OOC Thread and Chatroom 2

[ULC]

I'm not arguing against the rules Andres, but to me I really cannot explain why, IC, my character would not go after Rome. If an explanation can be thought up, that would be great.

[_Tristan_]

The problem is that the IC part should be included with the constraints of the OOC rules and not the contrary...

Otherwise, what prevents me from claiming that Methodios is the Basileus, because it suits me IC...

Hope you see my point...

[ULC]

I see your point - but why not declare "I am the Basileus!" - make for an interesting situation in which Methodios no longer believes Ioannis competent for the job and (for the good of all Roman people) Takes over office.



I am not asking for a Rules Change, I am just asking for understanding - I will go with what TC decides, but it just feels gamey to me nonetheless.

[Northnovas]

Speaking of rules and the activity in the senate it would be good to put some of the statements into Edicts. If you want to conquor the Turkish capital get it into law so you will have the support of the Megas and something should be done with that leaderless fleet sitting outside of Venice. I don't even know who put it there or how long it has been there.

No Edicts no direction for the Megas during his term.

[_Tristan_]

The mention of the University in the Megas thread just had me notice that Methodios lacks the trait from the last University under Dean Apionnas...

[_Tristan_]

I see your point - but why not declare "I am the Basileus!" - make for an interesting situation in which Methodios no longer believes Ioannis competent for the job and (for the good of all Roman people) Takes over office.

I could do it (I may even have considered it) but it would have to remain IC, there are no OOC mechanisms that allow anything like this (nor should there be) and I wouldn't do it for Iggy's sake...

I know I would hate to have the rug taken from under my feet...

[AussieGiant]

Good day all.

I'm off to Australia for holiday this Sunday. Three weeks is the duration so I'll be out of action...which as you can see is not making much difference.

I'd say at this rate that when I get back I'll have to bow out of the game.

I'll be back online by the 24th of February.

Take it easy everyone.
AG

[_Tristan_]

Good holiday, AG...

And I hope 3 weeks will be ample time to reconsider...

[AussieGiant]

Thanks Tristan.

I've updated my SOT to allow Basileus discretion with Sofia, recruiting and the army.

[KnightnDay]

I would definitely agree with the point that even a player who has gone rebel should not be allowed to declare on another power without blessing from the highest order. Otherwise, any player could take their avatar, say "ok I'm a rebel now" and lay siege to the nearest neutral town or attack a neutral power's stack to start a war, then a moment later say "ok, now I changed my mind, I'm back in the fold now"

[TinCow]

Apologies for the slow response, I have house guests over and am busy being a host. This reduces my internet time to almost nothing until Monday morning. I will not be able to promptly answer questions or resolve issues until Monday, at which time I will return to my usual schedule. Accordingly, due to my inability to monitor this properly, I am going to extend the debate period of the Senate by 2 days (through Monday) so that I am able to deal with all issues before any deadline passes.

Regarding the YLC declaration of war thing:
Sorry, but I will not allow a unilateral attack on a neutral or allied faction unless an Edict exists authorizing it or the war is declared by a rank that has the power to do so. I understand that there may be IC reasons, but this is a limitation in the game engine. IC, Byzantium could declare that person an outlaw and convince the other faction that it was a rogue attack, not an official act of war. OOC, we can't do that and it starts a war with another faction. As we all know, M2TW is extremely picky about ending wars once they start. It simply doesn't happen. This means that an un-authorized attack essentially starts a war that we will never be able to end. This to me is even more unrealistic IC than barring someone from making a unilateral attack. So, I will not allow it.

On a more practical level, YLC, I don't think this is a major hindrance on you. If you want a city in Italy for yourself, Byzantium is already at war with the Venetians and they've got cities a couple turns north of Rome. Just keep marching that way and you'll get your city soon enough. Apologies if this limits some storyline you had in mind, but there has to be a balance between freedom of action for the players and the constraints imposed on us by the game engine. In this case, I think it's more unrealistic and problematic to allow the attack than to prevent it.

