MPC Adopted Generals

[FactionHeir]

This poll is for the sole purpose of discussing and voting on what to do with generals that were adopted in violation of the rules set at the beginning of the game.

As the game would become unfair for those who have kept to the rules in comparison to those who broke it, I feel it is necessary that we make a decision and keep to it.

Poll options are as follows:

1. Adopted generals/family members must be killed off within the next 4 turns. During this period they are not allowed to lead any armies. The rule stays as it is.

2. Adopted generals/family members must be killed off within the next 4 turns. During this period they are not allowed to lead any armies. The rule is modified so that generals that you started off with (i.e. starting generals) may be adopted via man of the hour into the family tree. However you may not accept any other adoptions or (captain) man of the hour.

3. Get rid of the rule and allow uncontrolled adoptions/MOTH for each faction.

Background information:
Currently, HRE and France are in violation of this rule. HRE has 1 adopted general and France (at least) 2.
All other factions have duly went to great lengths to keep to the rules.
Thus the decision made via simple majority rule will determine mainly the fate of the generals of these two factions or possibly all factions depending on which option is passed.

This poll is open for 48 hours henceforth

[Ramses II CP]

I think my fourth son is adopted as Poland and it shouldn't be any trouble to throw him in the ocean near Constantinople. I like this rule, I just forgot about it in all the things that have happened since the game started. Now that things are moving faster and we have a more interested group I think we can observe this rule fairly easily.

A large part of the trouble with adopted generals is that we know how to manipulate their creation. As Poland my provinces are a long way ahead of my generals so I could pretty easily create 4-5 extra generals. When there isn't a crusade that's not quite as big a deal, but when a crusade is on each of those generals can pretty quickly march to a new region, recruit those excellent mercenaries, and become an instant army.

Also we have to consider that factions which have kept to this rule are now at a disadvantage. It's unfair for some of us to have the head start we have.

[Cecil XIX]

If Option 3 wins, but is not larger than Options 1 and 2 combined, we should have run-off between Options 1 and 2.

[_Tristan_]

Now that the fate of the surplus generals seems decided, how best to deal with them ?

Some can be drown at the nearest straits, but some are too far from such locations for that to be implemented...

I won't even consider sending them on a fleet... Too costly...

And with the console disabled, there is now way to teleport them right on a strait location...

I'm open to any sensible idea, being one in violation of the rule...

PS : Even leading them against impossible odds should let them live...

[FactionHeir]

The cheapest and most reliable way is via a ship.
Doesn't cost much as most people have ships left over from the crusade (I saw several French ships at Wales and Thessalonica)
There's also loads of pirates around there.

[_Tristan_]

The cheapest and most reliable way is via a ship.
Doesn't cost much as most people have ships left over from the crusade (I saw several French ships at Wales and Thessalonica)
There's also loads of pirates around there.

500 fl a ship is not what I would call cheap...

Still I wonder how you happen to have seen ships in Wales

And there's no guarantee that going against a pirate fleet will end up with a sunk ship and dead general...

[EDIT] Finally the poll result seems a bit bogus with more voters than the number of players left in the game... We are now seven players but nine voters ???

Should I round up people to vote for my point of view ? I sure can... but won't...

[FactionHeir]

Ignoramus, Tristan, Ichigo, Cecil, Me, Didz, Tran, Ferret, Ramses = 9

So all voted.

You have a ship next to Dublin last I checked, after you turn was over, so there you go. You can also hire merc cogs there or build your own for cheaper.
In either case, generals/family members cost a lot of upkeep. The longer you keep them (and bound not to do anything with them) the more it costs you in the long run.

[edit]
With everyone having voted (and confirmed with PM receipts) I hereby declare the poll closed and Option 1 won...

[_Tristan_]

Ignoramus, Tristan, Ichigo, Cecil, Me, Didz, Tran, Ferret, Ramses = 9

So all voted.

Oops... I thought we were only 7 players left, my bad...

You have a ship next to Dublin last I checked, after you turn was over, so there you go. You can also hire merc cogs there or build your own for cheaper.

That's what I was wondering about... How did you check ?

Did you open my savegame ? If so, would you mind telling me who gave you the right to do it ?

Even after I told you I was opposed to it and refused to give you my PW (for a totally different matter...)...

