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?

[johnhughthom]

I may have missed something, but your rules don't mention how level 4 govts and client rulers will work. Will using a client ruler give you total control over your province's building queue?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

I may have missed something, but your rules don't mention how level 4 govts and client rulers will work. Will using a client ruler give you total control over your province's building queue?

Yes, it's not in the rules but I thought that we shouldn't build level 4 government.
It would bring too much confusion into the game. Also.. Only those who have Satrapy have to worry about the build queue and something like that. All other provinces will be under Basileus' jurisdiction. Basileus will post a build queue to all of the provinces that are not part of any Satrap. IF Basileus want's to share his responsibilities then he can do so by posting in public thread where he will say who will govern what province.
Anyway.. I don't see how we could use level 4 gov in this game

[johnhughthom]

Would using one of the starting client rulers be ok? I was hoping to use the Babylonian dude, if no-one else picked him first of course.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Would using one of the starting client rulers be ok? I was hoping to use the Babylonian dude, if no-one else picked him first of course.

I think it is OK. Since EB 1.1 have client rulers who can move then it is possible(correct me if I'm wrong but I haven't used level 4 gov in EB 1.1)

[Roka]

I think it is OK. Since EB 1.1 have client rulers who can move then it is possible(correct me if I'm wrong but I haven't used level 4 gov in EB 1.1)

they can move, but it's not advisable

i think it has a massive impact on public order if the client ruler is outside the settlement

[Ibn-Khaldun]

And they happen to get this 'Insolent' trait too..

[Roka]

didn't know that, i always just keep mine in the settlements unless i can guarantee theyll be back during that same turn

[Ibn-Khaldun]

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.

In case of a civil war you shouldn't send your Captain led stack to land that Basileus controls. Only then can Basileus seize them(can be roleplayed as troops were loyal to Basileus and left the Satrap they served). But if they stay in the borders of the Satrapy then the Basileus can't control them even if they are 1 tile away from the Basileus' land.
Also you have to remember that if Basileus sends some Captain led units through any Satrapy then the Satrap can seize those units himself. So becoming a Satrap of Susa or Persia is a chance to intercept and seize all units that are passing through those lands.

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?

Yes, retraining is allowed.

I apologize for not noticing your post before.

[Celtic_Punk]

thank you, Ibn-Khaldun all is forgiven!

how is the test game doing?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Since some of the test gamers were not able to play as fast as I would have wanted WH and I decided to start the real game instead. We will see if that was a bad idea or not.

[Celtic_Punk]

I guess we will work the kinks out ourselves in the council meetings then?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

I guess we will work the kinks out ourselves in the council meetings then?

I think so. I want to think that I have thought about everything while I wrote the Rules but no one is perfect. So if some part of the rules are causing too much trouble it can be changed later in game via Charter Amendment.

[TinCow]

Here are the rule changes I mentioned before:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=107440

[Celtic_Punk]

I think we should stick with what we got for armies for now, then swap if we run into the same trouble. I like this idea of Royal armies and whatnot.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

I think so too. But just in case I'll rewrite the rules with the new army system of LotR in it and save them for the future.

[Celtic_Punk]

Thats a good idea Ibn.

I think a good way to track captain-led stacks is to literally write down the name of the bloke, and track his position, this would be up to the army owner. We could however create a council position that would be in charge of logistics. he would make sure reinforcements get where they need to, that armies do not get confused with eachother, and that they all find a suitable place to camp to prevent starvation. He wouldn't beable to override orders from superiors or the owner or the army, and he could still hold a rank of General or something, it would just be a responsibility or office that one would be elected to...

just an idea to bounce of y'all

THIS IS AND EDITED EXCERPT FROM A POST IN THE SIGN-UP THREAD:
I think since they are independant states you have to declare war on each settlement. Also if you want to make an expedition deep into enemy territory (and not just a raid or attack on a bordering settlement/province) you should require your superior's approval... not a vote in the council, but just "hey mr satrap can i go sack memphis?" "why yes you can mr strategos!" im paraphrasing and adding a bit of jest, but you get the idea....

[kingsnake]

Can I change the video options, etc at my will? Will they save with the savegame and annoy some people who want different specs?

[The Celtic Viking]

Yes, you can. No, it won't. Go ahead with your fine-tunings.

[johnhughthom]

Since we have more settlements than generals there will be a lot of adoptions offered. Phanias Laodikeias Lydikes got a man of the hour adoption after winning a battle and this is likely to happen to any RGB after winning a battle as long as there is a shortage of family members. Wouldn't it be fair to everyone then if all other adoptions were refused, giving everbody not on the family tree a chance to get on it?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

The thing with the RTW is that if you don't accept those 'A man of great potential' offers at the beginning of the game then you can't do it later after you have already saved the game and load it again. You get the message that the man have deceased. So I agree that all other adoption should be refused. in the next Council Session I propose CA with this.

[johnhughthom]

Perhaps those playing RGBs should put in their SOTs whether they want to be part of the royal family if offered so we wouldn't need to wait for them if the offer comes about in-game.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Actually it's more the adopter who should put in their SOT whether they want to adopt anyone or not.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Since we are waiting the new Council Session to start I would like to know what are your expectations, what would you like to see in WotB?

We've had defeats our defeats and victories. Our Basileus have changed. We finally got Chancellor elections.

So, what would you like to see in future?? Some good Event ideas are welcomed.

I'll give you some hints about things I have planned: Assassins, Akademia, Invasion.