Ten Novices One Throne [ Youngbloods Hotseat ]

**Lord Commander** · 06-10-2014, 22:43

I woud like to start playing at the next turn bacause I do not have the time to play right now, so use the save joe have uploaded so we can move on.

And Tully only have 3 units in the fort near stoney sept

**Silenced Ape** · 06-10-2014, 22:48

Originally Posted by Black Wolf

I woud like to start playing at the next turn bacause I do not have the time to play right now, so use the save joe have uploaded so we can move on.

And Tully only have 3 units in the fort near stoney sept

Hmm, must have forgotten it. Will fix it once my turn is up. The fort is not important at the moment btw.

**AdmiralThrawn** · 06-10-2014, 22:49

OK, sounds good. The 4 units thing is more to make you pay upkeep costs on forts you aren't using. Regardless, we all make mistakes so no penalty.

As for a vote, that is only done if the Admin can't decide. While I sympathize with you (I don't think any of us knew these mechanics before hand), I stand by my previous explanation for why it should be legal.

**Silenced Ape** · 06-10-2014, 23:31

Not to disagree or anything, but I knew of the bug.
While playing YB IV I played as Martell, I, Renly and Tyrell (I think) was attacking Joffrey.
I was actually in an alliance with Joffrey and was going to betray Renly and Tyrell when I got the perfect chance.
Now Renly and a full stack was sieging KL, I was sieging a fort which was next to Renly. When I took the fort from Joffrey, I at the same time quit Renly's siege of KL.
Now this would be a good opportunity to betray Renly, but I didn't do it. I would allow myself to betray someone by using a "bug", it would not have been "clean" as Jaime Lannister says. I would have "used/exploited" the mechanics if I wanted too, but I didn't because I didn't find it to be the correct thing to do.

Just pointing that thing out there.

**DrakeRox** · 06-10-2014, 23:59

Even not agreeing with this(cause he clearly used this bug to exploit the option of lifting my sieges without fighting them, not to block my movement) I'll play, but I request an extension

**AdmiralThrawn** · 06-11-2014, 00:35

I'll allow an extension.

As I said before, I sympathize. But if we make a rule saying one cannot occupy forts when it would break a siege, it takes away a lot of tactical options under all circumstances. The admins on high have chosen not to add it to their list of bugs, and I agree with them (see my lore reasons above).

**DrakeRox** · 06-11-2014, 01:07

I agree that it would take away alot of tactical options as you mentioned, but for me allowing a whole stack to escape his certain death just by throwing some shitty units you wouldn't miss on a fort that occasionaly was near the armies sieging that stack is more severe than taking away those tactical options, which aren't that many as this situation almost never occurs. And the fact that the older admins have chosen not to add it to the list of bugs isn't a surprise as there is a lot of bugs and essential rules that aren't mentioned even on GS HSs(as example, the bug of surrounding an agent, the navy bug, the yoyo army bug), something that I as a GS member am looking to fix. And also new bugs are found every day, thanks to this M2TW engine.

Luckily Renly won't escape because of that but even then it take away alot of tactical options of mine since I will have to leave my armies there cause Arryn comes after Stark on the turn order.

I respect your decision and your arguments are surely valid. Just wanted to express my opinion.

**DrakeRox** · 06-11-2014, 14:34

Greyjoy - http://www.mediafire.com/download/ct...Greyjoy_20.sav

Renly Baratheon is dead, now his bastard nephew sits on the Iron Throne but will soon join him on the grave too. All the Lords that insists on suporting this Bastard King and his silly war will die too, there will be no more offers of peace.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: