Quote Originally Posted by TheFlax View Post
About that has been said recently, in a nutshell:

RGBs: I completely agree with TC, I'd rather not make players wait for the game to spawn avatars. Interacting purely in the senate for a few terms takes a great deal of dedication. I do think there should be some sort of restriction on people ditching their avatar (through carelessness or because they simply want to change) getting another one immediately after. Just a thought.

As far as new players going inactive, I think that stems mostly from feeling out of the loop. In my opinion it is up to the players in positions of power and importance to involve these new players.

Edicts for annexations: I'm partial to TC's proposition, mostly because even though I liked YLC's idea, I don't think the chancellor needs more power. I also feel its more simple to implement. YLC's idea would mean tracking which provinces are legit, which are not.

Civil Wars: I agree we need to avoid another War of Words. I liked the civil war event which ended LotR, a sort of special campaign mode for Civil War. Would this be too complicated to be used in every civil wars? If so, than the next best thing IMO is what TC proposed. How would the terrain of battle be picked? The side who has the avatar with most command stars could possibly chose the terrain of battle, representing a better strategist?
I agree with most points, except -

It would be rare to have an illegitimate province, and it could be kept track of easily on a list of conquered provinces among the KotF Library. Second, we can take away a chancellors ability to decide whether or not to fund it, simply by stating he can't until it is legitimate, hence my refinement of the rule - a friendly chancellor is still important, but not overpowering. Again, not very hard, since legitimizing a province is usually a once off thing - essentially like keeping track of Chancellors.

I dislike the idea of simply making a single battle of it, simply because it removes any strategy on the map. I wouldn't mind it if it became localized however - a fight in one area or over one settlement, while skipping movement to and from. I would never, if war was declared upon me, ever summon up all my forces and bet it on one battle in the middle of nowhere - it's war, I'm not going to be a gentleman about it! I'm going to try and use tactics to bleed my opponent dry first, force small battles, or costly ones. What TC is proposing is basically the opposite and limits tactical choice - again, the basis is solid, but I'd like to be able to pick and choose my fights instead of rumbling it out in the ring with what will almost always be a 600 pound gorilla.