OOC Thread and Chatroom

[Privateerkev]

apparently LotR doesn't like the Order

Since we tend to consider the M2TW AI as God, and God loves the Order, then it only makes sense that M2TW loves the Order as well.

[OverKnight]

The mod has been working on my end. I have not noticed any oddities.

Would a couple people (not PK) with access to the latest save load it up and count the Antioch garrison, I guess by attacking?

We can compare that to PK's number from the latest save. If everyone gets the same number, not much we can do. If just PK's number is higher, it might be his installation. If all three are different, God in the Machine hates us.

I'll look myself when I'm home.

[flyd]

PK, as a test, try saving the game, loading it and then advancing turn. Repeat on each advanced turn and see if garrison reduces. It could be another bug caused by saving-loading.

[Privateerkev]

PK, as a test, try saving the game, loading it and then advancing turn. Repeat on each advanced turn and see if garrison reduces. It could be another bug caused by saving-loading.

I just tried it.

I saved it, loaded that save, and then advanced a turn. The garrison went down.

Like I said, when ever I advance the turn myself, the garrison reduces. But every time I have downloaded a save someone else puts up, the garrison is not reduced at all. Even though at this point it should be down at least a couple dozen men.

It's not a huge deal but it just bugs me because I have absolutely no idea why it is doing it.

[Privateerkev]

From the Megas report thread:

Sofia taken.

Pssst... the Emperor took it already...

[flyd]

I don't know what you're talking about, the report thread clearly says Scopia and always has.

(At least I named the save as LOTR this time)

[Smowz]

Tristan,

Really enjoyed your latest installment of your characters back story. Methodios Tagaris certainly is living up to his chivalrous billing so far, though it seems he wishes to get as far away from the Seljuks as possible is this part of the backstory to come?

[_Tristan_]

Tristan,
Really enjoyed your latest installment of your characters back story.

Glad you like it...

As for the Seljuks, he's much more willing to settle the score with a certain Byzantine general than
to get as far away from the Turks as possible...

You'll soon see where that leads...

[The Lemongate]

Here I am hoping that having moved closer to the Basileos I'll get a little loyalty boost... or else I fear Anastasios will go rebel pretty soon

[TinCow]

That proximity to the FL thing is a bit annoying for the purposes of LotR. I would support changing the mod to remove those traits (both positive and negative) if everyone else did. We could do it via an OOC Amendment at the next session.

[Ignoramus]

Another thing I wish to raise is the spawning of avatars for those who have lost them, such as in battle or natural causes. I reckon we should all wait 5 turns before getting another one, so that there are some consequences for losing one.

[TinCow]

Another thing I wish to raise is the spawning of avatars for those who have lost them, such as in battle or natural causes. I reckon we should all wait 5 turns before getting another one, so that there are some consequences for losing one.

You don't think the death of the avatar, the loss of all his traits, the loss of all his provinces and retinue, the loss of all ranks, and the loss of any storyline you had going is enough of a penalty?

[Privateerkev]

That proximity to the FL thing is a bit annoying for the purposes of LotR. I would support changing the mod to remove those traits (both positive and negative) if everyone else did. We could do it via an OOC Amendment at the next session.

Character wise, it's actually working quite well for me. Having Makedonios gain "unwatched" traits fits him very well. But I can definitely see why others wouldn't like it. I would certainly vote yes to remove them.

Another thing I wish to raise is the spawning of avatars for those who have lost them, such as in battle or natural causes. I reckon we should all wait 5 turns before getting another one, so that there are some consequences for losing one.

In KotR, you had one avatar assassinated. You then suicided your second. And you took your third and fourth into PvP battles. I must say I'm kind of surprised to see you argue that people should wait before getting replacements.

[The Lemongate]

That proximity to the FL thing is a bit annoying for the purposes of LotR. I would support changing the mod to remove those traits (both positive and negative) if everyone else did. We could do it via an OOC Amendment at the next session.

Well, there would be a lot of traits to check before doing such a move. For example, winning a heroic victory gives you a negative loyalty trait for a short time as well. And then there's the ancillary titles that can modify loyalty too. And there might be more. I'm not all familiar with SS 4. SS 6 seems to have a revamped trait system which makes more sense. But for now, I wouldn't touch the traits too much.

Another thing I wish to raise is the spawning of avatars for those who have lost them, such as in battle or natural causes. I reckon we should all wait 5 turns before getting another one, so that there are some consequences for losing one.

So losing your character through no fault of your own would result in a penalty? That's a good way to lose players permanently. Since we have the options to simply respawn RGB, why not use it

[_Tristan_]

On the matter of the FL-distance related traits, I think they had depth to our character development though the trait is perhaps acquired a bit too fast (perhaps modding the distance rather than removing the traits...) Simply being two provinces away from the FL shouldn't make you "Unwatched" but being on the other side of the sea surely does...

As for RGB-spawn waiting period, I'm fully against it... I will happily take any risk necessary with my avatar and even place him at danger voluntarily to afford him a "good" death but that is done knowing that I will soon have another one to cherish...

