote is the deciding factor. Thus, there is no point in arguing that Lothar can't give away Nuremburg, because even if you are right he will do it anyway.

econ21

12-12-2007, 19:22

Since there is nothing in the rules conflicting this information, the FAQ content in this particular case would be in effect and binding until the rules (i.e. charter) are amended.

I don't think TC intended to "legislate" with the FAQ. If he thought he was creating new rules, I suspect he would have proposed a CA. (He has proposed "tidying up" CAs before for more minor things.)

FactionHeir

12-12-2007, 19:38

Alright, I'm going to argue this for the point of arguing :clown:

Possibly, but it's a pointless argument under the circumstances. Lothar wants to give Nuremburg to Elberhard until Rome is recaptured. If he needs to, he will point to the following rule language and say that this authorizes it:

4.4 Dukes can then grant a settlement to a player, making him Count of that settlement. The settlements remain nominally within the relevant Duchy.

Except that Emperors cannot be made counts, so this wouldn't be possible.

Anyway, need to be off to a charity event now.

TinCow

12-12-2007, 19:45

True, they cannot be made Counts, but it says that Dukes can distribute provinces to other players. It does not limit it to "Electors" or even members of their own House. The Emperor is a player and thus qualifies, except that he cannot become Count. So, the question is whether the settlement can still be granted to the Emperor even though he cannot gain the title of Count. The rules say nothing about this, so it is unclear and goes to the Kaiser for resolution with the eventual predictable result.

For the record, it is totally impossible for the FAQ to be considered law. It was never voted on by the Diet, it was simply written up by me and pasted at the beginning because I thought a 'plain English' explanation was needed given the complexity of the rules. Since it was never voted on, it cannot be law in any manner, regardless of what it says. I tried to show this with my 'pre-amble' but apparently even that language was not clear enough.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 20:04

Time for me to weigh in as "Lieutenant Deputy Lord of Charter Interpretation".

Kaiser authority "adds" to the one vote everyone gets. Look at old voting records and you'll see Henry got 11 "votes" on things.

I agree with TC's interpretation of the Nuremburg issue. The Charter is unclear about Dukes giving up their provinces so it's a "rules dispute". The Kaiser would rule on it unless someone declares that it involves the Ducal Council due to it being a rule that involves the Kaiser. Then they would meet and Lothar and Arnold would likely vote in favor of it. The Kaiser would then break the tie. Since we effectively have 3 out of 5 of the votes locked up, there is little reason to go through with the long drawn out process unless people want to do it for IC political reasons.

Going through the old OOC threads, playing the save for fun is allowed but some people don't want to know the results. At the very least, discuss them in spoilers so those of us who like surprises can ignore them. Same goes for "heir hunting".

The faq is just helpful and not to be taken as legally binding. If it was, a whole lot of legal disputes may have gone differently because the faq lays things out much more clearly than the charter. Ironically I try not to read the faq at all when I am researching the Charter for a legal dispute. I don't want the faq coloring my legal argument.

deguerra

12-12-2007, 21:20

love this discussion, and wish it could be more IC. we need a court. i just wish I had time to flesh that idea out before the Diet. We shall have to see

GeneralHankerchief

12-12-2007, 21:25

love this discussion, and wish it could be more IC. we need a court. i just wish I had time to flesh that idea out before the Diet. We shall have to see

Nooooooo, please.

Our last few diets have been plagued with Charter interpretation to a ridiculous extent. Let's get all the legal crap out of the way now so that we can focus on playing the game in 1340.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 21:25

love this discussion, and wish it could be more IC. we need a court. i just wish I had time to flesh that idea out before the Diet. We shall have to see

You might change your mind when you see ideas like this debated and dragged out before the Diet.

:laugh4:

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 21:28

Nooooooo, please.

Our last few diets have been plagued with Charter interpretation to a ridiculous extent. Let's get all the legal crap out of the way now so that we can focus on playing the game in 1340.

Last few!?!

:laugh4:

Look through the old Diet threads and you'll see that this has been pretty constant.

The first Diet had Max Mandorf agonizing over whether the Kaiser truly had the right to distribute territory. It was a legal nitpick on par with "it depends what the definition of is is."

Or when Kaiser Heinrich tried to persuade a generic elector that it was wrong to talk about Chancellor elections before the Diet. (because the Kaiser wanted to be Chancellor again...)

Or the classic fight between Dietrich von Saxony and Kaiser Heinrich over whether you can refuse to build something in the build queue.

GeneralHankerchief

12-12-2007, 21:31

Having actually lived through the Diet threads, let me say that the whole Mandorf/territory thing was an outlier. It didn't dominate debate like issues in recent ones did, and you'll notice after that the main topics were where to expand next, what to do about the Pope, whether or not to go on Crusade, etc.

Once all parts of the Empire got established is when we started squabbling about what is is.

I blame FactionHeir. :tongue:

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 21:33

I blame FactionHeir. :tongue:

Ironically, Hans participated in relatively little legal debate. ^_^

GeneralHankerchief

12-12-2007, 21:34

I'm talking about FH's penchant for excellence in the field of... excellence as far as M2TW goes.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 21:36

I'm talking about FH's penchant for excellence in the field of... excellence as far as M2TW goes.

So Hans caused our legal squabbling by his very presence? Or was it because he was one of the first chancellors to really have his options limited in terms of expansion?

While you ponder that philosophical question, I'll go dig up some links to old Diet debates.

Anything to keep me from working on my end of semester stuff...

GeneralHankerchief

12-12-2007, 21:42

No.

I'm talking about him being so freakin' efficient at being Chancellor.

If he never took the position it probably would have taken us twice as long to get where we got and given us more time to squabble over real issues.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 21:43

I'm talking about him being so freakin' efficient at being Chancellor.

Yeah, he is like that isn't he?

Ok, then it is settled. The official reason for there being so much legal squabbling in the Diet is FH!

:clown:

TinCow

12-12-2007, 21:49

The first Diet had Max Mandorf agonizing over whether the Kaiser truly had the right to distribute territory. It was a legal nitpick on par with "it depends what the definition of is is."

History has vindicated Mandorf. I quote the great man himself:

Furthermore, I would be concerned about such land powers being abused by future Kaisers who do not have the proven wisdom of Heinrich. By your interpretation of the laws, if the House of Swabia were to be attacked by the French and lose control of Staufen, the Kaiser could subsequently deliver it to Austria upon its recapture, even though this would be a blatant violation of Swabia's sovereignty over its own lands. While I know that the noble Heinrich would never do such a thing, we cannot trust that we will not some day find ourselves bending knee to a madman who would! We must protect our rights to our own lands now, lest our leniency be taken advantage of later.

I now note that Elberhard wishes he could do exactly that.

Regarding the legal nitpicking, though, I think there are two kinds of ways to do it and they are very, very different. The first way is to use the law to manipulate the political process for personal (avatar) gain. This has been done often, and no more superbly than by Kaiser Heinrich to declare war against the Papacy. This is a good kind of legal manipulation and it should be encouraged because it is, in essence, smart politicking. The second kind of legal manipulation is the discussion of the rules without any real IC purpose. This is usually pointless, annoys people, and contributes little to the entertainment factor of the game. As a general guideline, I would say that if your avatar has no real reason to be discussing the rules, it should not be done.

vpmd

12-12-2007, 21:50

I love this idea. I would like to join the game, if possible, in the House of Bavaria, although I really have no previous experience with anything of the sort.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 21:54

Hi Vpmd!

TC: It is sometimes difficult to tell the difference between the 1st and 2nd kind of "legal nitpick". Sometimes bringing up inane tiny details of an opponents legislation, in order to annoy him, is political strategy by itself. :2thumbsup:

GeneralHankerchief

12-12-2007, 22:00

Yeah, but it's annoying IC and OOC, especially if done repeatedly.

Welcome vpmd! ~:wave: You picked a very good House.

Northnovas

12-12-2007, 22:13

Yeah, but it's annoying IC and OOC, especially if done repeatedly.

Welcome vpmd! ~:wave: You picked a very good House.

I strongly concur on both points.

TinCow

12-12-2007, 22:16

Sometimes bringing up inane tiny details of an opponents legislation, in order to annoy him, is political strategy by itself. :2thumbsup:

I personally think that intentionally annoying people is not a good way to play your character. If you have no other reason for writing something other than to cause someone else irritation, you are making the game less enjoyable.

Welcome vpmd!

Let me make sure I've got this right. The following people need avatars for next turn:
FLYdude
Tristan de Castelreng
vpmd

Am I missing anyone?

vpmd

12-12-2007, 22:22

I personally think that intentionally annoying people is not a good way to play your character. If you have no other reason for writing something other than to cause someone else irritation, you are making the game less enjoyable.

Welcome vpmd!

Let me make sure I've got this right. The following people need avatars for next turn:
FLYdude
Tristan de Castelreng
vpmd

Am I missing anyone?

Since we're on that subject, actually, I'd like to request a diplomat avatar. I'm not sure I'll always be able to fight the battles within 48 hours, so that seems best.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 22:28

Yeah, but it's annoying IC and OOC, especially if done repeatedly.

I personally think that intentionally annoying people is not a good way to play your character. If you have no other reason for writing something other than to cause someone else irritation, you are making the game less enjoyable.

It's still part of the game and has been used by just about every player here at one time or another.

Every part of the Charter is written in a way where it is possible to find loopholes. Announcing or ignoring those loopholes is political strategy in itself. If your avatar likes another avatar, you ignore the loopholes in his legislation or send him a private letter. If your avatar does not like an avatar, you brutally announce the legal shortcomings of his legislation in plain view of the Diet in order to embarrass him and politically alienate him.

So, I'm all for both kinds of "legal disputes" and it is up to other characters to provide the consequences. OOC legislating of what we can and can not say in the Diet will not lead us down anywhere I want to go. Make real IC consequences for behavior you don't like. Do not tell me OOC what I can or can not say in the Diet. :no:

Now on a lighter note, I will provide you all with my annotated list of events in the famous Edict 1.13 dispute. With links! Anytime I'm sad or bored, or both, I just have to pull up the 1st Diet thread for some entertainment. :2thumbsup:

Edict 1.13 is proposed. It dictates that Bern be captured and given to Bavaria. https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1379408&postcount=12

First rebuttal: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1379451&postcount=14

First show of support: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1379582&postcount=17

And the legal nitpicking begins: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1379852&postcount=26

Counter-nitpick. This post contains one of my favorite lines in all of KotR: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1380233&postcount=28

By the way, my favorite quote in that post is, "Please note the most crucial of words in the legislations. The Kaiser CAN allocate settlements. This does not mean he must nor that he always has the ability." Just priceless...

More rebuttals: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1380294&postcount=29

In an attempt to both defend his power, and placate the Dukes, Kaiser Heinrich proposes a CA that would mandate that every Kaiser take an oath regarding territory allocation fairness: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1380400&postcount=30

Debate over the new CA: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1380770&postcount=32

Mandorf realizes the pandora's box he opened and asks the Kaiser to reconsider the CA: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1381284&postcount=47

More debate: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1381309&postcount=49

More fears over the CA: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1381333&postcount=50

The CA is withdrawn: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1381487&postcount=51

More support for 1.13: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1382479&postcount=70

More fears over 1.13: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1382608&postcount=74

Edict 1.13 is finally amended and the legal dispute is over: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1382849&postcount=78

This "outlier" took 3 days in real life, spanned 3 pages in the Diet thread, almost spawned a reactive CA, and involved many of the players of the game at that time.

The idea that legal disputes in the Diet are somehow new, is contradicted by this Massive dispute that happened in the very beginning of the game.

I love the first Diet thread and I can see why it's one of the most read threads in the Throne Room.:2thumbsup:

Warluster

12-12-2007, 22:30

Welcome vpmd!

econ21: Do I have to pick a heir any time soon? I don't really want to set anything in stone (i.e Still deciding)
Edit: Whoa! THats one massive post beforehand!

TinCow

12-12-2007, 22:39

By the way, my favorite quote in that post is, "Please note the most crucial of words in the legislations. The Kaiser CAN allocate settlements. This does not mean he must nor that he always has the ability." Just priceless...

I very much apologize to anyone who thinks that is an absurdist statement. One unfortunate side-effect to be a lawyer is that you cannot turn it off. It permeates your entire life, whether you want it to or not. In legal practice, the use of words like "must" and "should" or "can" makes an enormous difference. I have a proofreading checksheet next to my desk that I use to go over all judicial decisions I write before I submit them as completed. One of them literally reads:

Remands - Always use "must" never "should"

I recognize, however, that this is one of the things that makes people shake their heads and hate lawyers. I sincerely apologize for everything I do like this. I swear it's just the way my brain works now. I promise I pay for it, though. My wife is also a lawyer. You can imagine the arguments... :wall:

deguerra

12-12-2007, 22:46

glad I finally have people discussing after mentioning this for the third time. I agree fully that I don't the entire diet clogged up with legal issues and I don't want people debating too much legal stuff that doesnt concern their avatars...

...which is exactly why i think some sort of IC court, where only those appointed to it, or appearing before it discuss, limiting appearances to when they are justified IC, is the way to go. plus it adds another fun dimension, and gives another set of players more to do. (that being said, given the decision times in real courts, its not like the time pressure would be very large).

I feel that way we can have fun with the legal stuff, ensure it doesn't get out of hand, make sure it doens't clog up the diet, and create more positions for characters.

edit: tincow, nonsense, legal talk ftw!! :D

GeneralHankerchief

12-12-2007, 22:46

Again: Outlier. So yes, a big legal issue happened the first Diet. The Charter at that point was still unclear (Christ, I still remember having to keep track of two turns after people entered settlements and such).
Next Diet: Expand east or west?
Next Diet: What do we do about Rome?
Next Diet: Heinrich or Mandorf? Should we include Household Armies?
Next Diet (1154): Crusade? Yes? No?
Next Diet: Crusading Chancellor good or not? What to do about Heinrich?

You get the idea.

Nitpicking on minor legal issues in Diet sessions, which become less and less frequent as the game goes on, take away from the enjoyment of KotR in general. When Diet time rolls around, I want to, IC and OOC, give my view on what we should be doing for the next twenty years, beat down the opposition, and explain to the world why he is an idiot, why my position is great, and how I'll provide every Elector with legit male heirs if elected Chancellor.

What I do NOT want to do, yet still find happening every Diet session, is debate for the millionth time regarding the Outremer succession issue or debate the merits of "can" as opposed to "must." This is Medieval 2, Total War. The goal is to conquer and play the game efficiently, to focus on domestic and foreign affairs. NOT to waste three days of precious debate time with stupid, meaningless legal disputes. There's a reason why there's no such thing as Mavis Beacon Teaches Law. I played Jens Hummel to reflect this view.

As far as I'm concerned, this behavior is extremely distracting from the game as a whole. I despise logging on, reading the Diet thread, only to see more of the same legal wordmongering. It takes away from my enjoyment of the game, and I'm sure that I'm not alone in this view. And if the trend continues, especially in 1340, I may just have to resign from the game.

flyd

12-12-2007, 22:48

My wife is also a lawyer. You can imagine the arguments... :wall:

"Honey, can you take out the trash?"

"I CAN take out the trash. This does not mean that I must nor that I always have the ability."

:laugh4:

TinCow

12-12-2007, 22:55

"Honey, can you take out the trash?"

"I CAN take out the trash. This does not mean that I must nor that I always have the ability."

:laugh4:

The truly hilarious part is that we have said things exactly like that MANY times. It is not unusual for one of us to say to the other "Can you do X?" at which point the other person says "Yes." and continues to sit there for several minutes. Eventually the other person comes back, glares, and says "Will you do X?" at which point it actually gets done.

vpmd

12-12-2007, 23:09

Well, if you ever get bored of being a lawyer, you'd make a fine English teacher.

econ21

12-12-2007, 23:12

econ21: Do I have to pick a heir any time soon? I don't really want to set anything in stone (i.e Still deciding)

I think it is like a Will - you don't have to have write one, but if you don't and your time is up unexpectedly, then things could get messy.

I guess there could be an issue with publicly announcing an heir - particularly if you fear you may change your mind. However, in that case, you could pick one in secret and PM it IC to Elberhard - or any other third party - in spoiler quotes (to reflect a seal). That's what I would like the Dukes of Bavaria and Austria to do. You can always change it later and, being secret, there would be no repercussions.

Stuperman

12-12-2007, 23:28

...which is exactly why i think some sort of IC court, where only those appointed to it, or appearing before it discuss, limiting appearances to when they are justified IC, is the way to go. plus it adds another fun dimension, and gives another set of players more to do. (that being said, given the decision times in real courts, its not like the time pressure would be very large).

I feel that way we can have fun with the legal stuff, ensure it doesn't get out of hand, make sure it doens't clog up the diet, and create more positions for characters.

edit: tincow, nonsense, legal talk ftw!! :D

I had thought about some sort of "Limited scope emergency diet session" law allowing for a court type proceedings. Or that the E-diet sessions have thier scope and width defined at the start of one.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 23:33

Here is how I view KotR in a nutshell.

It is a game about trying to get your character to make other characters do things. (feudalism)

To provide the mechanical means of "making other characters do things", you need rules. Since, in real life, we have very few ways of actually making each other do anything.

Since these rules are basically the levers of power in the game, they are highly contested spaces.

Contesting these spaces IC, is in my opinion, completely legitimate and needs to be countered IC if people don't like it.

If Power is the ability to "make your dreams manifest", then these rules are the way to do it. How the rules are written, re-written, and interpreted is crucial.

Now, I think annoying "players" should be discouraged. But annoying other "characters" is completely legitimate in my view. If a player gets annoyed about something that happened to his character, he needs to remind himself that this is only a game.

If I want to have my avatar run naked throughout the Diet screaming while covered with cow dung, I can do so. It is then up to the players to figure out how their avatar will react. But telling me OOC that I can't do something in the Diet will be unproductive.

OOC, we have very few actual rules in this game and I think it should be kept that way. If we start urging people OOC to police their own IC language so that it is not "annoying", then things will get complicated and less fun. We'll basically have to all "be nice to eachother" in the game because it may have a slight chance at annoying another player.

The way to stop IC legal nitpicking is through using the levers of power to discourage and punish such behavior. People have many of these levers available to them. Lobby the Kaiser to throw the offender out of the Diet. Kill the offender's legislation. Lobby the Chancellor candidates and make sure the offender will have a "rough" time for the next 20 years. Try to pass a "legal obfuscation" CA. Appeal to the offender's patron to coerce a change in behavior. These will all work a lot better than telling people to behave a certain way on the OOC thread.

Cecil XIX

12-12-2007, 23:50

While I'm not quite as passionate as GH on this, I too worry about the effects of thinking too much about legislation. I think it's important to remember that in order for this to be exciting, people need to be able to do unpopular things. The most dramatic moments in this game have been when one person does something to cause in uproar, and the others must decide individually or in groups what the consequences will be for that person. The biggest examples of that would probably be Heinrich's war against the Papacy and Peter's march on Constantinople. I don't want the Diet to be powerless, but I think players should be given a wide berth in how they use the resources given to them, be they armies, counties, or duchies.

Privateerkev

12-12-2007, 23:51

Yay! The Tavern's back! :jumping:

GeneralHankerchief

12-12-2007, 23:53

gibsonsg91921

12-13-2007, 00:08

i agree with GH. this diet session, at least, i want to have sparks fly, and not about charters and @#$%^. actual debate about the cataclysm. a lot happened that needs to be answered for.

FactionHeir

12-13-2007, 00:10

I think with many new Bavarians, maybe they want to wait for an actual avatar (Steffen has 4 sons) for a few extra turns rather than get a general?

deguerra

12-13-2007, 00:24

come on guys, lets keep it nice. it IS a game, yes, and it SHOULD be fun, but it should be fun to everyone, without trying to limit what they can and cannot do IC.

My proposal still stands, and the more I hear the better I think it is: IF we have a court as a seperate institution to the Diet, in a seperate thread, then people who dislike all the legalisitc debate can just ignore it. It doesn't have to clog up the Diet, and on the off-chance something important is decided, that can be announced in the messenger service. On the other hand, those like PK and myself, and I assume TinCow who find some sort of pleasure in making and debating rules, can be active in that thread and institution and can get our kicks out of the game without annoying the others.

so lets all get along, ey!

gibsonsg91921

12-13-2007, 00:28

nice thoughts deguerra. that's a compromise i can accept.

econ21

12-13-2007, 00:57

It's an interesting idea, deguerra, but I think creating a court specifically for legal disputes will just encourage them. We'd end up role-playing Medieval lawyers rather than generals.

And I don't think non-legalistic minds would be able to ignore the court - law is too important to be left to the lawyers. For example, whether the Kaiser can allocate recaptured settlements is a pretty major issue.

When the issue of too many rules queries arose before, PK and I agreed that he PM me first with any genuine (OOC) rules queries. If he gets satisfaction, then we've dealt with it without bothering any one else. If he doesn't, then it goes public but at least we've probably clarified the issues so can present them straightforwardly. I think this screening process would be useful across the board, and not just for PK.

If people want to have IC legalistic arguments for political advantage that is another matter, but even then some exploratory private discussions may be useful for them. If the Diet gets sidetracked with esoteric legal arguments, you can always ignore them. I confess, I occasionally did. This is one reason I'd like people to PM me about rules queries, in case I've slept through the dispute. (For example, I recommend a detailed understanding of the Franconian succession circa 1300 as an excellent antidote to insomnia.)

We have a pretty well established mechanism for handling rules disputes. The Kaiser makes a ruling, unless it directly concerns his powers, in which case it goes to a Council. But the Diet can change virtually everything with a 2/3 vote. Most rules disputes seem to be about situations that were never envisaged when the Charter was drafted (who would have thought we would lose many provinces?), so new laws are often appropriate.

deguerra

12-13-2007, 01:09

I agree somewhat econ, but I think there are perfectly good solutions to these issues, rather than keeping things as they are. As you said, currently things usually end up in front of a council or in the diet, and that is exactly what im trying to avoid.

with regards to encouraging legal discussion: then limit it. in most Common Law jurisdictions courts can only rule on issues brought before them, and can also throw out issues they do not even consider worth debating. if we apply the first, and charge that only legitimate IC claims will even be considered, then i think the amount of debate should be manageable and bearable, especially once it gets over the initial phase.

regarding the ignoring issue: sure, but if such is decided OOC in PMs that makes it no less important. Granted, the emperor and chancellor would prbly need to keep an eye on things, but a seperate thread for such arguments would only make that easier. as for retaining the emperors power to rule, he could manage judge appointing, have vetoes or both.

edit: and the problem seems to be that some people are unable to ignore legal debate in the diet. i still think this would alleviate that somewhat. the diet is much less ignorable as a whole than a thread specific to legal stuff

flyd

12-13-2007, 01:25

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 01:45

The concept of actually creating a judiciary arm of this GAME is terrifying and something that would have to be passed by OOC and/or IC CA.

Guy's this is like watching the embryonic stages of the bloody UN, which in my view is a bad bad bad idea.

Note I used three "bads" there which I rarely do.

Having a talk shop is not what this should be about.

Keep in mind, IC we are all nobles in the medieval age and while at this point in time there were lawyers and bankers and debate was advanced and insightful it was still the Dark Ages...each of us IC is a noble skilled in the force of arms and is daily confronted with the visceral world of blood shed, violence, hunger and life.

I can hardly believe that any of us would IC be inclined to spend most of our time together debating to such an extent that it impedes our ability to actually go out into the Empire and govern effectively and with real purpose for our own gain and that of our immediate superior.

This is not Rome where peace has spread across vast tracks of land...we are fighting for our lives, and we've just had our asses handed to us by the opposition.

This Diet is going to be a massive endeavor and made increasingly so by the substantial increase in players...the level of debate is going to be at record levels.

If you waste time...then you'll do yourselves a disservice, I for one am going to stay on target and get what I want before going off on any time wasting tangents.

That's not to say Arnold will not be in full swing and enjoying himself immensely back on the grand stage of this Empire.

I'm sure this will all be rather self regulating and clear to most as to when common sense needs to prevail. The escalation and resolution of issues should be kept as is and made as swift as possible. The Kaiser rules, if there is further issues regarding him the Dukes will get involved.

The Kaiser may not have much influence but he is the Rule maker and breaker...which is yet another powerful tool.

deguerra

12-13-2007, 01:51

I do hear you AG, and I agree that I do NOT want people spending huge amounts of time debating the rules, and I especially would like to avoid it at this point in the game.

But, it may be desireable later on, and I still think we can keep it away from the game best by seperating it. I agree 100% that any such idea needs pretty much full IC and OOC support, and the last things I want is to take away from Imperial power.

the one point I have to disagree upon is that it is somehow "unrealisitic" for the time of KoTR: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskammergericht

gibsonsg91921

12-13-2007, 02:16

Yeah, I guess I really don't want rules debates at all. Econ seems to have a solid grasp of what's going on, and as the game goes on a few Charter Amendments may be necessary each session, but not for now.

Off-topic, any of you MP fans should check out the Multiplayer Tournament thread. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=96510) If you're new to it, that's ok. I have a feeling not many of us have ever played online. This is an interesting experiment and should produce some fun reads.

Zim

12-13-2007, 03:14

Hello everyone. I was wondering if there's any cut off point for ending this turn. Is it about 48 hours after the upcoming battles are posted(in this case, after Warmaster Horus' upcoming battle was finally posted half a day ago)?

I'm not in a huge hurry, just curious. I'm looking forward to the Diet and the end of the Cataclysm. :2thumbsup:

gibsonsg91921

12-13-2007, 03:28

I believe it's 48 hours. Warmaster Horus sounded like he was going to it this morning, but I'm in no rush. I'm very, very excited, however.

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 03:45

Rules are good. I agree. But we have precious little time to actually debate and change these rules, and far too much of this time is squandered on rules. Rules about rules = bad.

PK, I'm appealing to your nature here. This Diet is important. It's signalling another chapter in this game. We haven't had one for several months, and considering the gradual slowdown of the game, we may not have another one until after the New Year.

I'm asking you, OOC, from one player of the game to another, to please not focus on this legal obfuscation. It annoys far too many people. You can do it any time you want, just please - not during the Diet session.

If you disagree, then you and I have nothing more to say to each other.

Ironically, I have planned on playing a much lower key character this time around.

For me this debate has been a matter of principle. I don't plan on engaging in what I call "lawfare" but I will defend what I see as my right to do so.

I do not enjoy being told OOC what I can and can not do IC. Something you and I have gone over before.

If you do not want "lawfare", then create real IC consequences. I will probably not engage in lawfare this time around but I reserve my right to do so. Also, we have a lot of new people here and I don't want them thinking they "can't" engage in lawfare.

If my stance means you will not talk to me, I find that regrettable but I will not be coerced or emotionally blackmailed into giving up valid role-playing options.

Econ has laid out a good procedure for lawfare. If you have a legitimate IC or OOC rule question, PM Econ either IC or OOC. This allows you to have your question answered without putting the other players/characters on edge. Then, if your not satisfied with Econ's answer, or just want your avatar to !@#$ with another avatar, then let the lawfare commence.

Many people on here have said that they want things to come about in the game "organically". I see this as one of those issues that should just be dealt with in the Diet. Trying to appeal OOC for certain IC behavior starts to get near the dangerous territory of meta-gaming.

TinCow

12-13-2007, 03:49

deguerra

12-13-2007, 03:55

does WH have anyone to fight his battle for him?

gibsonsg91921

12-13-2007, 04:07

You can't use proxy battles unless you're on an extended vacation.

deguerra

12-13-2007, 04:12

ah so. so what happens if he is attacked?

Warmaster Horus

12-13-2007, 04:18

Cecil XIX

12-13-2007, 04:33

While I myself am in the anti-legal-nitpicking camp, this court idea might be worth trying. The Diet is a place to make laws, not to interpret the ones that already exist. Perhaps the best way to limit the debate is to have each house appoint one lawyer, who is instructed by his Duke which position to argue, and then its his job to write long arguments about single words from the charter. However, I don't think this should be a formal court with any direct power, which would require amending the charter. The way I'd implement this is to have the Emperor appoint the judge, who will, after a particular case is heard, give his advice on how the Emperor should rule on a dispute, and the Emperor will take that advice... if he wants. If it is the sort of dispute that involves the Council, the council should appoint the judge. This way, players who don't want to get involved in this, can appoint trusted proxies to argue for them. I stress that the charter need not be amended for this, and that the decisions of the court would be non-binding.

Having an entire court of law is a rediculous idea. Not only would it invariably draw attention from the other aspects of the game, it's completely ahistorical. The Middle Ages did not have the rule of law, because that was impossible.

This whole problems stems from the fact that we do not have the feudal system in KOTR. Counts and Dukes do not own what is given to them, as they would in real life. I understand the KOTR demo tried this approach and that it was judged as too complicated, but I think what we have now is also becoming too complicated in a different way.

deguerra

12-13-2007, 04:45

again, lets be nice. I am in no way adamant about my idea. I kind of like it, but more importantly I was hoping it would resolve some of the OOC conflicts. Apprently it has done the opposite so lets drop it.

Once again though, ahistorical it is not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskammergericht

OverKnight

12-13-2007, 04:52

I admit that like econ21 I gloss over the legalistic arguments. Anything larger than two paragraphs and my eyes start to glaze over. I usually wait for the dust to settle and then go on doing what I want anyway. :laugh4:

I joined up mainly to roleplay. Some joined up for the battles. Some joined up for the debates. I hope we can, excuse me, will, recognize this and move on. If we become bogged down in one area to long we will lose momentum and the enjoyment we get from the game, however it is derived, will lessen for everyone.

If we can isolate the extended legal arguments in one thread, I'm all for that. I don't want to see the sausage making, I just want to eat the sausage. As long as econ stays the final arbiter, let people debate all they want.

There is a precedent, we have a stories thread for those inclined to writing, and we have battle reports thread for the military historians amongst us. Neither of these is required reading to play the game, though they do add to it. So if we have a seperate Court thread I can safely skim over, with occascional rulings arising from debate that might effect small elements of game play, I'm for it.

Zim

12-13-2007, 07:15

Regardless of what happens with Warmaster Horus, I am going to move on to 1340 tomorrow. If there are not battles to be fought during the AI turn, the Diet can begin tomorrow night EST. If there are battles on the AI turn, it could take until Friday night EST.

Woohoo! 1-2 more days to go! :2thumbsup:

As for the Court thread idea, if there is to be a..reichstag, I think, it should probably be used for "lawfare" between Diets. I think the Diet should retain its role as both establishing law and discussing goals, voting for Chancelor, etc.

I don't object to the idea, but it could irritate a lot of people, who wouldn't want to be involved but would be affected by it.

Edit: I should also note, that unless it directly affects my characters or appeals to his principles, I will be sitting out any debates about law. :clown:

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 08:50

I'm afraid that if we take legal debates out of the Diet, then the Diet session will basically just devolve into "what settlement should we take this term?" We might as well just hand out multiple choice cards with settlement names on them and vote that way. The settlement that gets the most votes, becomes the next target. Kinda boring in my opinion...

I could care less what settlements we take, how black we can make the map, how many battles we win, or if we meet CA's victory conditions. If I cared about those things, I would just load up a SP HRE Grand Campaign and play by myself.

Without the Diet, Story, Tavern, House, and other threads, KotR is nothing but a savegame of the HRE in the 1330's and doing quite badly I might add. It is the character interaction and development in the other threads that give that savegame meaning.

To me, it is all of the other threads that are important. Because that is where the interaction happens. GH mentioned that he just wants us to conquer as efficiently as possible. Well, KotR is a very inefficient way to play M2TW. If you signed up, just so you can play battles or be Chancellor, then your going to be quite bored for much of the time.

I play this game in order to roleplay a character and interact with other players who are roleplaying characters. To spice things up, we have added a power structure in the game. Which means there will be power struggles to see who's agenda gets implemented. Part of that interaction with the power structure is debating the rules. Either to remake the rules to your liking, or prevent the rules from being remade in a way you don't want.

If people didn't want legal debate in this game, then they should have written the rules very clearly, and then banned the possibility of CA's. That would make the game rules static. After an initial "learning period", there would be few, if any debates. We would just play by the same exact set of rules for the entire length of the game.

I personally would not like that. I like that we can change the game to reflect different political circumstances. If a side effect of that is legal debates, then I'm willing to pay that price. Otherwise, how can we change things if we can't even debate them?

Zim

12-13-2007, 09:02

PK, speaking of the tavern, can anyone post there now that it's reopened. I think Andreas could use a drink. :clown:

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 09:07

PK, speaking of the tavern, can anyone post there now that it's reopened. I think Andreas could use a drink. :clown:

Well, it's unlocked so I don't see why not. :yes:

The tavern is open whether the Diet is in session or not. It's just busier during a Diet session because some people choose to roleplay distance.

Just read the first post for the general rules and have fun. :2thumbsup:

Zim

12-13-2007, 09:09

econ21

12-13-2007, 09:10

...speaking of the tavern, can anyone post there now that it's reopened. ...

Post away!

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 09:13

Thanks. :2thumbsup: Since noone had posted there since Econ opened it back up, I wasn't sure.

I would think that interactions at the Tavern would take place at an indterminate time, so distance wouldn't matter. In Andreas' case, i'd just pretend he is back for the Diet, ignoring the fact that he may be in a defensive battle tomorrow. :yes:

There are no real rules for rp'ing distance. Some people observe very strict rules. Some ignore distance completely.

But, since each "turn" takes 2 years, it is not totally unrealistic that nobles would sail back and forth.

During the Diet, a lot of people pretend the House/Outremer threads are "chambers" that are off of the Diet floor instead of "great halls" in between Diet sessions.

So, no real rules regarding travel. Some people just have their personal preferences.

Sending proxies is also a mechanism we use but it is sometimes frowned on if it is overused.

Zim

12-13-2007, 09:15

:bow: Thanks, Econ and PK.

P.S. PK, you haven't commented on the "mighty" empire I posted in the Britannia OOC thread yet. :clown:

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 09:18

P.S. PK, you haven't commented on the "mighty" empire I posted in the Britannia OOC thread yet. :clown:

Well I am of course amused that there is a "New Jansylvania". :2thumbsup:

Zim

12-13-2007, 09:22

Well I am of course amused that there is a "New Jansylvania". :2thumbsup:

You'll have to ask deguerra about the origins of that name and Ludwigistan. Basically, it came out of a joke between the two of us. :clown:

FactionHeir

12-13-2007, 09:47

Just move on. The battle was horrible... It's not worth it.
Their general died, but many more of our men did too, and it ended in a massive rout...

I've got some screens detailing the battle results, and you'll see it's not worth it.

Let's just use 1338-8 as the next save. Sorry for the delay.
It's 4h20 here, so have a good day!

Uhhh so you played the battle, lost many men and just quit it and ask us to use the save before you fought it? :inquisitive:
If you are losing(have lost a battle, at least post a save of you having lost it rather than suggesting to skip it!

econ21

12-13-2007, 10:05

TinCow and I have discussed the Venice situation - if Warmaster Horus does not upload a post-battle save by the deadline, TC will just autoresolve it. I suspect it will be a defeat - not unlike what WH experienced fighting it manually.

People need to be cautious in the immediate post-cataclysm phase of the game. The AI will still be there in strength - it will be topped up for 1340 - and there won't be TC's safe asterisked option available. We won't be able to use the console to spawn extra men or teleport help. Our financial situation is tight so you can't bank on instant reinforcements.

There's no shame in picking your fights - apparently ancient and medieval generals used to maneouvre for weeks or months just to get the chance to give battle on the most favourable terms (the enemy generals seldom obliging). I doubt I could have won WH's assault on Venice - two stacks AND a bridge, when either one would give me pause for thought. And, even if I could, I am sure it would have cost me most of a full stack.

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 10:15

Well I'm torn in half to have to mention this but, I'm heading to mountains for some snowboarding from Friday night to Sunday afternoon.

I guess that doesn't place me in a good position for the Diet session.

How long will it be econ?

And where is the latest save by the way?

econ21

12-13-2007, 10:28

The latest save is still the 1338-8 one, until the Venetian situation is resolved. I am sorry to spoil things but I think Arnold will have a defensive battle, so we need to liase with TinCow to see if we can have you fight it before you pop off. I'll PM you both about that now.

I suspect we will open the Diet on Friday night or Saturday. People have asked for it to be longer than usual, so we could aim to close it on Wednesday evening. Vote on Thursday and then the new Chancellor will have next weekend to get to grips with it.

If you want to PM me an opening Diet speech or something, I could post it on your behalf - given Arnold's lastest story, that might be a better option for him than jumping in a couple of days after the initial hullabaloo.

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 10:44

Hi Econ,

I just read your PM.

I'm on GMT +1 in Switzerland. I wont be heading out until about 18:00 on Friday and more than likely returning around 18:00 on Sunday.

If the Diet could be extended I would greatly appreciate that given what I would like to do this session.

Ideally I'd like to fight the battle before I leave, send you my opening speech and then get back Sunday night and do some catch up reading and wade back in.

deguerra

12-13-2007, 12:40

skiing in switzerland...you lucky bastard :thumbsup:

econ21

12-13-2007, 12:45

I actually hope that Warmaster Horus does NOT upload a post-battle save, as I have just fiddled around with the existing save to allocate most of the feudal levies. Details in the Chancellor and Governors thread - please keep discussion here.

I hope TinCow can work from this save:

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/kotr1338-9.zip

deguerra

12-13-2007, 14:22

hey econ: Ludwig considers himself a bit of a man of the people (at least the flemish) so the infantry levy will do me fine. thanks

_Tristan_

12-13-2007, 14:28

deguerra

12-13-2007, 14:32

yeh I think the general consensus is to just keep it to a minimum. technically I'm not a native speaker, but I've been in english speaking countries a while. You just an "average" frenchie tristan? In that case your english is splendid!

FactionHeir

12-13-2007, 14:45

I'm not a native English speaker either, but happen to start studying this language around 6th grade or so and actively use it since 10th grade.

I bet Tristan is secretly plotting for the return of a French monarch to the English throne :grin:

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 14:45

On a side note to the "lawfare" debate, I'd like to point out that almost all of you are natural-born English-speakers but not your servitor...

I can read and comprehend all that I read but I would have some problems discussing legal matters with you (my English Law studies are more than 10 years behind me and I wouldn't like to have to give them a brushing up...)

So rules debate are off the question for me...

Tristan, you've got an excellent command of the language especially considering it is your second or third language...therefore you will have an opinion.

Please don't hesitate to voice it my friend. We aren't lawyers and this isn't Medieval Total Legal debate. If you role play then your a noble in medieval times who is at the top end of society...get stuck in, no matter what the more legally inclined are saying...

:2thumbsup:

_Tristan_

12-13-2007, 14:48

Four years of education in English in college do that for you, deguerra

Anyway, as you said, let's just keep it to a minimum... It's Total War after all and not Total Legislation...

TinCow

12-13-2007, 19:23

I have updated the List of Battles (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1714961&postcount=297) to the best of my ability. However, for the battles from 1328 to the present, I only have the info supplied in the OOC thread and the Battle Reports thread. Any results sent to me by PM are not included because the PMs have long since been deleted.

I am missing stats on about a dozen battles and it is possible that I have completely forgotten a few battles as well. Please check over the table. If you see any battles that are completely missing, or can help fill in missing stat info, please let me know.

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 20:45

Keep legal debate to a minimum?

Since we're agreeing OOC on IC behavior, should we keep exterminating, executing, and butt-scratching to a minimum too? How much should we decide in the OOC thread instead of... oh I don't know... playing the game!

I reject the notion that we should decide in here about behavior that we should be deciding in the game. When I wanted to try to limit executions, I did not bring it up in here. I tried to use the game mechanics to change behavior. I failed of course but I had fun and I went about it the right way. And that is "in the game".

Do not keep legal debate "to a minimum". Engage in as little or much of it as you wish. If you want to sit your avatar on the floor of the Diet, and turn the whole Charter into a haiku, you can. If people want to limit debate, then do so within the game. Form a "anti-lawfare" alliance with like minded characters.

There have been "chivalrous behavior" and "dread behavior" support groups in the game and I see legal debate as something similar. But I'm getting a little tired of the attempts at "peer-pressure" that keep popping up on this thread. Keep the peer-pressure "in game". Don't use it against your colleagues out of the game. We deserve better than that. :yes:

econ21

12-13-2007, 21:00

We probably should let the issue of legal debate drop for a while. We are now arguing about whether we should be arguing about whether there is too much arguing about law. My head hurts. :dizzy2:

GeneralHankerchief

12-13-2007, 21:01

We probably should let the issue of legal debate drop for a while. We are now arguing about whether we should be arguing about whether there is too much arguing about law. My head hurts. :dizzy2:

QED

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 21:02

We are now arguing about whether we should be arguing about whether there is too much arguing about law.

I feel like we're having a "meeting" meeting...

:laugh4:

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 21:15

skiing in switzerland...you lucky bastard :thumbsup:

:beam:

and what is QED GH? (I just love all the acronyms)

Ramses II CP

12-13-2007, 21:16

Err, just briefly, on the legal disputes; Our goal should be to have fun, first and foremost, right? So I'll do what's fun for me, and you do what's fun for you, but don't be surprised if you type up a three page rebuttal to the 'definition of is' edict and Fritz just turns to the Kaiser and says 'We appear to be at an impasse. What say you Emperor?'

Which is to say, a debate requires two parties. If we have an agreed upon arbitrator then nobody can really be forced into such a debate.

Ramses goes back to typing his seventeen page Clarification of the Anti-Reunification and Byzantine Denunciation Proclamation

:egypt:

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 21:23

It certainly is pointless to try and prearrange any level of debating.

As I said before, this diet is going to be a big one, and if people want to waste their time on debating law then they are free to "knock themselves out."

If we need to get a ruling then we should call for one "earlyish" so we can keep the ball rolling.

As long as that is in the background then lets leave it up to the "Free Market" economic concept of supply and demand and self regulation.

I'm a little sad I'm going to miss the start of this because I'm going to Ichgel, some of you European types will know it...it's the equivalent of Cancun except in the snowy mountains of Austria...and I live 4 minutes from the border.

hmmmm I wonder if I should take my laptop? :clown:

deguerra

12-13-2007, 21:31

most ppl know QED from maths:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.E.D.

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 21:33

most ppl know QED from maths:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.E.D.

thanks "d".

Privateerkev

12-13-2007, 21:36

hmmmm I wonder if I should take my laptop? :clown:

No you shouldn't take your laptop!!!!!

Your on VACATION!!!!

You should sit back, relax, and enjoy the "view".

(and I don't mean the mountains)

:yes:

:D

AussieGiant

12-13-2007, 21:45

No you shouldn't take your laptop!!!!!

Your on VACATION!!!!

You should sit back, relax, and enjoy the "view".

(and I don't mean the mountains)

:yes:

:D

It's even better than that...I'm off from today until Monday next week...then I'm taking from the 20th of December to the 6th of January off.

Essentially I'm at work Tuesday and Wednesday next week and then that's it.

Whoo hooo!!

And yes I intend to be looking at "The View" in the mountain over the weekend...just to give you an idea of how obvious we are being...out of the 5 of us...one is taking his snowboard gear...the rest of us are just going for apre ski and the night life!! LOL :laugh4:

Zim

12-13-2007, 23:57

Hey guys, if anyone is interested we've got a mini KOTR type game going for the Teutonic Order.

Only one general avatar left, but that should change. If I remember correctly from my SP games, more should be adopted quickly, and expansion will lead to omre births. :thumbsup:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1778511#post1778511

econ21

12-14-2007, 00:37

I have updated the List of Battles (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1714961&postcount=297) to the best of my ability.

Good work! :2thumbsup: Battle #45 never happened, BTW.

But that's a pretty scarey number of battles - 80 in 10 turns!

TinCow

12-14-2007, 01:04

I have moved ahead on 1338. On autoresolve, Friedrich Karolinger lost in a horrendous manner (1000+ lost vs. 250+ killed) but the Byzantines were surprisingly merciful and released 600+ prisoners, thus leaving Karolinger's army relatively intact.

It appears that there will be two battles during the AI turn. First, Arnold is being assaulted at Ragusa, as expected. After this is fought, the Byzantines appear to be attacking Matthias Steffen as he had hoped. Matthias' battle will be interesting, as it is two stacks vs one in the open, and one of the Byzantine stacks is heavily upgraded. Let's hope he chose his ground wisely.

AussieGiant: After your battle, let the game run through the Byzantine turn to bring up Matthias' battle. Then post that save with the battle screen ready for OverKnight to fight. If for some reason the Byzantines do not attack, please save the game immediately before the AI turn ends, so that I can see the 1340 info scrolls.

OverKnight: Please save the game immediately after the end of your battle (assuming it occurs) so that I can see the 1340 info scrolls.

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/kotr1338-11.zip

To everyone else, there are still some changes to be made after these battles are fought. Once I get the game back I will be making some last minute changes to the AI factions as well as to the recruitable generals hired for the new players. If you want, the Diet can start immediately once AussieGiant and OverKnight are finished fighting, so long as you all understand that the save they upload is not yet the final state. Otherwise, it should be ready for the Diet tomorrow night.

OverKnight

12-14-2007, 10:22

Has AG already left on his long weekend?

Zim

12-14-2007, 10:26

Has AG already left on his long weekend?

He was actually on earlier, but I guess he couldn't play the battle then. He can't be too far from leaving, it's already Friday where he is. :sweatdrop:

econ21

12-14-2007, 10:40

Has AG already left on his long weekend?

He said he will be able to fight the battle today - he's leaving around 6pm Swiss time.

Zim

12-14-2007, 11:09

Oh, good. It's a relief that Arnold will be able to fight the battle personally and slaughter the...Venetians?

Now, hopefully it all works out so Overknight can play his battle before the deadline as well. :yes:

Go Diet!

P.S. What is the timezone in Switzerland in relation to GMT?

_Tristan_

12-14-2007, 11:17

GMT +1 same as France, I believe

OverKnight

12-14-2007, 11:18

The forum has a nifty Worldtimes feature under site tools on the top bar. Switzerland is an hour ahead of GMT, it's 11:19am there.

Depending on when AG fights his battle, I'll be asleep and I'm working tonight, so there might be a delay on my battle, but I'll get it in before the deadline. Worst case scenario is Saturday morning, EST (GMT -5).

Zim

12-14-2007, 11:31

That's a relief, it will be an important battle for Outremer. Good luck!
I'm not sure if by saying everything will be ready for tomorrow night Tincow means that's the deadline, or just that the Diet will start then. :sweatdrop:

AussieGiant

12-14-2007, 11:36

Ok chaps I'm taking the save!!

Tally ho there!!

I can't help but feel like I'm in the Battle of Britain every time I get to fight a battle this way. :laugh4:

AussieGiant

12-14-2007, 12:53

I was certainly nervous before this but it turned out to be a AI disaster.

Lost the first ring due to Arty but then held the second ring with a HV.

OK, you are up mate. A double stacker coming right at you.

TC, the Byz came across the Poe and laid siege to the city just north east of you.

The save is here:

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/kotr1338-13.zip

OverKnight

12-14-2007, 12:59

I have the save.

This might take a while, as pictures and pinpoint control are needed.

OverKnight

12-14-2007, 14:18

Battle fought: http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/kotr1338-14.zip

Andreas and Matt are still alive, battle report to be posted.

AussieGiant

12-14-2007, 14:32

Amazing OK.

That upgraded stack must have caused you at least some problem no?

OverKnight

12-14-2007, 14:37

It's complicated, it'll be detailed in the battle report.

TinCow

12-14-2007, 17:08

I officially declare the Cataclysm over. I hope you've all had fun. I know I have. There's plenty more to come as well, as we are still in a very bad spot. I would not be surprised to see more Electors die and cities be lost before things truly stabilize.

A few final notes. I have boosted the AI one final time. However, it has been almost exclusively triple bronzes and triple silvers and almost all have been to border region city garrisons. The only triple gold units added were three (two of them artillery) to a stack near Palermo and an entire triple gold stack in Constantinople, which is far enough away from everyone that it should not be encountered anytime soon. However, there are still several triple gold stacks wandering the map that were generated at earlier times. The Polish stack is once again besieging Magdeburg and an old Danish triple gold is near Hamburg. Also, the French have a few lingering in their hinterland which will show themselves eventually.

Also, the new avatars have been recruited. There are two pre-assigned ones:
Hugo von Holland is for Tristan de Castelreng. It is a relatively French sounding name and, as econ21 and I agreed, I have given him a retinue and a trait to help him roleplay his 'French-defector' background. He has a Knight Templar with him (the Templars were expelled from France at about this time in history) and he has the trait "Loathes the French Fools." He is starting in Nuremburg.

Dieter von Essen is for Privateerkev. He is Siburg Zirn's new husband and is starting in Zagreb.

FLYdude and vpmd may pick whoever they wish from the following choices, all located in Nuremburg:
Herrmann Ruppel
Lukas Godwinson
Wenzel von Kassel
Hans von Bavaria

Whichever of these generals are not chosen should be killed off immediately with the aid of console commands, due to their high upkeep.

Stuperman

12-14-2007, 17:10

Von Bavaria? COOL!

_Tristan_

12-14-2007, 17:23

Cool...

Hugo von Holland sounds good... A bit Belgian but good anyway...

The traits and retinue are real cool also and will help create my storyline a lot... Nothing like what i had envisioned but still, if think I can make something of it...

TinCow

12-14-2007, 17:26

econ21 has been planning on using KOTRfix to change the last name to something more francophone. I chose him as the avatar simply because Hugo is a plausible French name. The trait and retinue are not ideal, but I wanted to visibly mark him as French in some way in case econ21 decides not to change his last name.

_Tristan_

12-14-2007, 17:39

The trait and retinue are fine... Some ideas have begun forming inside my brain...

Something about the Templar's treasure and what became of it...

A more French sounding name would be cool but I could justify the name if need be...

FactionHeir

12-14-2007, 17:50

Still in discussion over the name change. Will keep you posted.

_Tristan_

12-14-2007, 17:53

Thanks but don't bother too much...

I have some ideas to justify the name von Holland...

TinCow

12-14-2007, 18:15

The Library has been updated, except for the Bios and the Noble Houses list. I believe Northnovas is doing the mugshots again, so the rest will be completed when that is finished. I personally think World Overview History (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/KOTR/1340/maphistory_1340.jpg) is particularly interesting this time, as it shows just how much we have lost during the Cataclysm.

Ramses II CP

12-14-2007, 18:29

I wasn't here for all of it, but the Cataclysm was excellent fun during these last few years. It will be very interesting to see how things shake out in the years to come. Thanks to all the guys who went above and beyond to make the Cataclysm so much fun, Tincow in particular of course and everyone else I'm not aware of as well! :2thumbsup: ~:cheers:

If that's the Danish stack from Arhus... I was worried about that. Where did Fritz wind up? Have to DL the save...

:egypt:

Ferret

12-14-2007, 18:39

he's on the other side of Magdeburg to the tripke gold stack now besieging it. I can wait a few turns and easily beat them if they attack the walls or you can attack, I don't mind so long as I don't starve.

Stuperman

12-14-2007, 19:48

looking at those maps, France is back with a vengence

Ramses II CP

12-14-2007, 20:15

I'm certain you can handle the Polish EF, what I'm worried about is Hamburg. There are two full stacks in range there, at least one of them is partly triple gold, and Fritz has a negative movement trait; he can't reach Hamburg this turn. I have no idea what I'm going to do about them (Err, I guess whatever the next Chancellor desires, eh?).

:egypt:

TinCow

12-14-2007, 20:17

Yes, France is only slightly behind Byzantium on our 'threat' list. Poland is probably in third place, with Denmark, Hungary, and Venice all tied at fourth. Sicily is a weak fifth since they have their own problems and are about to lose Tunis. There are two other major powers that do not currently threaten us: England and Spain. Spain in particular could be a problem in the future as they will likely control most of Africa within next couple decades. I have done relatively little to boost them throughout the cataclysm and they are simply formidable because of the way the AI has played them.

Cecil XIX

12-14-2007, 20:53

I second that about Spain, in fat I noticed thier crusading army was originally marching south through the desert towards Timbuktu.

Northnovas

12-14-2007, 21:02

I will get the mugshots ahh...... I mean portraits taken for the library. I will deliver in the same format has last time to TC.

Say Cheeze!:beam:

_Tristan_

12-14-2007, 21:12

I have to take a look at that save and finally get to know my avatar...

flyd

12-14-2007, 21:18

I'll take Lukas Godwinson.

Privateerkev

12-14-2007, 21:20

I'll take Lukas Godwinson.

You mean you didn't want to be a Franconian named von Bavaria? :clown:

Cecil XIX

12-14-2007, 21:22

Boy, who would have thought Arnold be the chivalrous choice for chancellor? :dizzy2:

GeneralHankerchief

12-14-2007, 21:24

Boy, who would have thought Arnold be the chivalrous choice for chancellor? :dizzy2:

Heh, this is what happens when all the Chivalrous guys die in the Cataclysm.

Right now I believe we have a Dread King Viceroy and three Dukes with Dread (although only two Dread Dukes), and if either of the Swabian Rebellions were successful that number would have gone to four.

Ramses II CP

12-14-2007, 21:43

Pfft, Arnold is just less devious, but far more dreaded. Fritz has bloody Noble in Rule for a trait!

Seriously, check the save. :yes: :2thumbsup:

Then ask yourself who you want to vote for, eh?

:egypt:

Zim

12-14-2007, 21:49

Ferret

12-14-2007, 21:50

Fritz ftw!

Zim

12-14-2007, 21:52

So, is the question now one of "who do you fear more" regarding the contest for the Chancelorship?

Privateerkev

12-14-2007, 22:08

Matthias is still "King" until his charter passes, right? Otherwise, Andreas just said something stupid in the Diet, thus ensuring that his first impression to most of the Electors is a bad one, and hounding his political career for life. Some day, he will be running for Chancelor, and some rival will pull up an old scroll and say "Here my opponent incorrectly called Matthias Steffen "King". Do you want such a man running the Reich?". :clown:

Technically, the King is appointed by the Kaiser at each Diet session. The Kaiser could wait at any time during the session but it is traditionally done near the beginning to give the King time to propose legislation and pick Crusader Counts.

So, for now, he is Count Matthias for the time being until the Kaiser says otherwise. I made the mistake in my second post as Dieter and quickly edited it. I have been discretely PM'ing people OOC letting them know so they can decide for themselves whether to edit their posts.

I'd like it known that I have gone out of my way to avoid a "legal dispute" in the Diet over this issue. :clown:

I've decided my 16 year old avatar would be far too scared to bring up such a small nitpick in the Diet. :yes:

*edit*

Technically you can call Matthias anything you want. Just some titles will get different reactions than other ones. My point is, he technically does not hold the position unless the Kaiser re-appoints him.

Zim

12-14-2007, 22:12

Ok, I editted my own post to take that part out. :yes:
Dieter is 16? My character spawned at 31. :clown:

vpmd

12-14-2007, 22:14

Okay, I'll take Hans von Bavaria.

P.S. I did ask for a diplomat, but that's okay, this is too good to pass up anyway. I can handle a few battles.

Privateerkev

12-14-2007, 22:14

Yeah, he's a 16 year old boy that got to marry an 18 year old noblewoman.

:2thumbsup:

Zim

12-14-2007, 22:29

It will be wierd to see you playing such a young character, PK, rather than the outspoken Jan.

Just read Overknight's battle report. I'm impressed. :2thumbsup: Considering what happened to Warmaster Horus in a similiar situation, it's interesting what a difference holding a good position makes.

:charge: Nice to see Andreas involved and knighted, as well. :beam:

gibsonsg91921

12-14-2007, 22:55

Uff da.

Sorry to slip into my nonnative Norwegian, but thanks a lot Ramses! Way to make it hard to decide who I'm voting for!

TinCow

12-14-2007, 23:11

Okay, I'll take Hans von Bavaria.

P.S. I did ask for a diplomat, but that's okay, this is too good to pass up anyway. I can handle a few battles.

I know you said a diplomat, but you did that because you didn't want to fight battles. Having a general doesn't mean you have to fight battles, though, so I figured I would give you the more colorful option. If you don't want to fight, you just need to tell the Chancellor that and he will keep you out of trouble.

Ramses II CP

12-14-2007, 23:12

Thank the Kaiser who rejected my previous bid for power. I can't see ole Fritzy sitting around being a county-less count and satisfied with it, so he's pursuing power.

Oh, and I don't want Fritz sidelined by his political enemies either. I need battles! :laugh4:

:egypt:

Cecil XIX

12-14-2007, 23:20

I know you said a diplomat, but you did that because you didn't want to fight battles. Having a general doesn't mean you have to fight battles, though, so I figured I would give you the more colorful option. If you don't want to fight, you just need to tell the Chancellor that and he will keep you out of trouble.

Remember to tell your Duke as well, so he doesn't assign you command of one of the house armies.

gibsonsg91921

12-14-2007, 23:22

well, is Hans von Bavaria Bavarian? I think TinCow knows to keep him out of trouble.

or was that tongue-in-cheek regarding your status, cecil? LOL

Zim

12-14-2007, 23:29

Gah! I looked at the save. One Byz superarmy, mostly intact, one silver chevron Byz army, intact, and one general led, well balanced but unupgraded Byz army. Plus the Turks are making a beeline for English Outremer with a super army.

The life of a Crusader is an exciting one indeed. :clown:

Cecil XIX

12-14-2007, 23:46

or was that tongue-in-cheek regarding your status, cecil? LOL

Well his situation isn't the same as mine was, since his Duchy has more than two people on the mainland. :beam:

gibsonsg91921

12-14-2007, 23:48

This is true. It seems that if TC told vpmd to watch out for battles, being Duke of Bavaria he wouldn't assign him any. But hey! I get what you mean.

econ21

12-15-2007, 00:57

My internet access may be limited over some of the weekend as I have various family duties to attend to. If I am not logged on and some urgent procedural dispute errupts in the Diet, please roleplay it that Elberhard has stepped out rather than is being strangely passive.

Peter can step in as chair in his absence if Gibson is online. Otherwise be patient (we could say there was a Diet Speaker in attendance but that he is utterly useless).

gibsonsg91921

12-15-2007, 00:59

I can handle it - I expect plenty of Dieting this weekend.

deguerra

12-15-2007, 01:27

YAY I gained a trait. Apprently I'm honest :D. Unfortunately I'm also under siege. Go Flemish pikemen!

Tristan, how is von "Holland" a belgian name? :D And we might be able to give you Antwerp to make the Holland useful, no?

econ21

12-15-2007, 01:45

Yay I gained a trait. Apparently I'm honest :D.

Tell that to the gatekeeper of Staufen. :inquisitive:

BTW, should the shennagins at Staufen be made public? We never really got to see them play out, which is a shame, but the orders the 4 players submitted were collectively rather astounding. If all 4 of you agree, TinCow or I could post them - maybe as an OOC postscript to the Battle of Staufen thread.

FactionHeir

12-15-2007, 02:24

Just as a note to everyone that the name change is going ahead as planned.
All "von Holland" in future will display as "de Cervole". Note that this includes any future person on the family tree and all agents too.

I will be uploading version 1.3 for everyone sometime in the next 10 or so hours, once I finalize some details with econ.
One word of caution: Everyone must have the fix installed and working if they are going to play KOTR, save the game, and upload it. Not doing so can lead to some rather peculiar things happening to your character that are irreversible. Some of the older characters especially are all affected by this.

Privateerkev

12-15-2007, 02:25

It will be wierd to see you playing such a young character, PK, rather than the outspoken Jan.

The lack of responsibility, drama, or legions of political enemies is oddly refreshing...

:2thumbsup:

econ21

12-15-2007, 02:30

GeneralHankerchief

12-15-2007, 02:34

Ignoramus

12-15-2007, 02:42

I'm happy to have the orders revealed - it can't spoil anyone's plans now that the rebellion is over.

Privateerkev

12-15-2007, 02:43

He probably would have killed Hans outright and then used any other prisoners (von Hamburg, von Salza maybe) as bargaining chips - after doing something nasty to them first. :evilgrin:

I bet it is not nearly as nasty as what I had planned for Jan to do if he captured Dassel.

Imagine being locked in a cell and having Jan read the Bible to you... for hours on end.

A few days of that, and Dassel would have begged for sweet merciful death...

:evil:

econ21

12-15-2007, 02:48

He probably would have killed Hans outright and then used any other prisoners (von Hamburg, von Salza maybe) as bargaining chips - after doing something nasty to them first. :evilgrin:

You are still fixated on the killing Hans thing? It really is not smart to kill a prisoner and then start to negotiate. Especially, the elder brother of the person you are negotiating with. Sorry, PK and Warluster, but in such a situation, Elberhard would probably shoot the hostages himself and then Dietrich. After that, he would change his name from Kaiser Elberhard to Keyser Soze.

Privateerkev

12-15-2007, 02:51

You are still fixated on the killing Hans thing? It really is not smart to kill a prisoner and then start to negotiate. Especially, the elder brother of the person you are negotiating with. Sorry, PK and Warluster, but in such a situation, Elberhard would probably shoot the hostages himself and then Dietrich. After that, he would change his name from Kaiser Elberhard to Keyser Soze.

Thats ok. If Jan lived, captured Dassel, and found out Dassel had executed Hans before his capture, he would have walked up to the young knight, pulled a pistol, and blew Dassel's brains out.

He would have felt real bad afterwards but he would have done it. :yes:

econ21

12-15-2007, 03:09

Thats ok. If Jan lived...

Interesting, at the time, I did wonder how far Jan's "no execution" principle would have extended had he captured Dietrich[1]. Since it was Jan's soldiers who did capture Dietrich, I considered having them follow what I thought were his principles. However, I did not think it very plausible. I believe in WW2, German soldiers who killed (in "fair" combat) Allied soldiers in open view and then tried to surrender usually were unofficially executed. Snipers often suffered from this.

[1]I think at the time, GH was also making a related (mis)calculation.

Privateerkev

12-15-2007, 03:16

Interesting, at the time, I did wonder how far Jan's "no execution" principle would have extended had he captured Dietrich[1]. Since it was Jan's soldiers who did capture Dietrich, I considered having them follow what I thought were his principles. However, I did not think it very plausible. I believe in WW2, German soldiers who killed (in "fair" combat) Allied soldiers in open view and then tried to surrender usually were unofficially executed. Snipers often suffered from this.

[1]I think at the time, GH was also making a related (mis)calculation.

Well, since Jan did die, I didn't have to think really quick on the fly. So, I pondered it. And in my pondering, I concluded that if Jan had to walk by his decapitated friend, then someone was going to die. I would have asked you to wait a few minutes as I wrote a story of Jan just standing there thinking. He'd wrestle with the decision. And then he'd just do it. And then he would puke his guts out afterwards. I was even toying with making him go suicidal but his retinue would tackle him and stop him.

This is all just speculation though. If I was confronted with the quick multiple choice thing GH had to deal with, I don't know which I would have picked.

Now if Dassel had spared Hans, then there would definitely be no execution. I was even planning on having Jan confront Hans over the issue. Hence why I spoke to you and TC about figuring out who actually would have custody over the captured avatar, in the event of a Dassel and/or Luther capture.

Jan was a merciful guy but even he had his limits...

GeneralHankerchief

12-15-2007, 04:02

[1]I think at the time, GH was also making a related (mis)calculation.

At the time, I believed that PK was focusing all of his efforts on taking the city before I could get back. I figured I would finish Hans's army off and then either make a clean getaway or head back into Bern to join the fight, depending on the situation.

Privateerkev

12-15-2007, 04:05

At the time, I believed that PK was focusing all of his efforts on taking the city before I could get back. I figured I would finish Hans's army off and then either make a clean getaway or head back into Bern to join the fight, depending on the situation.

I'm still amazed and amused at the many assumptions we all made in that battle. I assumed you'd stay in the city. You didn't stay. I assumed you would come back right away. You didn't come back. Econ's system definitely portrays the "fog of war" in a realistic way. We had to make quick decisions without updated or accurate information. Basically we were just guessing a lot.

Kind of like real war. :yes:

Zim

12-15-2007, 05:01

I think it's funny that after all that debate over whether "lawfare" would derail the Diet, it's religious arguments that are doing it. :clown:

Ramses II CP

12-15-2007, 05:05

Oh yes, the discussion in the Diet is spinning nicely out of hand. I'm trying to keep Fritzy icily sneering rather than openly confrontational, but I suspect it's only a matter of whether Peter or Elberhard checks in first which side gets, at best, squashed, and at worst, banned.

Fun, fun! Now, having stirred the pot, I'm off to bed.

:egypt:

Zim

12-15-2007, 05:15

If I remember correctly, aren't most of the Electors (except possibly the newer ones) Lutheran?

Hey guys, is it just me or does my avatar look suspiciously like John Cleese?
https://img107.imageshack.us/img107/9925/holygrail130nl8.jpg (https://imageshack.us)

Northnovas

12-15-2007, 05:35

Zim

12-15-2007, 05:40

Close resemblance.:laugh4:

No it is the other way most are Catholic. At least the old Guard. There are a few Luthern but we are still a predominant Catholic Reich and hence the issue for the Outremer to protect the Papacy and Jerusalem.

Ok, I wasn't sure. I remember seeing an OOC thread where players voted on their avatar's religious persuasion. I thought most of them had by far and away voted Lutheran (at least 2:1).

Maybe I'll crop and resize that pic, and use it for my avatar pic on the forums. :clown:

I was wrong, it was half and half.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=92421

With so many Lutheran figures in Swabia dead, and presumably at least some of the new guys being Catholic (Andreas is, as is von Hapsburg), I think the Lutherans may be in the minority now.

OverKnight

12-15-2007, 06:28

Good work on updating the history, Overknight. :bow:

But what was that "Fight or flight" description about the Kaiser leaving Outremer? :furious3: He wasn't fleeing anywhere - he was returning to fight Dietrich (although that's not exactly how he tried to portray it publicly, I know).

Hmmmm, the judgement of History is harsh sometimes, perhaps that was one of the few times the objective veneer of the Imperial Historian was lost. :laugh4:

In my defense, it was a catchy title, "Fight or Fight at another place later and a continent away" would have been less appealing. If you have a suggestion for a replacement, I'm all ears. :yes:

Edit: As for all the bally hoo about how to address Matthias, meh, it's not all that important. He's really not all that into titles. If you wish to be technically correct, the best kind of correct there is, since he's been reappointed by the Kaiser he is currently King, and if 14.2 passes, he will be Viceroy.

Of course since he's basically in charge of something the size of a county I find it all a bit silly.

Privateerkev

12-15-2007, 06:31

If you have a suggestion for a replacement, I'm all ears. :yes:

"Bravely Sir Robin ran away... brave brave Sir Robin..."

"When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely turned his tail and fled."

:clown:

Zim

12-15-2007, 06:37

Hmmmm, the judgement of History is harsh sometimes, perhaps that was one of the few times the objective veneer of the Imperial Historian was lost. :laugh4:

In my defense, it was a catchy title, "Fight or Fight at another place later and a continent away" would have been less appealing. If you have a suggestion for a replacement, I'm all ears. :yes:

Edit: As for all the bally hoo about how to address Matthias, meh, it's not all that important. He's really not all that into titles. If you wish to be technically correct, the best kind of correct there is, since he's been reappointed by the Kaiser he is currently King, and if 14.2 passes, he will be Viceroy.

Of course since he's basically in charge of something the size of a county I find it all a bit silly.

So, what level Bureaucrat are you? :clown:

Concerning Elberhard

"Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat"

~;)