OOC Thread and Chatroom 2

[TinCow]

what was 'IT', in the last game that had us focusing no IC relations and playing rather than what is being discussed here?

I think the stakes are ramped up when PvP is introduced. People get a lot more wary about the rules when their enemies can kill them and take their land instead of just beating them down in the Diet.

[Privateerkev]

I think the stakes are ramped up when PvP is introduced. People get a lot more wary about the rules when their enemies can kill them and take their land instead of just beating them down in the Diet.

Exactly.

And now that I know my avatar's death is being plotted, things have become more "dire." If I'm going to lose my avatar, it better not be because someone broke the rules...

[Kagemusha]

You do know that those two broke Rules and Edicts left and right don't you?

It was never brought up IC because people didn't want to rock the boat. And things they did were relatively minor compared to what Ig did so nothing was said OOC.

Ig's term opened up the loophole floodgates to absurd proportions. He flagrently sought out every loophole he could find to devastate the Order so he could later kill all of our avatars and take our land.

Sorry, but when you take the game to that level, you can't complain when it's done back to you. You, and all of the players in his House were cheering Ig on both IC and OOC the whole time. Ig either broke, or came very close to breaking, no less than three "Rules" during his term and while he suffered politically, not one single IC or OOC sanction was ever imposed on him.

If we're going to sit here and gripe OOC about loopholes, then we should at least be consistent. Some of you seemed just fine with loopholes as long as it benefitted your own avatars. What I am doing to the Caesar's House is mild compared to what we suffered under during Ig's illegal term.

It took pretty much a whole term to get our proper legal armies because Ig sat and exploited every single spending loophole he could find. And in doing so, he broke the rules of the game. That delay put our avatars at risk since we had to fight with less forces than we legally should have had. During that time, the Caesar's House benefitted quite well from Ig's illegal actions.

So I hope you excuse me if I have zero sympathy for people who complain that I disbanded a few units that were not legally protected in the owner's SOT.

Show one point where i cheered Igno for braking the rules OOC. I am roleplaying here. Dont confuse my character with real me. I will not start commenting about anyones leadership or other qualities, when the players are role playing.

And to be honest if Flyd and Overknight broke the rules, then at least it didnt have any effect on my gaming experience. I am here to play a role playing game with historical setting. Not to be a part of some court of law about rules of a role playing game. The best solution for this would be that instead of finding ways to bend and twist the rules, megas should honour the spirit of the rules. But then again that is only my personal opinion.

[_Tristan_]

Frankly, from the start of this game (and before that in the test game), we saw that the wording of your SoT could have dire consequences on what could be done to your avatar or his forces...

And EF, neither am I a English native speaker but that doesn't prevent me from posting an SoT that is as "airtight" as possible...

This game is competitive... While it adds a lot, it also generates much more hard feelings than KotR did, where everybody "almost" worked together (barring some exceptions)...

This competition also requires from all parties to exploit all weaknesses, be they the result of bad placement in-game or wrongly worded SoT...

I fully support PK in his approach of the game as Megas... We as players have only our SoT to polish, while he (and any other Megas) has to go through lots of data so if we (the players) are not able to do our work, we have to stand corrected...

Please note that barring some player's forgetfulness, things like this shouldn't happen again... I'm sure most people will make their SoT as "airtight" as possible from now on...

If only for the sake of this, I think we should thank PK for pointing that out

Anyway jst my

[Dafuge]

Yes, but you didn't exactly say that you didn't like what Ig was doing.

Edit: Intended at Kag.

[Privateerkev]

Show one point where i cheered Igno for braking the rules OOC. I am roleplaying here. Dont confuse my character with real me. I will not start commenting about anyones leadership or other qualities, when the players are role playing.

If you didn't cheer, I certainly didn't see you complain...

And to be honest if Flyd and Overknight broke the rules, then at least it didnt have any effect on my gaming experience. I am here to play a role playing game with historical setting. Not to be a part of some court of law about rules of a role playing game. The best solution for this would be that instead of finding ways to bend and twist the rules, megas should honour the spirit of the rules. But then again that is only my personal opinion.

That's the thing. All rule-breaking effects "someone's" gaming experience.

Ig's rule breaking now makes it more likely that he can kill my avatar. That does not make me happy...

