Out of character thread XIV

[RoadKill]

Econ, forgot to tell you, if you think you have to odds of winning, do't wait for reinforcments just attack on your own, Lorenz has to prove Arnold that he can kick butt.

[gibsonsg91921]

cmon kingdoms people, join up so i can have some good experienced PBM players. get a good avatar if u come early!

[RoadKill]

Hardly anyone here has kingdoms haha.

[gibsonsg91921]

stig, econ, and bob do, maybe more im not sure. ik econ is busy, i was more wondering stig and bob, depending on how busy they are

[GeneralHankerchief]

***Serious post below***

Judging by my parsing of the various House Threads (don't yell at me, we're all guilty) and private communications I'm worried about the amount of sabotage that's going to occur during this cataclysm.

The whole idea that you're allowed to do whatever you want to other Electors and the fact that the rules basically encourage the sacking and plunder of your own settlements, i.e. destroying buildings in-game is very worrying for the situation in 1340.

I'm worried that we might break the game in these ten turns if we're not careful. TinCow and econ have stated that there's going to be more losing settlements than capturing them in this period, and that's fine, but there's always the time where we have to win them back. In addition, it's very possible that we're also going to have to get our finances straightened out and drive off the multitude of enemies from our land, this time without the help of the console and at the mercy of the game's financial system, not TinCow's.

There is 1340 to look forward to, and right now it doesn't look good. Strictly from an IC point of view, emotions are going to be running high after all of the internal sabotage and plunderings. I don't know if we'll be able to justify it if we were all able to convene and be satisfied with the legal resolutions. What's to stop firebrands like Dietrich or Becker (if they're at large) if they don't get what they want from going right back to rebellion?

In addition, we're actually going to have to get back to the game OOC as well. I had planned to run as Chancellor in 1340, and I still do, but if we all choose the "safe" option, plunder settlements, and retreat farther into the heartlands the Chancellor is going to be faced with a bunch of armies huddled around Frankfurt and Nuremberg, which won't be able to pay for all of them and the men won't be able to keep out the many French, Byzantine, Danish, Polish, Hungarian, Russian, Venetian, and Papal forces laying siege to those two territories.

Basically, I'm worried that we'll lose the game. While it's a rather fitting death for the PBM IC it definitely wasn't designed to be this way OOC. It was designed to provide a challenge to us, but I believe that the cataclysm is tottering on the edge between "challenge" and "impossibility."

If we want to keep playing well into the 1400s and even discover America, I suggest you all tread carefully when making your decisions.

[gibsonsg91921]

GH is right. we cant just kill everything.

[RoadKill]

I second that,

[gibsonsg91921]

id hate to be the accidental engineer of the end of the game. at least econ21 and tincow are planning it all, i just through my hat into the ring

[Privateerkev]

GH: You reap what you sow. People have chosen to play contentious rebellious characters. Of course this is a possible outcome of that. People do not have to plunder and sack other people's provinces. People don't have to kill Popes. People don't have to rebel. But if they choose to, then they should not be surprised IC or OOC at what happens. There are many reasons I am having Jan go the "co-operative" route in the cataclysm. One reason is simply to follow his traits. The other is because I do not want to create such a massively contentious and stressful environment to play in.

So, if people are worried about breaking the game, then they should think about what their avatar says and does. If we do break the game, we only have ourselves to blame. We wanted strife and difficulty. Now we have it. It's up to us IC and OOC to decide what to do about it.

I say lets play on and see what happens. If we end up breaking the game, we can just start another. If anyone is really worried about what the game is becoming, then they should sit and think about how they are adding to the environment.

[TinCow]

The problems that GH is concerned with are exactly those that we wanted to create with the cataclysm. We want to renew the 'challenge' in the game, thus the cataclysm. Don't worry, though, I'm not going to let us totally collapse. I am trying to balance all aspect of the cataclysm so that people are constantly challenged and (hopefully) slowly pushed backwards. However, it is not my intention at all to destroy the Reich. If the AI becomes more dangerous than I want it to be in certain areas, I will use in-game events to give HRE players more of an edge.

Regarding finances from tearing buildings down, judging from the initial choices I have received, I don't think you'll need to worry about this too much. Maybe a few cities will suffer with a couple small buildings consumed elsewhere, but I don't expect people to burn down everything they see. Have some faith, I think people will generally be far less destructive than you think.

I will take it as a major compliment that econ21 and I have been able to make you afraid of losing the game though.