I can understand you playing some other players' turns as a substitute but I don't like it much to know that one other player (although ally in game) is taking looks behind my back at my savegame...

It may sound a bit paranoid but if you have some good in game justification of your "checking" (I mean spy or any other means...), then I'm more than disappointed...

[FactionHeir]

I noticed your ship while subbing for Didz this turn.
Only mentioning it because you claimed you had no ships there which obviously is not true and this is an OOC discussion matter

I shall remind you of what you said in the MPC thread:

However, I'm ready to follow any ruling about what is to do about the situation like drowning some generals in the middle of some straits...

To me it looks like you are trying to escape the clause now, but I might be wrong.

[_Tristan_]

At no time did I deny that I had a ship in Wales... I simply wondered how you knew...

Now that has been made clear, all is fine...

[Ferret]

Doesn't drowning in straights mean sending them over a land bridge and hitting delete? It would be a lot easier if this was an admin enabled game lol. I say just keep what you've got but don't do it any more and try to get rid of them if you can.

[_Tristan_]

Most I will be able to drown come next turn but there is at least one I won't be able to get rid of like this...

[EDIT] Up until now, they have not been of real use, simply preventing captains turning rebel...
What few things they may have done could have been done by the original family members...

[Ramses II CP]

My suspected adoptee is being sent west to the crossing at Constantinople in all haste. It'll probably take him 3-4 turns now that the crusade is over. I won't do anything else with him on the trip, I'll slide 'em right around rebels/enemies.

[FactionHeir]

One thing to note Tristan:
You can keep the generals (note: generals) you started off with which are: Guillemot de Lyon, Raoulet Poitevin and Perrin Gassou. Note that you cannot adopt them into your family tree however unless you want to spend a princess doing so.
Those and of course any that were naturally born to your King or married into the family.
You'll have to get rid off any hired generals and any family member you adopted since the start of the game.

Don't worry about it taking time. I gave a 4 turn leeway in the poll as there will be some that are far inland or you don't have the means of killing off within the next turn.

[_Tristan_]

There is a problem with that as Guillemot de Lyon was killed before I took the reins of France and one had already been adopted by the previous player (Simon de Provence)

So how do I go about it ?

[FactionHeir]

Unfortunately, generals dying is part of the game and you would have to say belated prayers for poor Guillemot (I usually have him married in my SP games because he tends to have good traits) and say bon voyage to Simon de Provence.

I understand this isn't an easy thing to do...

[_Tristan_]

I won't do it... I had no part either in his death or in the adoption so I won't do it...

I fully and duly accept the consequences for my own actions and decisions and will kill all my adoptees (if not gladly then willingly...) but I won't do it for things that I had no mastery of...

Kick me out if you deem it necessary, but I will not get back on this...

[Cecil XIX]

I don't see why a distinction should be made between generals adopted by you and generals adopted by the previous player. No one's being punished, it's just a simple correction.

[Ramses II CP]

I imagine it's because France is very large and has lost one of it's starting generals, potentially leaving very large areas of territory without a general at all. I personally don't think it's necessary to punish current players for the mistakes of their predecessors. We have an active group of players now and it's good for the game, let's not lose them over fairly minor disputes.

I would add, however, that I am by no means objective in the matter, and my sympathy might be said to stem from having made the same mistake myself. I'd suggest here, as I did to FH via pm, that we should have an uninvolved, objective arbitrator to settle OOC disputes like these.

I'd also like to point out that the main benefit of extra generals was during the crusade. Caesarea would still be under siege if not for my extra general, so any advantage I gained is already a fact of the game for me. Leaving France with the one extra general right now won't (IMHO) substantially alter the balance of the game, especially with the French not at war with any player factions.

[FactionHeir]

I'll be giving this issue more thought still, but I would welcome everyone chime in their views.

In my own personal opinion, I believe that giving one faction an extra general is unfair to all other factions if they don't get an extra general either. There is no doubt that other factions haven't also lost some of their generals in past battles, so giving one faction special treatment because the player "threatens to quit" may become an issue when other players also start threatening to quit if things don't go their way or be more willing to bend/break the rules in their favor because there is arbritration on this particular matter.

The poll has been quite clear in terms of the majority opinions, but I am open to the exact implementations regarding this issue. Do note that players are replacable and there are people interested in still joining a running MP game.

[Ramses II CP]

I'm still inclined to have a willing third party take a look at the situation and give us their judgement. I sympathize with the position Tristan is in, but it's also clearly given those of us with the extra general(s) an advantage. If nations that already started off smaller and at a disadvantage are okay with France and Germany keeping the one adoptee they each collected before the current player took over then it won't bother me at all, and I'd be fine with still throwing my guy in the channel as he was clearly my mistake.

Let's also be clear that these adoptees, the ones we're sure are drowning, should depart their positions immediately, participating in no further combat, and move to their swim. I pulled what's his name out of the siege of Caesarea, where he wasn't needed anyway I admit, and sent him shortest path to Constantinople because that's the only fair thing to do. For my part, it's much more important to have the respect of the other players here and to correct my mistake than to get whatever advantage he might've brought in the auto-calc.

[Cecil XIX]

How big of an advantage could that be, exactly? I know that generals lower desertion rates and are a powerful military force, but I'm surprised how important they're being treated here.

[Ramses II CP]

The way auto-calc seems to work is heavily based on the strength of the first unit in your stack. Generals very rarely die in battle, have excellent stats and armor, and add their attributes to battle stats. So a stack that might have taken large casualties in each battle, especially against other captain led stacks, is suddenly taking very small casualties in battle and is able to fight again and again without reinforcement.

Additionally during a crusade each region (Not province) has it's own set of mercenaries which a general can hire on. It's possible still, even without many generals, to abuse this system but having a lot of generals with huge movement rates under crusade effectively means that each of them can generate a decent stack of mercenaries at the drop of a hat.

In my case I Caesarea would still be under siege, and about 6 companies of mercenaries would not have fit in the stacks I had in the area, and a few more would have required some manipulation to get that might have left me unable to even lay siege. Adana almost certainly would've gone to the Sicilians, and it snowballs from there as I can reach Yerevan, Tblisi, Trebizond, and etc. much faster and hire mercs there as well.

[FactionHeir]

I've got some feedback so far and believe that I will have Ignoramus have the final say in this matter as game master, especially since he is now a more neutral faction being no longer fully active.

[Ferret]

I say just keep what you've got but don't do it any more and try to get rid of them if you can.

I still think this would be fine and I am one of the small factions with only 3/4 generals.

[_Tristan_]

Steps have been taken towards the removal of the surplus generals in my last turn... Only the "Simon" adoptee will not be removed...

[_Tristan_]

So giving one faction special treatment because the player "threatens to quit"

I didn't threaten to quit, only that if you thought I had benefiited unduly from the previous player mistakes then you would simply have to ask and I would quit... If that was not quite clear, it may due to the fact that I'm the "cheating French" around these parts...

I didn't require special treatment neither just the taking into consideration the fact that I had not to suffer from other players mistakes...

Do note that players are replacable and there are people interested in still joining a running MP game.

I'm fully aware of that... and that is why if players are thinking I acted out of malice, then I am willing to quit, however much I would like to go on...

I'm still inclined to have a willing third party take a look at the situation and give us their judgement.

As to judgment concerning the adoptee done by the previous player, I was taking a look at the early MPC thread and I have found I already had a ruling in favor of keeping it... <A href="http://[URL="https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1691336&postcount=259" target=_blank>[B]here[/B]...

For my part, it's much more important to have the respect of the other players here and to correct my mistake than to get whatever advantage he might've brought in the auto-calc.

Same here... From my point of view, I couldn't bear to be considered a cheater and that's the reason why I have driven all my adoptees towards their ultimate doom...

[FactionHeir]

As to judgment concerning the adoptee done by the previous player, I was taking a look at the early MPC thread and I have found I already had a ruling in favor of keeping it...https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...&postcount=259

I said that given the impression that you only had 1 adoptee, and it would still be up to the game master to make the final verdict, not any single player.
However, note that I also said "just don't adopt any more", but you adopted many more, thus creating a situation of mistrust I suppose that Ignoramus will hopefully resolve.

[_Tristan_]

I had only one at the time...

That was over three months ago and I admit that the rule had gotten out of my head...

As to the "many more" adoptees they were only adopted in the last two turns... after the defeat of England...

[Ferret]

Isn't Ignoramus the gamesmaster, what does he have to say?