[_Tristan_]

Sorry for the double post...

Just to let you know that I edited the battle report for Durazzo mixing the story with the pics for a better understanding...

Over and out...

[ULC]

I'm against it as well, for the above reasons, but also since I have a nasty habit of using my general as a normal cavalry unit, and I also profess what seems to be horrible luck in keeping them alive regardless.

[Ignoramus]

The fact is that is that it removes the consequences of an avatar's death. Supposing a house declares civil war on the Basileos. Two armies clash outside of Constantinople, and the loyalist avatar is killed and his army is defeated. However, as the rebel army had already marched from near Thessalonica, it runs out of movement points right near the city. So the next turn, instead of fighting a leaderless garrison, a new avatar would have been spawned in the city and you'd have to either fight a PvP or a multiplayer battle.

[ULC]

But that's like saying the next Avatar is subject to following in the lasts footsteps. I would think that even though it's possible that a player may want to continue the fight, it's also possible he may want to switch sides, or be a neutral party. It's not right to penalize a player for that, unless it is obvious he is abusing it. So maybe a penalty after the second or third time within the span of 20 years would be sufficient.

[Privateerkev]

The fact is that is that it removes the consequences of an avatar's death. Supposing a house declares civil war on the Basileos. Two armies clash outside of Constantinople, and the loyalist avatar is killed and his army is defeated. However, as the rebel army had already marched from near Thessalonica, it runs out of movement points right near the city. So the next turn, instead of fighting a leaderless garrison, a new avatar would have been spawned in the city and you'd have to either fight a PvP or a multiplayer battle.

You seem to be thinking awfully hard about civil wars...

I'm sure TC would make sure nothing that "gamey" would happen. I think dying has plenty of consequences. Forcing players to wait for an arbitrary amount of turns could lead to bad feelings OOC.

[Ignoramus]

You seem to be thinking awfully hard about civil wars...

Well, if I become Basileus I'll need to.

[Privateerkev]

Well, if I become Basileus I'll need to.

Or you could just be a good Basileus that keeps us all happy.

Or you could just be a mean Basileus that keeps us all scared silly.

Or somewhere in between.

The choices are endless.

[Ituralde]

I think in general terms we shouldn't have a penalty for dying. This does not mean that we can't make exceptions once extreme situations, like the one you mentioned arise.

That way is better than penalyzing everyone. I mean even if you can rejoin instantaneously I think there will be plenty of cases where Players choose for themselves to take a short break. I always found it hard to bounce right back with a new avatar, it usually takes me some time to adapt and create a new character concept.

If you really wanted to make a rule about it, I would be open for an OOC Amendment that makes you wait a small amount of turns if an avatar dies in a Civil War. But then I never liked rules that just existed to prevent OOC character flaws to spill into the game!

[Ignoramus]

Perhaps we could make it that in a civil war your new avatar cannot spawn in the same province as your previous one was killed in?

[_Tristan_]

Although I see where you're coming from, Igno, I must admit that I can already see an IC justification to having an avatar respawn in the same province as the old one died (like the captain of the bodyguard rallying the men to fight for the memory of their lost commander...)

I agree that may appear a bit gamey to have defeated a player's avatar only to see him respawn in the next turn and to have to fight him anew but we shouldn't completely close the door on that... It could really make for interesting stories... Which I think is the whole point behind this game, no ?

[AussieGiant]

We managed to survive without a rule in KotR. The GM's are around for a reason and it is these types of issues that I believe should be handled by them. A rule is not necessary in order to manage this IMO.

TC is more than capable in dealing with any "issues" if they occur. Igno's example of an avatar dying and the next one taken simply continuing the fight would be a classic example of an overrule by TC.

It has to be plausible IC for me to accept this type of behaviour is ok.

[Ferret]

I think that example is easily plausible IC, like Tristan explained. I remember when someone wrote a battle report in which the General died and he wrote about a captain taking over and turning it into a victory, he got a MotH at the end. Also it's gonna be rare that just the general is killed in a battle, the player would still lose their army and a settlement if it was a siege. It hardly unbalances anything.

Besides surely it is more fun to have a PvP battle than to fight the AI...

[Ignoramus]

I think that example is easily plausible IC, like Tristan explained. I remember when someone wrote a battle report in which the General died and he wrote about a captain taking over and turning it into a victory, he got a MotH at the end. Also it's gonna be rare that just the general is killed in a battle, the player would still lose their army and a settlement if it was a siege. It hardly unbalances anything.

That was actually me. I was new to the game and I didn't know that captain led armies had to autoresolve their battles, so I fought this one out. The captain got killed, but I won the battle, and then got a Man of the Hour, which turned out to be the future Kaiser Jobst von Salza. Ah, the twists a game can take...

[Ferret]

I thought it was Econ playing Xdeathfire's (Scherer's) last battle. Maybe it's happened more than once...

[TinCow]

The rules give the battle 'umpire' carte blanche on determining how PvP battles are run. If a player re-spawn seems like it will have unfair and unrealistic consequences for a PvP battle, the umpire can do whatever he wants to keep it balanced.