I'm pleased that these adoptions are being offered semi-regularly. I far prefer to see existing avatars put on the family tree than new ones spawn without someone to play them.
Printable View
I'm pleased that these adoptions are being offered semi-regularly. I far prefer to see existing avatars put on the family tree than new ones spawn without someone to play them.
I updated the battle report, now its up.:yes:
Igno...can you clear your PM box?
First time I've had to ask that...seems strange after so long :balloon2:
Yes there does seem to be a relative lack of requests for Ig to clear his PM box. Perhaps he regularly deletes at least a couple of his 500 pm's that he has packed in there.
:clown:
That is really the first time...ever. I was really shocked. :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
Well, PM box clearing requests can now be made on people's profile pages so I think we'll see less of them in here. :yes:
did know that. i'll put one there also.
I have 1149 pm's in my inbox and still room for 351 more :smug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
I'm surprised your that popular. Do you PM yourself? ~;pQuote:
Originally Posted by Andres
:clown:
Privateerkev, i find it pretty amusing why your character is trying to miss credit what happened in the battle of Transylvanian hills and after it. First only 10 rebels got out from the battle alive, so there were not many to start rumours around, specially when they were in hostile territory after pillaging the countryside prior the battle.
Second Hector was the first messenger to bring the message to the capital and only Ioannis men were present in the battle from the other side.
Third i wrote the executions in the battle report, so i cant understand your motive, other then that your character is trying to make Kantakouzinos to look like a liar in front of others, without shred of evidence from your part, quite reckless for a man in your position.:clown:
It's the nature of fighting rebel stacks. In the game, you don't get the option to ransom/release/execute rebel stacks. So, there are no prisoner treatment traits that come from fighting rebel stacks. Therefore, it's basically up to us to make up what happens. Mak's version of events is one plausible explanation. Ioannis's version is equally plausible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
Regardless, someone with Mak's chivalry is not going to like sitting there and listening to someone boast about executing prisoners.
Whether that is reckless or not is a matter of opinion. :beam:
What i mean is that Mak doesnt have shred of evidence to back his claims what happened in the battle and killing the captured rebels would not have been anything out from the ordinary. On the other hand, miss crediting a noble man and also an eye witness who was present in the battle is calling them both liars, which is a serious offence against the honour of the said individuals, wouldnt you agree? Specially when Mak doesnt have anything other then his own speculations to prove anything he is saying.:smash:Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
Take it up with Mak in the Magnaura. :yes:
Nah. Ioannis is not present there and wont be for a while, while his shieldbearer knows better then start to argue with the Grandmaster inside the senate, his status does not entitle him to such a luxury.:smash:Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
For the love of god, let's never have an arguement OOC about what was said IC. It's never worth it.
Besides which, the last time this happened Becker lost a lot of potential fun in the Cataclysm. :no:
You must have completely misunderstood. Those couple posts before yours were in no way any kind of argument. Just friendly observations. Why is everyone being so serious in this game? Its not like we are dealing with here anything more serious then bit of role playing.:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil XIX
My mistake. :2thumbsup:
On another note,
Was that perhance an M:TW reference, Zim? If we weren't on the internet, I'd high-five you. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim
Some of us, like myself, would like for stuff to be as IC as possible. When I see OOC posts on here talking about IC debates, or goading people for IC fights, it takes something out of it for me. I'm in this for the IC interaction. Something that gets totally spoiled for me if the drama is then arm-chair quarterbacked on the OOC thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
There is plenty for all sides to chew on in the Magnaura regarding the treatment of rebel prisoners and I'd prefer to see the debate in there. :bow:
Yep. All the talk about about how to deal with rebel prisoners had me nostalgic for M:TW. :beam:
:clown: No high five smilie, we'll have to settle for these guys. ~:cheers:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil XIX
Playing someone sober makes me need even more of these: ~:cheers:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim
:clown:
I only brought it up in this thread, because it was not plausible to do so in the IC thread. It should not have spoiled anything. I think it would have been lot more strange for a lowly shieldbearer to start arguing with an grandmaster of a religious military sect in a senate building. Ioannis would have,but Hector would not have under any circumstances. I tried to bring up issues which to me seemed unnatural to happen in IC, which i thought the OOC thread would be perfect for. I am sorry if such sentiments seem like spoiling the IC experience, so i will refrain from doing so in the future.:bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
It's funny how many great features that game had which aren't part of the series anymore. I really loved how each level of castle had two sub-upgrades you could purchase before the full level-up, that kind of customization would be perfect for LOTR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim
I'm intrigued, how so?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil XIX
Oh yeah, I remember that. :yes:
It's kind of interesting they didn't bring anything like that back for MTW2, which was supposed to make sieges so much better.