The mention of the University in the Megas thread just had me notice that Methodios lacks the trait from the last University under Dean Apionnas...

I haven't received any trait improvements via the University for a long time. Anyone who was a Scholar in previous terms who did not receive their trait can PM me with what it should have been and I'll make sure it gets added.

[ULC]

The main issue for attacking Rome was simply that it was a one province faction - although yes, declaring war on it as Byzantium especially would mean it being next to impossible to get a ceasefire, it would also mean it would be over quick and there would be little repercussions besides the Pope calling a crusade on us from wherever he happens to get new territory gifted to him.

The second is that it has nothing to do with land in Italy - it has everything to do with incurring the ire and wrath of every last Senator in the Empire while still being chivalrous. If this were in the Balkans, then that would be fine - if this were in the Levant, Egypt, Greece, Anatolia, the Caucasus, it wouldn't matter (although preferably in the Balkans/Thrace ). The whole point of me going to Rome was to challenge the authority of the Basileus and Empire while still being a good guy - nothing more, nothing less.

But, if I cannot go to Rome, then I will continue to search for ways to anger everyone else while still being the good guy, IC of course

I also see you signed up for Godfather III but not mine Oh well, it was going to be closed today anyway *hint, hint Andres*

[Ituralde]

I'm back from my trip. Had a blast. Learning to snowboard hurts... a lot!
I won't be up to date with the Magnaura and everything until tomorrow though.

Cheers!

Ituralde

[TinCow]

It has been pointed out to me that due to the 1 province inheritence rule, many Rebels could be automatically reconciled and re-incorporated into the Empire just by dying, even if they wanted to continue the Rebellion with their next avatar. This doesn't make a lot of sense. While some rebellions would certainly cease with the death of their leader, many would continue with a new man taking up the leadership position. As such, I am going to add these bits to the proposed secession rule change:

Rebel:
Powers:
(7) Can pass an unlimited number of provinces on to the player's next avatar through a valid will. The player's next avatar will instantly gain the rank of Rebel.

Secessionist:
Powers:
(6) Can pass an unlimited number of provinces on to the player's next avatar through a valid will. The player's next avatar will instantly gain the rank of Secessionist.

Independent Ruler:
Powers:
(12) Can pass an unlimited number of provinces on to the player's next avatar through a valid will. The player's next avatar will instantly gain the rank of Secessionist.

This allows the rebellions to continue through the death of an avatar, if the player wants to keep leading it. Thus, rebellions must be crushed by force of arms or by convincing the Senator to end the rebellion by giving up his Capital peacefully (which is the only way to remove the rank once it is gained). People who die while still Rebels will have to continue at that rank (with its nasty penalties), but Secessionist and Independent Rules will only have to drop back to the Secessionist rank. Note that this doesn't override the inhertence rule on passing on one retinue to your next avatar. That bit still stands.

[_Tristan_]

For ease of reference, may I suggest that a table be added to the Senate Library listing all of our provinces and their owners (to be revised at each Magnaura session) ?

With the recent deaths and upheavals, I'll admit I have had a bit of problems keeping up with the ownership of our provinces...

[TheFlax]

I have to ask, since no one answered me in the Magnaura, is Ioannis Erotikos' (Ramses II CP)candidacy legal? If I remember correctly, he is a Strator and according to the rules, can't be Megas because of that.

Strator:
Requirements: None
Influence: 1
Powers:
(1) Can propose one Edict per Senate Session.
Penalties:
(1) Cannot run for Megas Logothetes.

[Ituralde]

I don't think it is. I always thought he owned Tortosa for some reason but neither the Library nor the SoT claim ownership of any province. This would indeed hinder him from running for the office of Megas Logothetes.

[TinCow]

Hmm, it would appear this is correct. Tortosa belongs to Kousinos Sophianos (Cecil XIX). Apologies for not noticing this. I will not re-do the election poll until Ramses has a chance to respond and perhaps point out which province he does own (since the Library could be inaccurate on that).

[TinCow]

I'm in the midst of updating the Library, but thought the current world map was worth a comment in here. The Danes seem to have made huge progress in their war against England, and have actually captured two provinces in England itself, including London. I don't think I've ever seen another faction successfully invade England before. The Moors are also gaining significant ground, having recently captured 2 Portuguese cities and Sardinia. Finally, the Sicilians (!) appear to be about ready to take Timbuktu. That must've been one long march through the desert!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[IMG][/IMG]

[Cecil XIX]

Hah, yeah, the AI expansion has been something to see.

[Ignoramus]

The Scots are going very well too. They got all of Norway, Scotland, Ireland, and Groningen.

[Ramses II CP]

I don't think I own a province, though I had an offer or two. Frankly if I don't know for sure I'd say that's a pretty clear no.

[Ituralde]

I don't think I own a province, though I had an offer or two. Frankly if I don't know for sure I'd say that's a pretty clear no.

It's hard to keep track these days, isn't it?

[TheFlax]

It's hard to keep track these days, isn't it?

I tried to track them all down for my report in the Magnaura, but there were a few for which I could not find an owner, no matter where I looked.

[TinCow]

I'll get it all figured out in the next day or two.

[TinCow]

Ok, I have added a chart of all provinces and their current owners. Doing this has pointed out some errors in the Library, which I have now sorted out. The following provinces did not have anyone listed as their owner:

Damascus - It's last owner was Armatos ek Naksou (Cecil XIX). I cannot find any evidence that he ever lost it before his death. Thus, in accordance with his will, it goes to Vartholomaios Ksiros (Rowan).
Nevoulion - Conquered by Isaakios Komnenos (flyd). As he had no Lord, the province is his.
Ragusa - Captured by Magnentios Kalameteros (Zim), who died in the attack. When Magnentios captured it, it became the property of the top ranked Lord in his House - Ioannis Kalameteros (deguerra)
Thebes - Used to belong to Vissarionas ek Lesvou (Ramses II CP). He died without a will, so it goes to his Lord - Vartholomaios Ksiros (Rowan)

There were also two owners listed for Thessalonika, as I had forgotten to remove the province from its previous owner when it was transferred. This has now been corrected. I think this brings all province ownership information in the Library up to date. I will use this info to properly update the title retinues tonight so that the 1185 mugshots will actually be correct in this regard. Please note that some avatars will not be able to hold all their title retinues. There's nothing I can do about that.

[TheFlax]

Ragusa - Captured by Magnentios Kalameteros (Zim), who died in the attack. When Magnentios captured it, it became the property of the top ranked Lord in his House - Ioannis Kalameteros (deguerra)

I thought that since my character was also there during the battle, and actually won it, Ragusa was mine? (Even though Zim played the battle)

If not, my candidacy for Megas is void and Arintheos Voutoumitis wins by default.

[TinCow]

LOL, so much for the interesting election of 1185. Perhaps this will have a nice side-effect of putting pressure on some of the province hoarders to give away some of their land.

The rule on this is clear:

2.2 – Gaining and Losing Provinces: Except as stated in Rule 2.7, Senators gain control of all provinces they personally conquer. In the event that multiple Senators are part of the conquering army, the Senator controlled by the player who actually fought the battle is considered the conqueror. If the battle is autoresolved, the commanding Senator is considered the conqueror. If no Senator is involved in the battle whatsoever, the Basileus is considered the conqueror. At the start of the game, TinCow will determine which Senators receive control of the starting provinces, to a maximum of one province per Senator. Senators can only lose control of one of their provinces if they voluntarily give it to another Senator, if it is conquered by an AI faction, or if it is occupied by the army of a Senator who has made a Declaration of War against them (See Section 5).

[TheFlax]

, sorry about that.

Edit: Just realized that this would also mean I took troops that were not mine to fight YLC in that PvP battle, since I took Ragusa's garrison.

[TinCow]

No worries, it wasn't your fault and no one else noticed the problem either.