Out of character thread XIX

[Cecil XIX]

Looks like things are getting interesting again. Good thing too, it's been boring having us all working together and fighting the enemy. I hope all these super-stacks doesn't discourage anyone from letting this play out.

[Ramses II CP]

Heh, if the powers that be were looking for the right trigger to get the Chancellor to set aside the Reich's welfare, they found it. Fritz has spoken too heatedly about Siegfried to let this pass.

I mitigated though and stepped back in the Diet. If we're all in favor of the Crusade, then I'll have Fritz put his trust in Peter and push the French Crusade forward during the 'trial' or whatever after the defensive season.

[FactionHeir]

Anyone care to say boatride yet?

Adjourning a session usually results in things not getting done. Things moving on during the succession dispute played out in Siegfried's favor for instance.

[_Tristan_]

Ramses,

To answer your suggestion in the Orders thread, Is it ok if I save the game on the victory screen ?

[Ramses II CP]

That would be fine with me if it's possible (Or the ransom/release screen), but also there are a lot of countries that go after France. You'll have plenty of time afterward to save.

[FactionHeir]

You can't save the game on the victory screen unless you are autoresolving.

You can finish the battle and then press escape immediately. That works.

[econ21]

With the recent stories, there is again a real possibility of PvP battles between players.

To keep things simple, I propose the following mechanics.

1. A player may declare hostilities against another player. When this happens, BOTH players become “PvP flagged”.

2. PvP flagged characters are moved strictly according to the relevant player’s instructions. The moves will be implemented by econ21, not the Chancellor. They may not detach units or command more than a maximum 20 units in their own stack.

3. econ21 will be neutral in any PvP matters and will resolve any PvP encounters . (Welf von Luxemburg will not be a party to any PvP conflicts.)

4. Each character will have access to a feudal levy that will fight by their side in PvP battles. Details of the feudal levies will be provide shortly but will be similar to those previously assigned. Only these forces can be trusted to fight loyally. These levies will not be represented on the strategic map, but will be deployed in PvP battles.

5. Other forces under character’s command may also participate in battles, but their loyalty will be questionable - some may desert or even defect to the opposition.

6. PvP flagged characters may order recruitment from settlements they control, where control will be established either de jure or de facto. But these forces will also be of questionable loyalty.

7. Character movement will be constrained by the game engine as normal with one exception. PvP characters may freely be teleported once per turn to be adjacent to an allied PvP character. They may not bring any troops with them, except their feudal levies.

8. A general principle is that PvP battles will be set up so as to be relatively “fair” and also decisive. Strategic and political manoeuvring (ie bringing bigger stacks and more allies) will provide slight advantages. But some balancing gerrymandering by the referee can be expected so that the battles are not forgone conclusions. The battle of Bern provides an example of the kind of balanced and decisive encounter that is desired.

9. PvP battles will be resolved either through the "table top" style used previously or, if all participants agree, through multiplayer contests. Very uneven contests may be resolved by econ21 without recourse to these more time consuming methods (think "autoresolve").

If people have any comments, criticisms, questions, counter-proposals, fire away.

[Ramses II CP]

What about the Crusade? The topic has had little discussion in the Diet thread due to the other erupting events, but what discussion there has been is positive. It seems like a logical extension of the current situation. And, of course, it would give Welf something to do while the rest of us kill each other.

It introduces quite a complicating factor if a general on crusade wishes to get involved in this PvP stuff, and the Kaiser has requested to join the crusade.

While you're here Econ, I think the Danish stack near Arhus is broken. I've tried shifting armies around there and I can't get them to move, but it's time for Fritz to become untied from Arhus. Can we ship the Danes off the island where they're stuck and put them north of Arhus to let them lay siege, or something? Otherwise Fritz may just buy some more boats and laugh all the way to Stockholm.

[_Tristan_]

What about the Crusade?

In fact, I can't wait for it to be called...

[OverKnight]

I'm confused, the Emergency Diet session is over?

Gah?

Ummmmm, the Kaiser just accused a Duke of treason, tried to pass legislation allowing him to strip anyone he deemed treasonous of their title and commands to be replaced with people of his own choosing, gave himself the power to lead a house army, and now proclaims he will be leading that army with the man accused of treason as his second.

At the same time the Duke in question tore down the Kaiser's brother and accused the Kaiser of past treachery while calling his competence into question.

But now that's just water under the bridge?

Barring the facts involved, this is the latest occurence in the Kaiser versus Dukes balance of power game. Yet, we're just supposed to continue on while this bombshell gets passed onto a committee?

I'd love to wade into this, but I'm leaving in a few days. Bad timing, but maybe it's for the best that Matt stays out of this.

Gah!

[gibsonsg91921]

Yeah, it was kind of unlikely.

Think of it this way. Out of huge anger and typical Péter dread and authority, he called a Diet session. Out of a typical Péter quick change of heart due to the persuasion of comrades, he ended the Diet session until the evidence could be brought forward so the Reich would not be imperiled. Ya dig?

[Ramses II CP]

I think maybe what Peter meant in calling for adjournment is that now that he has a second, he wants to put his measures to a vote?

[gibsonsg91921]

Nah, I called for adjournment before I saw EF's post. Plus, ya need 2 seconders. Meh - once the investigation's over, we'll have a real Diet session.

[econ21]

What about the Crusade? The topic has had little discussion in the Diet thread due to the other erupting events, but what discussion there has been is positive. It seems like a logical extension of the current situation. And, of course, it would give Welf something to do while the rest of us kill each other.

Absolutely.

We do have two relevant clauses in the Charter:

7.2 Crusades must be authorised by the Diet, unless announced by another faction.

7.3 When a crusade is called, the Chancellor must ask all generals if they wish to join. He must include at least three volunteers who reply within 48 hours. If there are more than three, he must pick the three most pious. However, he can decline a volunteer if that would usurp his pick of army commander. If the AI calls a crusade, the Chancellor can choose not to follow it, even if generals wish to join - but he must still notify them immediately of the call and get their view on whether they would like to join (were he to follow the call).

To satisfy 7.2, you could just start a yes/no poll for KotR players. Welf would definitely volunteer.

While you're here Econ, I think the Danish stack near Arhus is broken. I've tried shifting armies around there and I can't get them to move, but it's time for Fritz to become untied from Arhus. Can we ship the Danes off the island where they're stuck and put them north of Arhus to let them lay siege, or something?

OK, I'll teleport it at the start of our turn.

EDIT: On the PvP mechanics - if people are happy with them in general terms, any player who wants to start hostilities against other player can do so by making an OOC (or IC) declaration in the Orders thread.

[TinCow]

I think it would be best if Peter's Imperials and Lothar's Bavarians were divided up from what is, apparently, a combined force. I honestly haven't been keeping track of where these units come from for a long time. I load up the game, fight my battles, and am done with it. I have no idea what would properly be loyal to me IC, and that's making the current situation a bit confusing.

[gibsonsg91921]

Man, I wish Peter's mortal enemy wasn't RPed by an effing legend.

[Ramses II CP]

I know which forces came from where with what intent and I can do the split at the start of the turn... however, I'd like some kind of ruling/resolution to the claim of custody and the CAs on the Kaiser's part. Kaiser Peter's forces are the smaller part of the army, but they're all quality cavalry because he was clearly in a hurry to head south.

Obviously I won't be taking any action until there's a clear, agreed upon path, even if it takes awhile to sort out. That's okay really, Tristan's not fighting his battle for maybe 12+ more hours and though there shouldn't be another defensive battle, there will be plenty for me to do just calling up the reports. I won't be in any hurry this time.

[econ21]

I think it would be best if Peter's Imperials and Lothar's Bavarians were divided up from what is, apparently, a combined force. I honestly haven't been keeping track of where these units come from for a long time. I load up the game, fight my battles, and am done with it. I have no idea what would properly be loyal to me IC, and that's making the current situation a bit confusing.

From the latest save, Lothar is commanding what is surely the strongest army in the Reich but the Kaiser is nearby. In the event of hostilities, the units in the army will each take some kind of loyalty test. You would be looking at something like rolling a dice with 1-2=Lothar 3-4=neutral (desert) 5-6=Peter. (I suspect the army is predominantly Bavarian, but the Kaiser is the Kaiser.) Any Imperials will fight for Peter. The division will only be made if one player tries to force the issue - e.g. if Peter tries to take command of the army or Lothar tries to use it against Peter.

Similar tests will apply to other existing stacks of troops - perhaps with a +/-1 modifier in favour of the de facto or de jure commander. The tests will be made when the commander becomes PvP. The +/-1 modifier puts some potential advantage in the hands of the Chancellor, as he can transfer troops away from suspect generals. In fairness, I think he should give advance notice of this - e.g. 24 hours - so that the affected generals have the chance to flag themselves as PvP and try to maintain their command (and indeed increase it, by recruiting from their settlements).

[Ramses II CP]

Well, since nobody got a heads up this first season I think in the interests of fairness I need to refrain from stripping anyone of their command, unless the Kaiser is, in fact, in custody of Lothar or some other action happens on the side. This would reflect the fact that all of this took the Chancellor very much by surprise, and any letters and orders were issued during this season rather than ahead of it.

My intent is to redistribute the forces so that the men I meant for the Kaiser move into his stack, and the men that were with Lothar at Florence become his army, unless that is superceded by action in posts. Lothar got those men so he could crush the Byzantines without placing Peter, who is on reserve duty, at risk.

So for this offensive season, such as it will be, no noble will be stripped of his command by the Chancellor. This also gives the Crusade a chance to develop and draw followers, and have larger implications.

Next year Lothar and anyone else I find reason to hold suspect will face the full wrath of the Chancellor. Do not be surprised if you oppose Fritz but do not wish to declare your intent to find yourself stripped of your men. I won't deliberately order anyone into danger, but neither will I order them out of it's path (This is to reflect that no one is loyal enough to do the incredibly stupid, but everyone may lack the information at the Chancellor's disposal).

[AussieGiant]

I'm confused, the Emergency Diet session is over?

Gah?

Ummmmm, the Kaiser just accused a Duke of treason, tried to pass legislation allowing him to strip anyone he deemed treasonous of their title and commands to be replaced with people of his own choosing, gave himself the power to lead a house army, and now proclaims he will be leading that army with the man accused of treason as his second.

At the same time the Duke in question tore down the Kaiser's brother and accused the Kaiser of past treachery while calling his competence into question.

But now that's just water under the bridge?

Barring the facts involved, this is the latest occurence in the Kaiser versus Dukes balance of power game. Yet, we're just supposed to continue on while this bombshell gets passed onto a committee?

I'd love to wade into this, but I'm leaving in a few days. Bad timing, but maybe it's for the best that Matt stays out of this.

Gah!

I've also raised my eyebrows at a few comments...

It's really kicking off nicely.

[Zim]

Interesting seeing all of that stuff happen while I was asleep last night.

Nice to see that the Catclysm and rather deadly Chancellorship afterwards having sated the KOTR characters' desire to kill eachother.

[AussieGiant]

Evening chaps,

Just a question as to whether I can go on the offensive Friday night GMT +1 and spank those Hungarian's sieging Zagreb.

Will this break the offensive season timing by too far or not?

[Ramses II CP]

Given all the action and options, it seems like a good idea to me to extend the offensive season. Any objections? I'm writing it into the report now.

[Ferret]

fine by me, can I just ask if Breslau is ours now? I haven;t had time to check the same recently but saw it on a screenshot I think, if so I'll go for Stettin instead.

[econ21]

Given all the action and options, it seems like a good idea to me to extend the offensive season.

No problem. The 24 hour window was never meant as a maximum period for offensive action. Rather it was more a minimum period. The idea was the Chancellor would do nothing for the first 24 hours at the start of a turn, so other players could catch up with events and request moves before the Chancellor moved on. Fitting in some offensive battles was just to stop it being dead time from the point of view of game progression.

[AussieGiant]

Excellent. Friday it is then.

Love the Crusade bickering...this is great.

[FactionHeir]

Ah yes, it reminds me of the days of Hans trying to catch up with the other crusaders and all the bickering

[_Tristan_]

Being a late comer to the game, I'm just trying to find my place and my "voice" thus a bit of bickering doesn't hurt

[StoneCold]

One question, will the crusade ends if the french king is killed in Caen? This will result in the French being reconciled with the Pope if I am correct, right?

[FactionHeir]

Hmmm that is actually a distinct possibility.