OOC Thread and Chatroom

[/Bean\]

We had a ceasefire after we took Taras, which as broken to take Illyria. Me being in Epirus has already been explained. I was in Illyria Hellenike when Pyrrhus walked right past me. The Senate has said nothing about stopping the war against Pyrrhus, nor making me reliquish command of the Second. I attempted to ambush him (in my own territory) but he got past me (he retreated as soon as the battle started) and so my forces pursued him into enemy territory.

I plainly stated that I only used my lightest troops to for pusuit, leaving my heavies protecting the mountain passes, and at this point the Legio III and my new troops were in Epidamnos protecting that; thus I did not leave my territory unprotected seeking glory.
If you think pursuing the enemy King and killing him when he has very little protection is illegal I am seriously worried. What on earth do you find legal?

[mini]

The deciding point in this discussion:

Are we currently at war with Epeiros?
If yes, and bean got phyrrus killed in Epeiros territory: no harm done.
If no, this action was illegal and bean should be prosecuted for transgression.

Have no acces to the save so I myself cannot check :)
Though I'm fairly sure we are still in a state of war with Epeiros.

[/Bean\]

Of course we are; we always have been, except for a small time after Taras was captured. Then we waged war again taking Illyria, and we never stopped.

[mini]

As the territory you moved into was Epeirotean?

Then there are no legal grounds to presecute you

Absolvo

[/Bean\]

How come Roman generals got Triumphs for things like capturing a few minor cities on Syracuse or a victory against the Sardinians, but not for conquering Illyria and killing Pyrrhus? Tad unfair don't you think?

[mini]

Actually, the granting of a triumph was something that was voted upon by the senate.

All I am saying, is that if you want a triumph, you'll need a put up a voting :)
(this is one of the occassions where it would pay off to have a tribunus plebis that is loyal to you under my new rules, as he can push things through without a congressional vote)

My IC reaction is thus accordingly. No congressional sessions is no vote. No vote is no triumph.

Which is why i chose to RP it being said by another tribunus plebis in office, rather than an envoy or whatever from my character, since this latter is loyal to his adoptive father.

[/Bean\]

But that isnt the argument you put forth. Yours was we dont have spoils. I can create some out of thin air if that would help

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

We had a ceasefire after we took Taras, which as broken to take Illyria. Me being in Epirus has already been explained. I was in Illyria Hellenike when Pyrrhus walked right past me. The Senate has said nothing about stopping the war against Pyrrhus, nor making me reliquish command of the Second. I attempted to ambush him (in my own territory) but he got past me (he retreated as soon as the battle started) and so my forces pursued him into enemy territory.

I plainly stated that I only used my lightest troops to for pusuit, leaving my heavies protecting the mountain passes, and at this point the Legio III and my new troops were in Epidamnos protecting that; thus I did not leave my territory unprotected seeking glory.
If you think pursuing the enemy King and killing him when he has very little protection is illegal I am seriously worried. What on earth do you find legal?

1) Ok, Ceasefire after Taras - that was what I was remembering, so we are still at war with Epiros, even though the campaign ended. That's fine by me, I just wanted clarification re: the peace treaty I knew we had signed at one point.

2) Just because you left the Roman territory defended would be irrelevant because roman forces left roman territory period. Whether or not you used light troops, heavy troops, one troop, all troops, or girl scout troops wouldn't matter if you had violated the game rules (which has been clarified that you did not because we are still at war).

3) I find any infraction of the game rules illegal, which is why I brought it up. It's the same reasoning behind preventing Mini from spontaneously creating laws because real life Tribunes of the Plebs did it. We have a system, and that system must be followed at all costs or else there is no reason to play the game since we all can just do what we want.

Congratulations on your excellent victory over Roma's long-time enemy!

How come Roman generals got Triumphs for things like capturing a few minor cities on Syracuse or a victory against the Sardinians, but not for conquering Illyria and killing Pyrrhus? Tad unfair don't you think?

I agree that for this occasion you deserve a triumphus. This is a major blow to our enemies, moreso than just conquering Illyria which was not entirely their territory and TCM will support a vote to honor you in the Curia.

[/Bean\]

Cheers. The only reason I was arguing against you in here so much was because I never had an inkling of a thought that we had not stopped fighting the Epirites. I couldnt see how you could possibly have thought I was breaking the rules.

And too be fair, you've had plenty of time to bring it up. I did defeat a large Epirite army straight after the congressional session as well. No harm done and no hard feelings though, eh?

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

No, of course no hard feelings. I just wanted clarification on the subject. It's such a profound turn of events that I wanted to make sure we had it right. With all of the cumulative victories that Cotta has, it is time that he's rewarded. TCM will most likely begin showing some deferential respect for this earned glory, though I doubt the two men will always agree on most things.

[/Bean\]

I hope not

[mini]

oh stop posturing, you're just sad you got no cause to preosecute hsi ass :D

atleast tensions keeps the game interesting

if everyone always agreed, this would be like wotb, utterly boring ;p

[/Bean\]

Is that why you don't like it?

[Cultured Drizzt fan]

Honestly right now is just slow for WotB, thing will pick up eventually. However the restrictions on rebellion do keep political intrigue down in the game, if only satraps can rebel it means the rest of us just have to live with the Basileus, not that I am complaining, I always seem to choose the loyal type anyways, but a rebellion or two would spice things up.