But at least your gaming experience has not been effected...

[Ramses II CP]

Okay, since we're still commenting here, I'll address this one more time.

You hit the nail on the head just there Kag, it didn't have any effect on you before, but for the seven of us in the Order it was life or death for our avatars. And Igno didn't check things out with the GM beforehand, he just did it. Staying silent when that happens, repeatedly, is exactly the same thing as cheering it on. Especially since now, when PK did check it out and it's an incredibly minor effect that doesn't place your IC avatar in danger, and only slightly inconveniences you OOC, you're pitching a massive fit despite the fact that TC signed off on it.

You said above that we should avoid pointing fingers about who started what, well, let's also avoid only wanting the rules to benefit ourselves. If you don't care when someone else is abused you lose the right to cry when you get loopholed.

[Kagemusha]

Well if everyone is happy about the splendid and witty move of PK, then that must be the spirit of the game. I better consult someone who is far more talented at nitpicking in English and lawyering then me and leave my humble and simple self to handle things in the game.

[Privateerkev]

If you don't care when someone else is abused you lose the right to cry when you get loopholed.

"Don't loophole me bro!"



PS: Loopholed has now just become my new favorite word. I just hope it doesn't mean anything like "cornholed."

[TinCow]

Thread is locked temporarily to effect a ceasefire. I am still a mod for this forum and will not permit this to degenerate into personal attacks. Perhaps in a few hours we can discuss the actual game itself again.

[TinCow]

Thread re-opened. Please keep the discussion productive.

[Privateerkev]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ok it's not very productive. But at least it's not destructive...

[flyd]

I don't think we should go with a wild reform of the Megas position, but it might be useful to reduce the reliance on the SOT thread. Most of the garrison orders are don't move/disband already, which makes them pretty redundant. Still, the Megas should be able to recruit. So, I propose:

Newly recruited units can be freely removed by the Megas on the turn after they are recruited. Otherwise, no units may be removed from any city/fort/legal army, without permission from the owner. Avatars may never be moved without permission.

This way, the Megas doesn't have to check the SOT just to recruit some units. He has to ask to remove units, but he has to ask for that these days too, as SOTs generally forbid it. There could be no more "seizing" of recruited units, but the Megas probably wouldn't recruit things in your towns if you were the type to seize things from him. The SOT becomes a build-queue thing, which is what it was in KotR.

[TinCow]

I got this PM from Ramses, with some interesting ideas.

More and more I like your suggested Megas change (Ties in with the no destruction of structures nicely), and I'd like to suggest some things that might help make it work.

First I think the RA/PA system may need a complete overhaul with this change. Since anyone can carry around any number of units it will be more important to assure the quality of units for a House than the quantity, and perhaps tie that to settlement owned in the House as well. Get rid of the idea of PAs entirely, and instead have 'House Armies' where each unit is designated to be owned by House XX and distributed to the members of the House by it's Lord. House Army XX under Dux XY must have a set number of XZ type units, selectable by Dux XY only from the units available to be trained in his House's settlements.

The HA then could be distributed any way he wanted among his vassals. This removes some of the importance of being a high vassal since you won't have your own PA, but it also allows us to dispense with any confusing multiple designations of who commands whose PA/RA. There may need to be some additions to the 'locality' of these powers, so that House Armies aren't tramping through other House's lands without permission.

Second I would suggest that power over fleets be given by title by the Emperor to a player of his choice. Perhaps make it so that the title can be revoked by the Emperor or a 2/3rds vote of the Senate; the Senate being able to reassign the title if they muster the votes to have it taken.

Thirdly I think captain led stacks are very hard to dispense with, but we could give their movement over to the man whose lands they are moving through. Thus the Megas might order that stack YY head from Constantinople to Antioch, but every man along the road in whose lands that army stops has to accede to that plan by actually doing the movement. If the army moves into another's lands during the movement that's fine, they are still under the orders of the person whose province they began in (Thus if the army can move through a province without stopping in one turn that man has no say).

All of these things tied together make Houses more like true Feudal structures, and limits the powers of the Megas to being an accountant, while also (Hopefully) simplifying his job.

I know it's still just a rough idea, but maybe there's something in it that could work.

[Ramses II CP]

To expand on the House Army idea, which is probably the more radical of the suggestions, my thought is like this:

1. The number of units in the HA is dependant on the highest rank in the house. That man can assign those troops to any vassal in any numbers (Consistent with the army restrictions in the rules of course) as he desires.

2. The types of units are dependant on what units can be trained in the provinces owned by that House. Thus the leader of the House could instruct the Megas that he requires the cavalry in his House Army to be composed of Kataphraktoi as long as that unit is available to be trained in one of his castles. If all he can train is peasants, all he gets are peasants. This makes the prioritization of construction more powerful, and it also reduces the number of variables the Megas has to deal with as training will almost always take place 'in house.' The only real choice the Megas gets is, in the event of insufficient funds, which Houses get troops and which don't.

In short the training of units becomes more like the building of structures, and House armies become more like provinces in terms of ownership. This does have the effect of weakening the 'upper middle' ranks of the chain because they no longer automatically get a PA, but it also removes the complication of juggling of PAs to other commanders within the House as now the House owns a certain number of units within their own lands as their HA, rather than a certain number of stacks and/or armies.

3. Captain led stacks passing between regions are, per TC's suggestions, not at the discretion of the Megas to move. Instead each Feudal Lord of each province they start a turn in must consent to order them to move on in the direction the Megas requests.

The other thing, having an Admiral or Captain of the Fleets assigned by title seems pretty reasonable to me. Logically the Emperor would assign that title, though I think it's reasonable to allow a 2/3rds or 3/4th majority of the Senate to overrule him.

Now, poke some holes in it! Personally I've been horribly dreading reaching a position where I'd feel obligated to run for Megas. Chancellor in KotR was bad enough, but Megas in LotR seems like a bloody nightmare. Maybe this can help simplify it a little...

edit: I forgot to mention that this could also be used to eliminate garrison dumping by forcing the House to draw their garrisons from their HA. The size of the HA might have to be larger than the current PA system to ensure sufficient troops, but it could still work.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

I like the first two ideas made by Ramses but not the third one.
What if the Captain led army have to stop on a land of player who will be gone for a week or so. What will happen then? Will that army stay there just there until the person comes back? And what if those are some very important reinforcements? And who can stop us wasting the movement points of that stack by simply moving them back and forth in our provinces?
I think that Megas should be able to move those Captain led armies himself and no one else.

[Kagemusha]

That idea would just make the houses top heavy.The idea behind feudalism is that the smaller lords can raise against their masters if they see it necessary.I dont see any problems assigning house armies to different players inside vassal chain. In matter of fact that is one of the ways to award and motivate vassals that does not have their own armies.
If you want to change the house armies towards more realistic direction. You should assign small forces to each land owning senator, with increasing size, more land they have themselves. So the large armies would be comprised of lots of smaller detachments, like the armies were in reality.

[_Tristan_]

Yes and I can already see a loophole in this captain-stack idea :

Say I'm the lord of province X and a captain-led stack starts in my lands. Then it is up to me to move it per the Megas' request but what is there to prevent me from moving them around my province, not setting one foot out...

I understand there may be some pressure applied by unaligned characters may remain deaf to entreaties...

[woad&fangs]

I assume that in the SOT thread people most people would have

All captain led armies have permission to pass through my land

and the provinces that don't have that would probably be avoided anyways.

edit: actually an order like this might be better

The megas has permission to move all captain-led stacks in my province except those in *city name*

[Ramses II CP]

TC's original idea was to remove the movement power from the default abilities of the Megas. If you want to let him move an army through your lands, then you can, but if you don't want him to do so you don't have to change your SoT every turn to deny him.

Tristan that's a feature, not a loophole. Remember the Megas is losing the ability to disband and move troops by default, so he has to secure the cooperation of landholders in order to transfer them long distances.

Regarding the top heavy structure, I absolutely agree, it's not ideal at all, but the way PAs are handled right now is generating a lot of trouble for the Megas and the players, and garrison dumping is going to become a huge problem as soon as someone thinks it's worthwhile to do it. I'm open to suggestions to correct it.

[TinCow]

Another option for Captain stacks:

Don't let the Megas move or disband any units in the entire game that are in an avatar led army or in a garrison. Then let the Megas be the only person who can move Captain stacks. This means that anything that says "Captain" on it (very easy to spot for the Megas) is his to do with as he wants, but he can't create them unless he creates them from his own avatar's army or garrisons. Essentially, if you move units out of your garrison or army without an escort, you're giving the units to the Megas. If he's friendly, he might do what you want. If he's hostile, he'll probably confiscate or disband them.

This would still require a rethink of the PAs/RAa because anyone with a province could tramp around with their garrison, but I'm growing fonder of that notion the more I think about it. I am almost inclined to abolish mandatory PAs/RAs altogether and simply make people rely on their settlements to get their military power. This would make the choice of which settlement you get far more important. Giving a vassal a fortress is going mean a hell of a lot more than giving them a small town. It would also increase peoples' connection to their provinces. If your province is poor and isn't being upgraded, you're going to be weak militarily, even if you are of high rank. If you own a massively upgraded citadel, you could be a one man mercenary army for hire, even if you're just an unaligned Comes. You won't be able to sway an election, but you can win a war.

[Privateerkev]

While the idea of being the Empire's official CPA doesn't exactly sound fun, I see the merits in the proposed ideas.

We basically have two choices.

Disempower players or empower players even more. I am very much against disempowering players.

So, how do empower players more in a way that still makes the ranks balanced and the game fun?

Getting the Megas out of the unit business might help. Someone has to control the purse in this game. And it shouldn't automatically be the Emperor because that takes away the best part of having an elected Megas. Which is the politicking.

If it was always the Emperor, that would be simple, but wouldn't help the game. So, the question becomes, what powers should a Megas have.

I see the point in giving players and Houses full control over all units in the game. It would certainly eliminate the problems were having. But it causes a whole set of new problems. For one, player activity. We keep having players drop out without warning. If we do this, we need safeguards in place so we don't have another TLG situation. Where an army is locked in his castle for years simply because the player dropped off the face of the .org.

Also, I said earlier that the fun/power of being Megas has to offest the work. With the ideas presented, we're lowering the work but were also lowering the fun/power. We might still have trouble finding people to be the Empire's official Comptroller.

I don't really have a solution. Despite some anxiety, I am having fun and working within the rules. But I can see how others would really not like this job as it currently is designed. I would be fine operating under the current rules for the rest of my term. If we want to overhaul the position, we could do it at the next Senate session.

(I just started getting the hang of these rules so please don't make me learn a whole new set of rules in the middle of my term... )

[Kagemusha]

I think we could get rid of garrison dumping with simple charter amendment i have been thinking to propose the next senate session. All we need to do is to name the maximum amount of garrison for each city size and the quality of it, for example only militia can be counted as city garrison. Of course the charter amendment then needs a clause about private armies in the cities and some other things, but if we can regulate garrisons by simple law, garrison dumping wont be a problem anymore.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

The vassal should be able to 'support' his liege by sending him some soldiers.
If a vassal have a castle but his Lord have just a town the the Lord can ask his vassal to send him better units than the ones he can recruit.

[TinCow]

FYI, for the coming Senate session, I will propose any CA submitted to me that is desgined to improve the mechanics of the game. If you think you've got a good idea that isn't embodied in someone else's suggestion, draft it up and send it to me. I'll make sure it gets voted on even if your rank doesn't let you propose CAs.

[GeneralHankerchief]

We need to keep a fine line between abiding by the general theme of this game (free-for-all) and still making it playable. After all: No Megas, no game. The day may very well come where this is the case, and that won't be a fun day.

I see the major Throne Room PBMs as kind of following the Total War aspect of games as in sets of twos: Revolution, then Evolution. WotS was the first Revolution, and KotR was its Evolution. Now, we're experimenting again with some seriously complicated rules in Revolution and, I think at this point, LotR is just becoming a massive test game for its successor once everything has been refined. Harsh, but true. We're in our fourth Megas term and still ironing out the kinks - not a good sign. I think that by the time we get things the way we want them to be, LotR will be finished.

Clearly, the most pressing step now is to figure out how to streamline the Megas role without making things unmanageable.

[Rowan]

I like Flyd's idea. At this point in the game the fewer radical chances we make the better. (Besides I've almost got my PA )

And if we require PA/RAs to be a single stack that helps a bit with the paperwork (or did we do that already?)

[Ramses II CP]

So basically we need a method to refine or revise the PA system so that both the players and the Megas can use it simply. RAs are a bit more complicated since the Emperor can't join a House, but shouldn't be left without any troops at all. Let me see if I can lay out the complications and some of the solutions semi-organized for discussion:

Garrisons. Right now because the Megas can move anything, garrisons have to be 'locked,' but the power to lock in concert with PAs creates the potential for garrison dumping.

1. If we remove the power of the Megas to disband or move troops inside a city or under an avatar then garrison dumping isn't necessary, but PAs are much, much less important. Captain led stacks in the open are still under his control.

2. If remove the power of the Megas to disband or move any troops anywhere garrison dumping is gone and PAs are really just a technicality. Captain led stacks in the open require further explanation and rules.

3. If we cap garrison size we have to build in overhead rules to determine what size is allowed at what time and what does or doesn't comprise a garrison, possibly adding complications when we want to remove them. PAs could remain as they are, preserving the middle ranks.

Private Armies. Currently tracking and refilling PAs is a major source of complication for the Megas, and a frequent source of contention for the players.

1. If we eliminate PAs for House Armies, as in my idea, the middle ranks once again potentially lose power in exchange for simplification of the system. Garrisons could be drawn from the HA to eliminate garrison dumping, and control of the quality of troops in the HA would depend on the quality of settlements in the House. Houses would be top heavy, but tracking the HA by total number of units should be simpler and recruitment would be 'in House,' which cuts down on potential abuses of the Megas' requirement to fill the HA.

2. What else can be done about PAs? Maybe a system that puts more emphasis on the rights of those middle ranks without denying the top ranks their due? Say:

Rank 1: No army except your BG
Rank 2: One unit army drawn from the type of units available at your owned settlement. Can be SoT'd to your Lord to form a larger army.
Rank 3: 2 units to be drawn from your owned settlements or the settlements of your vassals. Can be SoT'd to your Lord.
Rank 4: 4 units and ditto
Rank 5: 7 units and ditto

etc?

Since the Megas cannot move troops we could then make it the responsibility of the individual players to track their unit and, when units are merged, decide who it belongs or inform the Megas of the need to replace it? The Megas would still make the decision as to where the available funds were spent.

Simplifcation and loopholing preventing. What's the worst part of being the Megas? Checking the SoT every turn and before every decision? The worst part of being a player, in my experience, is having to wait around to see what bit of trickery the Megas has concocted to **** you. TC has cracked down on the latter, and I know PK has been checking his path before he treads it, but it may not always be that way.

1. Taking the power to move or disband troops should greatly simplify the Megas position IMHO. The Megas will still control agents, expenditures, (And possibly ships depending on the title idea's passage) and be the one to hit 'end turn,' etc. but armies and movement won't be a matter of figuring out loophole, but a matter of having a player's explicit permission.

2. I've decided I dislike my captain led stacks movement rule because it's complicated and requires potentially new permission every turn. There are some good alternatives, like letting the Megas move anything on land, out of a city, which starts with 'Captain.' This may significantly expand the power of the Megas, but he'll still have to be wary not to let those men wander into range to be siezed by an avatar.

That didn't seem to clear things up much for me while I was typing it, but... at least I tried?

[Privateerkev]

I prefer to see things move in baby steps. Big steps tend to come with big problems no one thought of. I propose three small changes:

1.) Garrisons/forts/armies are always "locked" as a default. The person doesn't even have to post a SOT. In case of player activity, these things can be unlocked by the head of that person's feudal chain. Or, if there is no head of chain, in 2 terms of no voting.

2.) Garrisons are capped at the settlement's free-upkeep level. This should prevent "garrison dumping."

3.) Only the first "insert fair number here" of units can be "locked" in a fort. This should minimize "fort dumping."

Leave the rest of the rules as is and see how these do first. If bigger changes are needed, make them then. I believe this would simplify the Megas job while helping to relieve the anxiety of the players.

[Dafuge]

I think even that would be quite a big step. Maybe just the first one next Senate session, then the next two after that ect ect.