Ideas and suggestions

[Ibn-Khaldun]

If you have some ideas or suggestion for this game then post them here.
Also if you have question about the Rules then you can post them here too.

[TinCow]

Suggestion: Wait a week to start the game. LotR has recently encountered problems due to the complexity of the Private Army system. Since your rules are based on ours, you'll probably run into the same roadblock eventually. We should have revised army rules ready in the near future which should solve this problem. I would recommend you use these new rules after they are published rather than going with the original LotR rules.

[Celtic_Punk]

yes i have an idea about private armies, since if you go to war with the king youd be cut off from the treasury, each Satrap should have his own budget, or have a limited amount of money to recruit more guys, and have a limited choice to the units he can mass. like only a few levy phalanx's or soemthing, since hed be paying out of his own pocket instead of out of the treasury.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Suggestion: Wait a week to start the game. LotR has recently encountered problems due to the complexity of the Private Army system. Since your rules are based on ours, you'll probably run into the same roadblock eventually. We should have revised army rules ready in the near future which should solve this problem. I would recommend you use these new rules after they are published rather than going with the original LotR rules.

I keep a close eye on things in LotR. Currently we have 3 army types: Royal, Regular and Satrapal(kind of Private armies). Royal Army is led by Basileus and Heir. Regular army is led by a general who is appointed by Basileus. Regular armies are not private and the Basileus is the one that can give or take them away from people. Satrapal Armies are private but once they leave their Satrap they are at Basileus' mercy(unless Civil War is declared). They are meant as defensive forces and not offensive armies. So if people want to conquer other provinces then they should be loyal to Basileus and perhaps they can lead an army. Anyway this is our military system(at least I was thinking something like that when I wrote the rules).

yes i have an idea about private armies, since if you go to war with the king youd be cut off from the treasury, each Satrap should have his own budget, or have a limited amount of money to recruit more guys, and have a limited choice to the units he can mass. like only a few levy phalanx's or soemthing, since hed be paying out of his own pocket instead of out of the treasury.

I think that it is practically impossible to represent each Satraps own budget. When I wrote the Rules then I thought that one Satrap alone can never produce enough money to pay for some buildings or recruit new soldiers. Thus he will be cut off by any finances if Civil War starts. Also Satrapies are most likely inside the Arche and are surrounded by other provinces of Arche. So they don't have anyone to trade and this means that soon they will be out of money and will be bankrupt.

[kingsnake]

This is my response to Ibn-Khaldun's last post at the first sign up thread (An Eb interactive campaign) I thought the discussion should be transferred here.

What kind of aids? A whole satrap army? or a unit? what's the minimum?

So Satrap A is ally with Basileus and Chancelor, but Satrap B and C are not.
The Chancellor cuts Building/Recruiting in the enemy satraps, then Satrap B attacks A and wins with heavy casualties. Since he can't recruit I think at least he could receive some units from ally satraps.

The whole thing of the chancelor controlling building and recruitng on civil wars is also strange... I mean if some Satraps want to remove the chancelor and the basileus they are kinda isolating themselves from the empire and should at least have control of themselves.
Imagine there is a direct battle between a satrap army and the chancellors army. The battle ends with alot of casualties the satrap wins but the chancelor manages to retreat. The chancelor will then be able to recruit a new army and have an advantage over his enemies, as he can recruit new armies whenever his allies need until revolting satrap is finished.

So I guess, with these rules, the whole thing about a civil war against the chancelor is to kill them at the first battle?

-------------

Also when a new turn starts the WotB admin or whatever they are called, will post a savegame with the status then I should download it, play it making my moves and save it, then I post the new savegame is it?

From what I've seen at the temporary forum that's how you do it... :S

Next what sites are best to upload the savegames?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

What kind of aids? A whole satrap army? or a unit? what's the minimum?

So Satrap A is ally with Basileus and Chancelor, but Satrap B and C are not.
The Chancellor cuts Building/Recruiting in the enemy satraps, then Satrap B attacks A and wins with heavy casualties. Since he can't recruit I think at least he could receive some units from ally satraps.

Satrap C can send units or the whole Satrap army to help Satrap B. What Satrap C must remember that a general must be in command of those reinforcements since Basileus can move every Captain led stack that is outside of Satrapy. There is no minimum. But Satrap C must remember that sending his troops to Satrap B makes his Satrapy vulnerable.

The whole thing of the chancelor controlling building and recruitng on civil wars is also strange... I mean if some Satraps want to remove the chancelor and the basileus they are kinda isolating themselves from the empire and should at least have control of themselves.
Imagine there is a direct battle between a satrap army and the chancellors army. The battle ends with alot of casualties the satrap wins but the chancelor manages to retreat. The chancelor will then be able to recruit a new army and have an advantage over his enemies, as he can recruit new armies whenever his allies need until revolting satrap is finished.

So I guess, with these rules, the whole thing about a civil war against the chancelor is to kill them at the first battle?

Yes, you should try to kill Chancellor(or Basileus/Satrap) at the first battle.

I must point that Chancellor don't have much military power. Yes, he can command an army. No, Ex-Chancellor can not keep it. Chancellors army is more like a defensive army. Also, you can always wait the next elections and make sure that more friendlier Chancellor will get the job.

[Celtic_Punk]

I think it would be more realistic if a satrap can recruit some levy troops (only levy quality) since they would be cheap enough to be paid for out of his own pocket, but he should only be able to do this once after every civil war battle (this could be revised of course) and only a limited number of regiments as well, like say 2 levy regiments of his choice. this would also balance the advantage given to the government against the attacker. You also said that

What Satrap C must remember that a general must be in command of those reinforcements since Basileus can move every Captain led stack that is outside of Satrapy.

I think in the case of civil war, if that army has thrown their lot in with the Satrap, they wouldn't give a damn if the King sent some messenger to tell them to disengage or w/e. Therefore a rule stating the Basileus cannot move armies of the renegade Satrap, ONLY in the case of civil war.
Allowing the Basileus to move those armies is like when Caesar left for Greece, the senate ordered his other half of his army to go back north of the Rubicon or something. it just doesnt make sense.

Also since there is probably a divide in retraining on the players who are interested, (this does not necessarily pertain to civil wars) should armies be allowed to retrain to full strength?