The Civil Wars were really cool as well, although I suppose for LOTR that would cause as many problems as SS's Civil War script. :sweatdrop:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil XIX
Minor changes mostly, but they were profound. When you first built a Fort, (Level 1 Castle) it's just a wooden keep with a palisade around it, so it looked sorta like this: (o) and it was pretty cramped. You could either upgrade it to the next level, or you could spend a few turns improving it as is. The first improvement was a motte, which of course just meant the building was on top of a hill. The next upgrade was a 'bailey', which added a curtain wall. A fully upgraded Fort looked more like this, and was made completely of wood: (forgive my ASCII)Quote:
Originally Posted by YourLordandConqueror
- ______
/------/--\
|===|-K-|
\____\__/
The level two castle (Keep) has the same structure, except the keep proper and the innermost wall are stone. The two upgrades for that level are to make the outer wall stone as well, and to add ballistas to some of the towers. After that my memory fades, partially because it's been so long and partially because the others were more expensive and thus I didn't build them as much. They were generally extra walls, artillery on the towers, and in at least one case in improved 'barbican' or gatehouse. Good stuff, and it would have looked gorgeous judging by how great MII's settlements look.
Suffice to say, a castle of level 'x' took 'x*4' turns to build. Each level had two improvements each which took 'x' turns to build. What's interesting is that the improvements you build are just stuff you'd get anyway by upgrading to the next level of castle. To use the fort I mentioned earlier as an example, if you just went straight to the next level of castle without making improvements you'd save time, money and have a better castle.
So why bother? Well, if you don't build the improvements and you're besieged while upgrading your Fort then it will just barely have enough room for a half-stack. Taking the two turns to fully improve your fort will give you extra room, more walls, and it would let your fort last longer in a siege. Also, if you're going to take the 20 turns necessay to upgrade your Citadel into a Fortress (don't ask me why they switched the names in MII), taking four or eight turns to make sure you don't lose the massive investment in time and money is quite tempting.
Of course, usually you're not going to upgrade to the next level immediately. Some provinces you won't even upgrade to the next level at all. In those cases, improvements provide a cheap way to make your castles more siege resistant without going all the way and upgrading the settlement. And finally, sometimes you just want to take 30+ turns necessary to make a fully improved Level 5 Castle.
tl;dr - We went from two improvements for each level of castle to two improvements for each castle, period. Also Keep, Curtain Wall and Ballista Towers ftw.
That felt good. I haven't screamed in a "governing body" in some time. :beam:
Alright, I just had Mak drop the "I-bomb." Let the games begin... :2thumbsup:
Isn't filling an army an OOC requirement? There shouldn't be any choice in the matter since we know there was massive spending last turn and not all of it was required by OOC rules to go ahead of filling out the army in question.
I guess the question I'm asking is what form the rule enforcement will take for violating an OOC rule for IC purposes?
:egypt:
Honestly, I can't see any way to enforce OOC army requirements aside from the usual Senate/Diet discipline. I was waiting for it to come up in KotR but it never did (it came close a few times...). Unless TC does a quick rewrite, we're just gonna have go with the old standby and impeach Ignoramus.
You're going to pay for that, IK!!!:jester:
w&f .. I have no idea what you are talking about! ~:rolleyes: