Out of character thread III

Thanks for testing the "add_money hungary, 100" console command, factionheir. :bow: I've added 100,000 gold to each AI faction (not the Pope, though). So the next Chancellor should play on from this savegame:

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/kotr1160-1.zip

After my embarassment over re-assigning Gerhard Steffen too quickly, I am going to hold off on assigning Conrad Salier until after the votes for this Diet. He will go to the most Bavarian without an avatar who has contributed most to the PBM by speeches, votes etc.

Ok, I just read the rules to try and get an asnwer, but it's not really clear. SO I have a question, settlements that don't have a governer have thier build ques set by who? the chancellor at his discretian? and is there any way to influance the build ques to un-governed settlements?

I'm just thinking that very few of our settlements will be governed once the 5 crusading generals leave.

Counts set Build Queues for their assigned Counties.

Dukes set Build Queues for all unassigned territories in their Duchies.

The Emperor sets Build Queues for Imperial territories (Rome and Thorn being the only current examples), all newly conquered territories are Imperial until the Kaiser chooses to assign them.

The Chancellor decides which Build Queues will actually get funded each year, but if he does build in a settlement he has to follow the set Queue.

Edit: This reminds me that I have to set Queues for Bavaria, ugh. . .I liked it more when Otto was a social climber and not a pillar of the community.

thank you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuperman

I'm just thinking that very few of our settlements will be governed once the 5 crusading generals leave.

---

The Crusaders will still be able to give build queues to their settlements. The only way to change that is by Charter Amendment. The same goes for Household Armies. 3 of the 4 Dukes are going on the Crusade. Unless they make someone a Steward of their House, they will still be required to do all the functions they normally perform.

LOL, I love this game sometimes, the potugese are fighting the danes for Holland, the winner gets to take on Scotland, if that was real, history class would be way cooler.

edit: Thanks for clearing that up TC

Now that the latest Diet session has begun, I know that we want to refrain from too much OOC, but after the last Diet TinCow had some proposals, concerning Counts be given to non-avatars for example, so I wondered whether some of this would have to be amended or if we just do it, since there's no rule strictly forbidding it?

Edit: Nevermind.. should have read the Diet first before posting. Feel free to ignore this. :beam:

A new OOC thread should be starting soon, we have reached 18...

Judging from the way the diet is held these days, you gotta wonder how accurate it is, that electors and dukes openly assault the emperor verbally.
While there is a chancellor and the system is more democratic than a standard monarchy, I think we should still keep in mind that this is a medieval feudal period, where the emperor does have a lot of power even though the charter does not explicitly say so.

Figure you would keep your head on your shoulders if you had insulted a medieval lord, or worse an emperor, back in those days for long?

I believe we really need to get back to the time at hand and control the emotions somewhat. Plotting behind someone's back is fine, as long as you are not caught doing so (consider the possibility of spies). The consequences might be tough.

It goes without saying though that we all invest time in the PBM and would not want the characters to come to some artificial harm which might cause some people to lose interest, we should roleplay that as a possibility ICly at least and have some more consequences instead of free for all brawl as is the current state of affairs.

I don't see where the Diet has descended into a brawl this time. I think that's exactly what the Diet is for, to exchange opinions, insights, and of course insults. The only thing I considered to be over the top was nazgul3 threatening to kill the Kaiser to his face. Sure, the Emperor wields power, but he has his advisors and should listen to them. Dukes and Counts also wield considerable power. There have always been powerful and commanding Kings and those that were merely puppets of the nobility. This is especially true for Medieval Germany, where the King got elected, often there were several Kings because the Lords couldn't agree on one. Many Kings also did not make it to Kaiser, as they simply lacked the power to establish their rule in Italy.
I think the level of discussion we're having right now is alright and see no problem with it. The medieval ruler who has all of his council beheaded won't last long.
I believe we should keep it the way it is, where the Emperor has exactly as much additional power as he can wrest from the Diet. The conflict between the supreme ruler and nobility is always present. So if it was up to me everything could go on as before. :beam:

I think we may to going on the wrong track about reconciliation with the pope. Even if our cardinal is elected pope, he will definitely try and take back Rome unless he has a new region given to him within the 1st term thus restarting conflict. Am I correct in saying that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FactionHeir

Judging from the way the diet is held these days, you gotta wonder how accurate it is, that electors and dukes openly assault the emperor verbally.
While there is a chancellor and the system is more democratic than a standard monarchy, I think we should still keep in mind that this is a medieval feudal period, where the emperor does have a lot of power even though the charter does not explicitly say so.

Figure you would keep your head on your shoulders if you had insulted a medieval lord, or worse an emperor, back in those days for long?

---

Well, historically when Henry (Kaiser Heinrich) was excommunicated by Gregory, 1/3 of the Empire rose up in revolt. The entire reason that Heinrich had to go groveling for forgiveness from the Pope was because he couldn't effectively put down the rebellion when every nobleman in the Empire had legitimate grounds to attack him. So... a few hostile remarks in the Diet are actually rather minimal in comparison to history. Had this been a real excommunication, some of the Dukes/Electors might have actively taken up arms against the Kaiser.

Well yes, but after the Investiture Controversy ended, the emperor had a rather strong foundation again, didn't he? (I'm not up to snuffs with history anymore)

WOW! This round of Diet is really quiet... weird...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StoneCold

WOW! This round of Diet is really quiet... weird...

---

Weekends are quiet, plus we had an Emergency Diet about two turns ago which pretty much set the course for the coming 10 turns.

Well, there isn't too much to discuss considering we won't be allowed to actually take many/any settlements at all and half the troops will be boringly walking all the way to Jerusalem without crusading speed. (although thats fixable ingame *shrug*)
So yeah, not a lot of war or diplomacy edicts that need passing.

BTW, someone wanna propose an edict that we keep milking Russia every turn for florins? :p
I would do that myself but I had to use my sole edict for the OOC charter amendment (unless that can be a house edict)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FactionHeir

Well, there isn't too much to discuss considering we won't be allowed to actually take many/any settlements at all and half the troops will be boringly walking all the way to Jerusalem without crusading speed. (although thats fixable ingame *shrug*)

---

Good to know you're having so much fun.

ya... its still fun for me... lol... destroy Crusader Chancelor... and possibly Govern a town without an Avitar!

my simple mind is quiet amused... lol...

and remember...

Vote for Ituralde :laugh4:

well, he's right, there is not a lot to discuss in the diet ATM, we just had a session and imposed some rather limiting legislation, with good reason of course. I'm surprised edicts concerning the cammanders for the assault(s) on Marseille and Breslau haven't come up. I have been trying to come up with an edict to deal with the castle at Ragusa, that doesn't violate E1.7, assasins to burn the place to the ground maybe? With us giving the a.i. money, this is going to be a serious pain in the ass for Austria and whoever gets Venice. although after a while it will "run out" of popuation.

ya, I guess so.

Stuperman, I think you are wrong on running out of population stuff. If I remember correctly, MTW2 recruiting do not eat into your cities population. I might be wrong.

FH, milking the Russian of gold is just wrong with econ giving the AI loads of cash, it is as good as giving yourself that amount of cash in the first place... :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StoneCold

Stuperman, I think you are wrong on running out of population stuff. If I remember correctly, MTW2 recruiting do not eat into your cities population. I might be wrong.

---

Sweet! Never ending hardcore-castle-trained Venetian armies! I can't wait!

ya i had the run out of pop. problem today on RTW... drafting nearly 4000 people into my army form one town... lol

but eventualy they will become never ending VHI hordes... that kick our butt... lol...

Edit: TinCow... I truly dont mean to bring death upon your Avitars... mostly that hot-blooded stuff is IC action...

Can I join the Council of Crusaders, even though I don't have an avatar yet? Econ promised me Gudda's husband, and as she is Henry's daughter, her husband would spawn in Henry's stack. Since Henry is going on Crusade, it would mean that it wouldn't delay the Crusade at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StoneCold

FH, milking the Russian of gold is just wrong with econ giving the AI loads of cash, it is as good as giving yourself that amount of cash in the first place... :P

---

True in a way, but TC has been milking the Russians for a few turns before in his chancellorship before he felt bad doing so (which is probably more OOC than IC). If they want to give us money, why not :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

Can I join the Council of Crusaders, even though I don't have an avatar yet?

---

Patience, young Padawan. If you and/or factionheir or others have an avatar spawned in the crusade, the Edict authorising the crusade entitles you to membership. I'd like to keep the council to those with crusading generals, as the smaller group will make it easier to reach decisions. I'm not a great fan of informal group decisionmaking at the best of times, but it gets harder as the group grows. We're delegating TinCow the role of liasing with the Chancellor (if it is not Henry) to minimise the practical problems of crusading by committee. There's no reason why issues about the crusade cannot be discussed in the Diet. Personally, I don't want to see this PBM divide into a Diet concerned with the Reich for half the players and a Council concerned with the crusade for the other half.

Stuperman, no insult is intended by my IC comments in the Diet. I just can't see any way that the most pious man in the Reich would be happy about turning over his lands to the least pious man in the Reich.

Just a short note that I strongly disagree with OOC Charter Amendment 6.5. If we have wanted a real Crusade authorized by the Pope that's what we should have done in the first place. We should not resort to cheating to make it into one now. It has been clear during the proposal of the Emergency Edict that the Crusade will take a long, long time. If I recall correctly it was a kind of incentive to get the game along. Next thing we're hiring the Crusader specific units via console to make the Crusade more to our liking.
Also I think we should not overdo the whole console thing. Next thing we're just typing commands into the console instead of playing the game.

Sorry for my harsh words, but I really don't think that that is a good idea.

I agree with Ituralde and will be voting against CA 6.5 for those same reasons.

I agree. I'd prefer to keep the cheats and mods to a minimum. If we don't like the terms of the game, we should probably be playing something else instead... :P

I would like to give my two cents and agree that Edict 6.5 or any other Edict to alter the game would not be in the best interest of game play. Picking the game/mod at the start is the time. Doing something like the Crusade to change the game play because of events and wanting to continue the game is the way to go with in the limited game boundaries.
Otherwise we are cheating against ourselves. :2cents: