Then by rights they go to the nearest provincial governor, as he wants the intel for border patrol.
Printable View
Then by rights they go to the nearest provincial governor, as he wants the intel for border patrol.
Would that mean Cotta could never become Quaestor, seeing as thats a lower rank. He'd have to be deomoted to Dux, and since he was never Tribunus Plebis or Quaestor par se, he could never be a Praetor. Which is kinda annoying. Perhaps we can sort something out for the BtSH veterans, who would mostly lose out on this new rank system, and then they can start afresh like everyone else when they choose new characters.
Oh, and should we have provincial governer reports, like the consul reports, seeing as they control tax, building and intelligence of their area?
Like I said, those who have a high rank atm, will be able to go for governor/consul.
Seeing as you have a high rank atm, we could say you've already been praetor or eligiable for becoming one.
Elegiable please. :2thumbsup:
Otherwise I think the reforms are a good idea. Navarro's still away and busy, so we might have to wait for him to reply
Personally I would prefer that it would stay centralized to either or both consuls as it is, but they could outsource control, raise spies for others or something like that. It's easier, and I don't really see the point making them completely anyone's. Besides, this would automatically give Cotta possession of all spies at the moment, which isn't quite right.Quote:
Originally Posted by mini
Edit: I also agree with giving PGs possibility to raise agents like they can with military units. That could be another solution.
I would prefer provincial governers to have the right to recruit a certain number of their own agents. Perhaps an amount tied to their rank or number of provinces, and then their agents names in their SOT.
Well, we have time to implement changes as big as the ranks :)Quote:
Originally Posted by _Bean_
seeing as everybody should atleast voice an opinion first maybe.
I do like to get one with the laws in the curia though.
I'd have no problem with voting for these laws outside a senatorial session.
Actually they look very promising. Standardizing the legions is very according to my taste. And gettig battle points for participation in battle (though not as commander) makes very much sense too, the character did not just watch the struggle from outside but also made his experiences and learned from his commander. Of course he gets less battle points, for the commander has to think about strategy etc. even more than his officers, but as I see also you already thought of that @ everyone
I say 10, so we could merge legions if required.Quote:
Therefore, 1 legion of max 10-12 units, composed as I said, would give the historical feel.
These new rules are all nice looking; but we have a proper system for bringing them into play in our current game: They must be proposed as Single Charter Amendments by a player of the rank Dux or higher, and then voted on in a Congressional Session.
Let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. And additionally, the Tribunus Pleibeus can only propose such edicts / charter amendments during the congressional session, not during normal game pla, per our active rules.
Meh, I'm a tribune of the plebs, i can push my laws through the comita ;-)
You're right. Then we could make an emergency session. In the name of fun and accuracy I think we should not be bureaucratic.
Actually, you can't. The rules regarding the rank of Tribunue of the plebs don't give you that authority. Even if it happened like that in real life, you need to adhere to the game rules or else we will have chaos.Quote:
Originally Posted by mini
I responded IC in the Curia to these ideas - they're good laws, and would make the game different, more interesting in some ways, and more fun; but we must respect the rules that we have. If everyone (I mean every player, not you, 'everyone') did what they wanted we'd have had civil wars by now, which would have destroyed us without ever even conquering Taras!
1) chaos is funQuote:
Originally Posted by Tiberius Claudius Marcellus
2) playing by the rules is boring. If every politician in history would have played by the rules...
3) as change is pioneered by one politician not playing by the rules, it's nice that I cna act as the replay of the becoming of a tribune of the plebs in its ultimate, best know form. it's nicely RP and it has a link to history
4) have an open mind and see the fun in this bending of the rules. Instead of focussing on a rigid structure which would dull the game rp.
Revolution ^^
Mini, I have to agree with TCM. I like your laws to make it more historical, but you can't just decide that the game rules don't apply to you. By signing up for the game you agree to play by our rules. By all means bend IC rules, let your character bend the rules, not you. Otherwise we can't keep control on the game and everyone just does what they want. I could just say I want war in Greece, so I'm going to just take Ambrakia and Pella and then sit back and say, 'Well, I could so I did' in the Curia and ignore everybody. It's not fair. I personally suggest you wait to the next congressional session, then use your CA to propose that Tribunes of the Plebs can act as they did historically. That will give everyone what they want. I dont see why anyone would vote against that. TCM and I arent against these new rules you propose, we're against the way your proposing them. Can you respect that?
meh
by the next voring, i'll be out of office a a tribune, so where doest hat leave me :)
And I did bend the rules IC, as I took the evolution of the tribunus plebis into the game and into IC and acted like it.
I admit there has to be a game structure, but there has to be room for things like this. Especially since you know the rule will be implemented. Why not play ball IC from the start then? You can howl all you want in the curia, and then let me do my thing in the comitia.
then you IC'ed you followed the game rules, but still had to see the laws come standing because i did it through the people.
Don't see why it shouldn't be fun.
No, mini, you don't get to ignore the rules and just do whatever you want to do. It doesn't work that way. The rules are like they are, and you must follow them if you wish to continue playing this game.
Fine.
Hey everyone, newbie here! I've been reading the last several pages of this and the Curia and I wanted to say that I can't wait to become a part of this! For what it's worth, here's my idea about legion uniformity vs. different general's styles: keep the Roman cohorts the same between legions, but allow the legion commander to have some say in the composition of the alae. (I don't think I read about this anywhere in the rules, if I missed it, forgive me:dizzy2:).
Anyways, I can't wait to start out and work my way up the ladder!
(Obviously something that could be introduced IC! Just thought I'd suggest it here)
Hope there are no bad feelings ;)
I just felt I had to push the limits. Only way to do that is to put pressure IC and OOC ;)
It would have been fun if I had gotten away with it :D
But one more question: Do I have to retract my laws?
I'd like to see my name still on those laws ;)
perhaps we should have something like LotR's rule change and Charter amendment thing; where Rule Changes can be proposed by any player and voted on by the rest of the players and such, while CA's remain the same; perhaps I'll quote from TinCow to make it easier to understand:
if we were to use it in BtSH, I think somebody should propose it the next Congressional session and see whether it passes.Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
That sounds rather good. That way we do not need to be in congres to apply any rule changes.
I would only consider the rank reforms as rule changes. That way we can already vote on these (in their latest form).
The other proposed things (legion reforms, war intel and law names) should be the normal way, as these aren't exactly game rules changes.
I'd say we implement Everyone's suggestion immediately. Or atleast an emergancy voting.
Otherwise it'll drag on for another week or so.
I'd be up for that, but let Navarro have a say before we change his rules
What everyone said had nothing to do about sessions, so I have no idea why you think that would change at all.
Well, you haven't actually made any laws, just proposed them out of session which simply means they can't be voted for (which in turn means they can't be taken into effect).Quote:
Originally Posted by mini
You'll have to wait until the next session begins before you can make one Charter Amendment, and it won't have your name on it even if it succeeds. :shame:
Anyway, I won't call an emergency session for this. It isn't an emergency.
Ooh harsh Consul :laugh4:
I like the Idea, but agree this really isnt a pressing isue, it can wait
which one? we've had a lot of ideas thrown around recently
minis reforms
I don't want an emergancy sessions for the reforms.
I want one to vote for Everyone's proposal concerning changes in rules having a different way of voting (meaning, out of congressional)