[edit]: A few PMs with Privateerkev have made me realize that I screwed up on the wealth calculations and gave the Dukes more then they should have had. However, I really like the wealth balance that I created at the start and I don't want to change it. Thus, I have changed the Fixed Income rules to reflect my error rather than the other way around. This in turn has made Dukes more profitable than I had otherwise anticipated. Thus, the rebel Capital rule has also changed to compensate. Rebel capitals now produce 2 income, even if they are castles. The new wording is as follows:

Provinces that belong to a Count who remains loyal to their Duke will provide 1 "control" income to BOTH the Count and the Duke, as well as a bonus 1 income to the Duke: resulting in 2 income for the Duke and 1 income for the loyal Count (assuming the city is not besieged, etc.). Counts that rebel from their Dukes will receive an income of 2 from the province they declare as their 'Capital' for the rest of the Cataclysm, provided that all other requirements for the income are met, even if they are castles. Thus, Wolfgang has an extra 1 wealth.

Apologies for any confusion. I became a lawyer because I'm better with words than numbers. Please keep an eye on my math, I may screw up again.

[RoadKill]

It is worrying because right now we're being crushed turn after turn non-stop.

[OverKnight]

No offense on the current exchange, PK, but Matthias isn't currently in a happy place.

[Privateerkev]

None taken OK. I'm just trying to be all co-operative and such. :D

The offer will still be there if Matt changes his mind.

[econ21]

I'm worried that we might break the game in these ten turns if we're not careful.

As TinCow said, I take this as a compliment but I would not worry too much. I think people should play it out in character and most characters have a pretty strong survival instinct. Try to keep your character alive and you may end up being more cooperative than one might think. I was impressed by the rallying round Austria after the Bucharest debacle.

GH: You reap what you sow. ... People don't have to kill Popes.

The general principle may be right, but on the specific point about the Pope - someone did have to kill the Pope. That was part of the script. OOC we wanted the loyalty hit and the possibility of Catholics ganging up on us (although I could not avoid the stupid AI crusading on Tunis on my last turn ). GeneralHankerchief did not volunteer for the Pope-killer job - we actually had it scripted as Hans because he was the anti-Siegfried a couple of Diets back. However, the way the last Diet played out, it seemed more fitting that Dietrich do it and Hans play the loyalist. I think in the end GeneralHankerchief went through some pangs of conscience trying to justify Dietrich doing what was scripted. So, the defence that he was "just following orders" applies OOC here.

Ditto the Illuminati killing Siegfried for that matter.

OOC, GH and the Illuminati did me a favour.

IC Elberhard still hates them, though.

[econ21]

Provinces that belong to a Count who remains loyal to their Duke will provide 1 "control" income to BOTH the Count and the Duke, as well as a bonus 1 income to the Duke: resulting in 2 income for the Duke and 1 income for the loyal Count (assuming the city is not besieged, etc.). Counts that rebel from their Dukes will receive an income of 2 from the province they declare as their 'Capital' for the rest of the Cataclysm, provided that all other requirements for the income are met, even if they are castles. Thus, Wolfgang has an extra 1 wealth.

I think you are skewing things too far against rebels by making a province give a net 3 if loyal to a Duke and only 1 if rebel. Even when it was 2:1, I thought it was a little unfair - a province does not double in wealth just because the Duke gets a cut (one might say more likely the reverse!).

To get of the current conundrum, why not just say that a city yields 3 income and, if loyal, 2 of them must go to the current Duke? Then to give Hummel a break, say that if a rebel only has a castle, it is regarded as a city minus one income?

Making cities give 3 points rather than 1 also makes them more strategically valuable - 1 militia per city scarcely makes them break even (it may take 6 or more to garrison it).

I'm not arguing this from self-interest, of course, otherwise the Kaiser would be demanding his own cut.

[Stig]

OOC: I am talking to TC about getting 1 or 2 points knocked off of Ansehelm's income. I'll let you know what he decides.

And yes I sweared and I don't care at all

[Privateerkev]

The general principle may be right, but on the specific point about the Pope - someone did have to kill the Pope. That was part of the script. OOC we wanted the loyalty hit and the possibility of Catholics ganging up on us (although I could not avoid the stupid AI crusading on Tunis on my last turn ). GeneralHankerchief did not volunteer for the Pope-killer job - we actually had it scripted as Hans because he was the anti-Siegfried a couple of Diets back. However, the way the last Diet played out, it seemed more fitting that Dietrich do it and Hans play the loyalist. I think in the end GeneralHankerchief went through some pangs of conscience trying to justify Dietrich doing what was scripted. So, the defence that he was "just following orders" applies OOC here.

Ditto the Illuminati killing Siegfried for that matter.

OOC, GH and the Illuminati did me a favour.

IC Elberhard still hates them, though.

Oh I have no problem with what the Illuminati and GH did OOC. But I have a huge problem IC. And GH is asking OOC for us to "tread carefully" when he is the one that agreed to have his character be highly controversial. He is worried about us breaking the game when his character has significantly upped the amount of tension in the game.

So I can understand wanting us to be understanding in the OOC thread towards GH for helping you guys out with a script. But, why should I give him a pass IC when his avatar did something that is completely anathema to everything my character stands for? He might not have volunteered but I doubt you and TC held a gun to his head. He didn't have to take the job.

So, that's what I meant by "you reap what you sow." I have zero problem with what anyone has done OOC. But if you are going to come onto the OOC thread, and ask all of us to "tread carefully", then I am going to ask you to examine your own avatar's behavior.

And yes I sweared and I don't care at all

Well, then your taking the income hit because TC had calculated you as having 1 point for Jan being a loyal count. Since Ansehelm just fired Jan, I guess he can't quit. But Ansehelm just lost 1/8 of his income.

[Stig]

No, Jan has never been a count, he can't even be a count as he's King.

Sides Ansehelm has 3 for Loyal Counts: Dieter, Fritz and Peter

And Tancred when he gets something

[Privateerkev]

Dieter has a castle. You don't get anything from that. Ansehelm was receiving the 3 from Peter, Fritz, and Jan. Now, Ansehelm fired Jan so that is dealt with. I pm'd TC with the update.

[Stig]

... go and take other people down, I'll make Tancred count of Prague to get it back

EDIT: which I obviously can't post in the Diet, so take it from here

[Stig]

Sides you're wrong anyway, as Arnold has 2 from loyal counts, while it's counts have no income.


It's not about their cities, it's about the counts being loyal

[Privateerkev]

... go and take other people down, I'll make Tancred count of Prague to get it back

It's nothing personal. You gave Jan a county. Econ ruled that Jan could have it and put it in the chancellor report thread. You never took the county away. TC calculated a bonus for Ansehelm having Jan be a loyal count. Jan got pissed at what Ansehelm and some of the other Franconians were planning. I talked to TC about how to deny Ansehelm the 1 income. Quitting is what I came up with. TC ok'd it. Now, Anshelm fired Jan so it's settled. Ansehelm loses the 1 point till he appoints another count of Hamburg. Life goes on. PM TC if you have questions

[Stig]

You never took the county away.

I did immediatly after Jan refused it

[Privateerkev]

I'll make Tancred count of Prague to get it back

EDIT: which I obviously can't post in the Diet, so take it from here

Yes, you can try to make Tancred the count of Prague. Cecil might have a slight problem with that though. ^_^

It's not about their cities, it's about the counts being loyal

the "loyal count" needs to have a city for the Duke to get the loyalty bonus. Ask TC

I did immediatly after Jan refused it

Well, you didn't make it clear enough for Econ to notice. It's been in the chancellor thread for awhile now.

[Warluster]

Well, I checked out some remedies on google, and I found an intresting one with toothpaste, of course I tested it out on a scratched disc I didn't need anymore, and I did what the guy said and magically 80% of the scratches dissapeared! I tried it on my MTW2 disc, unfortunatly didn't work, but my disc smells like mints, and its all buffed up shiny and all the tinier scratches are gone, but not the big one.

Ah, could you please provide a link? It sounds pretty handy, and I have a few games which need fixing. And I don't know the website and what to look up in google so...

[OverKnight]

Anyway, Jan can't be a Count of Hamburg because he still is King of Outremer and outside the Houses.

Let's chill out a bit and enjoy the Chaos.

[Stig]

Yes, you can try to make Tancred the count of Prague. Cecil might have a slight problem with that though. ^_^

As soon as I'm able to reinforce the Teutonic Army he's going to get a hard time anyway.

Just some OOC advice:
Don't move anywhere to the north

[Privateerkev]

Anyway, Jan can't be a Count of Hamburg because he still is King of Outremer and outside the Houses.

Let's chill out a bit and enjoy the Chaos.

Econ ruled that Jan can be count of Hamburg while King. He was even considering giving Jan the +1 influence. It's all moot now though.

[OverKnight]

Moot indeed. Hell, Matthias is officially the Count of Milan, but that don't mean squat under the current circumstances.

BTW, I'm enjoying playing him as a vengeance obsessed, unstable Man of God with a Vorpal Sword. Good times.

[Privateerkev]

Moot indeed. Hell, Matthias is officially the Count of Milan, but that don't mean squat under the current circumstances.

BTW, I'm enjoying playing him as a vengeance obsessed, unstable Man of God with a Vorpal Sword. Good times.

Yeah but at least you give Lothar +1 point for being a "loyal count" of a city. Your helping your house. :D

BTW, I dug the story.