Out of character thread XIX

**Warluster** · 01-17-2008, 05:56

Sorry can't fight it. Either deguerra or FH are going to have to fight it for me. I will post my situation in Acive Duty thread. Still don't have 1.2 (And won't for a while)

**deguerra** · 01-17-2008, 06:51

I am capable of fighting it, but would prefer FH to do it, if he's up for it. I'm no M2TW veteran, and this seems like a very important battle for Swabia. On that note, if its FH that plays and he fails, I vote to excommunicate him

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**econ21** · 01-17-2008, 10:04

Sorry - no proxying, AussieGiant should autoresolve the battle and move on to the next turn.

If players are on reserve duty, they should inform the Chancellor in advance and he will try to keep them out of danger. Warluster did not do that - he mentioned difficulties in the OOC thread last week, but then reported that they were being solved and did not update the active duty list. He also turned down both AussieGiant's and my suggestions for "safe" moves for von Salza this turn. I had a PM exchange with Factionheir in which I questioned whether Warluster could pull off the high risk move that von Salza has taken, but Factionheir went ahead and ordered it anyway.

I am loathe to have other players act as subs for army commanders. We allowed that with AussieGiant in the past because he contributed a lot to the role-playing without an avatar for months and then, when he finally got an avatar, had to go away on business for months. However, even then I felt uneasy about his avatar accumulating vast amounts of battle traits based in part on other players fighting the battles. At the time, we did not have many (any?) other Austrian avatars, so it was pretty much a necessity in game terms and not such a big deal OOC. But it does not seem right that we have players who can fight kicking their heels while players who can't fight have their avatars pick up the traits and players who may have armies and battles of their own also fight other people's battles.

Keeping the close bond between the avatar and the player adds a lot to the role-playing of the game, increases the challenge for the Reich and helps share out the battles to available players. I would only offer the deal we offered AussieGiant to another player reluctantly - much better, I think, to have their avatar find a replacement army commander, move to a safer spot and do some civic work governing a city. If you want to get lots of battle traits, fight the battles. I am not inclined to offer it just because a player doesn't install 1.2.

**FactionHeir** · 01-17-2008, 10:21

Originally Posted by econ21

Sorry - no proxying, AussieGiant should autoresolve the battle and move on to the next turn.

If players are on reserve duty, they should inform the Chancellor in advance and he will try to keep them out of danger. Warluster did not do that - he mentioned difficulties in the OOC thread last week, but then reported that they were being solved and did not update the active duty list. He also turned down both AussieGiant's and my suggestions for "safe" moves for von Salza this turn. I had a PM exchange with Factionheir in which I questioned whether Warluster could pull off the high risk move that von Salza has taken, but Factionheir went ahead and ordered it anyway.

I am loathe to have other players act as subs for army commanders. We allowed that with AussieGiant in the past because he contributed a lot to the role-playing without an avatar for months and then, when he finally got an avatar, had to go away on business for months. However, even then I felt uneasy about his avatar accumulating vast amounts of battle traits based in part on other players fighting the battles. At the time, we did not have many (any?) other Austrian avatars, so it was pretty much a necessity in game terms and not such a big deal OOC. But it does not seem right that we have players who can fight kicking their heels while players who can't fight have their avatars pick up the traits and players who may have armies and battles of their own also fight other people's battles.

Keeping the close bond between the avatar and the player adds a lot to the role-playing of the game, increases the challenge for the Reich and helps share out the battles to available players. I would only offer the deal we offered AussieGiant to another player reluctantly - much better, I think, to have their avatar find a replacement army commander, move to a safer spot and do some civic work governing a city. If you want to get lots of battle traits, fight the battles. I am not inclined to offer it just because a player doesn't install 1.2.

Placeholder reply. Need to catch a train first.

**AussieGiant** · 01-17-2008, 10:29

Originally Posted by FactionHeir

Placeholder reply. Need to catch a train first.

**deguerra** · 01-17-2008, 10:33

Fair enough econ, I did not know about the subbing rules. All good from my end.

**AussieGiant** · 01-17-2008, 10:49

Originally Posted by deguerra

Fair enough econ, I did not know about the subbing rules. All good from my end.

Subbing rules a very important deguerra, and my situation last year was pretty unique in this game.

**deguerra** · 01-17-2008, 10:59

As I said, I have no complaints with either the rules or how they are and were implemented. I don't really know the situation you were in, but I'm happy to take your word for it. As I said, all good from my end.

**FactionHeir** · 01-17-2008, 11:04

Meh, didn't use the placeholder afterall:

Anyway, three things that should be considered before making a hasty decision:

1. The OOC CA econ wrote and linked to in the old OOC thread yesterday is vaguely worded as he suggests.

Originally Posted by econ21

Originally Posted by Post #1
OOC Charter Amendment:
(a) Where there are multiple player controlled generals in a stack, then the player who plays out the battle is determined by who the computer designates is in command.
(b) An exception is that Household Armies (and the Army of Outremer) are always commanded by the designated Commander of said army.
(c) The commanding general may allow another player to fight a battle by mutual consent for OOC reasons.

As you can see, both points b and c could apply to this situation.

2. Whether Warluster can be subbed for depends on how long he wont be able to fight battles. If it is above the limit set (3 weeks), then anyone designated by him should and will be able to play his battles.

3. By precedent, players who had not been away for extended periods of time nor were otherwise eligible to be subbed for have been subbed for by other players not in their stack. This means that not allowing it in this (more legitimate case) we are disadvantaging Warluster. All of this happened after the CA regarding proxying has been passed AND outside the cataclysm period. Post battle results have always been accepted as well even when the issue was pointed out to econ.

Therefore, I would say subbing should be allowed for this particular case.