OOC Thread and Chatroom 2

[woad&fangs]

Just went on a murdering spree Ingame and found that marrying Aleksandra puts me third in line for the throne

I only have to have Andronikos die some weird, nasty death, and I get to be Caesar....

*prays the autoresolve gods are nice to him*

[Ituralde]

Concerning the upcoming PVP Battle. I don't understand exactly why it will be resolved via an AI only battle, since one side won't show up. Isn't that a disadvantage for the side that is actually active and playing? With inactivites being as frequent as they are this probably won't be the last engagement of this sort and I would have preffered fighting these kinds of battles as Player vs. AI. AI vs. AI seems much too random to me.

[Zim]

In this particular case it turned out a battle couldn't be initiated that turn anyway.

I was wondering that as well. If I had to hazard a guess it's MA's semi-active status (no posts lately but online recently and still giving directions concerning his character) A completely inactive character could just be killed off in a player v AI battle. Someone who's more active but out for a couple days might be very unhappy to find their guy killed while they were gone. Of course, that could be said to be the price of not being around for a little while...

[flyd]

I would agree with that, but there is no longer a PvP battle. One of the characters has escaped.

[Ituralde]

Alright. Just wondering how much of a precedent was set here. As always I trust TinCow to make the right decisions at the right times.

I didn't know about the semi-active state and I didn't know he escaped either.

[TinCow]

Alright. Just wondering how much of a precedent was set here. As always I trust TinCow to make the right decisions at the right times.

I was concerned about establishing a precedent where people who were afk for a couple days could get assaulted. We all know that allowing a player to fight against the AI will generally result in a massive victory for the player, even when they are at a disadvantage. I allowed it for the earlier YLC vs. pevergreen battle because pevergreen specifically approved it, and he was going to be on the losing end.

While Marcus Agrippa isn't around at the moment, he hasn't met the requirements to be moved to the inactive list yet. So, I was concerned about essentially letting YLC smash him flat. If he had been a fully inactive player, I would have allowed it as a custom battle. As always, this is not a perfect solution, but I'm trying to keep things as fair as possible.

[Ituralde]

I fully understand. It's just good to know what one gets into, as attacker also when starting these engagements. Like I said, I thought the inactivity to be far greater than it actually was.

[_Tristan_]

I'm sad to see that the turn has been pushed forward without me having a chance to redo the moves that had been invalidated by TC...

[TinCow]

Apologies, as noted in the Megas thread this was my error. I thought I had instructed Zim not to move the turn forward yet, but apparently I never sent him a PM saying that. I do agree that having the save moved forward was not right under the circumstances, so I have rolled it back again. Apologies to all, this is my fault alone. I'll try to get this resolved so it can move forward quickly.

[Ituralde]

Time Travel madness wohoooo!

I probably won't be on the computer tomorrow, Valentine's Day and all, so if someone could move Nikitas Moschos towards Markianople once the next turn starts that would be awesome!

[Zim]

I pmed you about that and you never replied. With at least one player on a timetable that delaying him will prevent his fighting a battle he's been preparing for several turns now, and absolutely no reason either of the moves I was aware of us waiting for couldn't happen the next rather than this last turn it was an easy decision.

I'm sad to see that the turn has been pushed forward without me having a chance to redo the moves that had been invalidated by TC...

I apologize to anyone that had been planning to make (or, in one case, already made) a move from the save I posted.

[TinCow]

I have to make this short because I'm running out to dinner and theater. Tristan has withdrawn from the game. With the deaths of the Basileus and the Caesar, we now have completely new rulers. Most significantly, the new Basileus, Ioannis Tagaris, has no player. If anyone would like to take him over, please let me know. This includes people who are already playing other avatars, as we really do need to have someone playing the Basileus.

I don't have time to make an IC announcement of these events, as I'm in a rush, but feel free to start the IC craziness that is sure to erupt. I will sort out what is to be done about the Tagarian Rebellion when I get home, but since Methodios' son is now Basileus, I believe it would be fair to offer an instant amnesty to those who joined him. Essentially, the rebels now rule the Empire, so they are no longer rebels.

Please feel free to discuss in here if you have any quesitons about how this is going to proceed.

[ULC]

Can we make everyone else Rebels !? Considering now that one man owns half the Empire (literally) and most of it's resources and men, he could do what he wanted, and pick those select few men who followed him.

GH! AG! Care to jump in please!

[GeneralHankerchief]

I would love to, but I left my M2TW at home and won't get it back until mid-March.

-edit- And as an FYI, TheFlax has been working very hard on making the History up-to-date. I'm going to try to finish it tonight.

[flyd]

If we can't find a player for the new Basileus quickly, it might be worth killing him off. Tristan wanted to do it anyway.

[GeneralHankerchief]

That might actually be optimal. Game-wise, it would be a lot easier to explain a Komnenos becoming Basileus then, you know, the son of a rebel.

[ULC]

Well, give me a second to marry Aleksandra so I can be Caesar :D!

[GeneralHankerchief]

I can vouch that someone was going to request the character (not me ).

If we can't find a player for the new Basileus quickly, it might be worth killing him off. Tristan wanted to do it anyway.

Test.

-edit- Above posted by Zim (except for the "Test" bit). It worked!

[GeneralHankerchief]

The Histories thread has been updated through the previous Megas Session; the current one will be done so tomorrow. Please let me know if we've missed anything. This is primarily TheFlax's work and you guys should all give him a big "thank you".

[Zim]

Yay TheFlax!

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Will check the History soon but at the moment... Thank You TheFlax!

[ULC]

Thank you TF

[Rowan]

Thank you, TheFlax!

[KnightnDay]

Thank you The Flax.

[TheFlax]

It really wasn't that long to get everything up to date, it took me about 2h or so. Now that it is up to date, we'll hopefully be able to kept it that way.

[TinCow]

TheFlax will be taking control of Basileus Ioannis Tagaris.

[woad&fangs]

Zim, any chance this turn could be extended a couple days?

[Zim]

I'll likely be giving this turn a few days. I imagine lots of people are busy today...

On an unrelated note, hurray for wills!

Zim, any chance this turn could be extended a couple days?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

On an unrelated note, hurray for wills!

I think it's time to make a will for Theo too.

[rossahh]

CA E3.2: Upon their elevation to the position of leader of a house, the senator must swear an oath of fealty to the Basileus.

By all rights of Byzantine law, all House leaders must now swear an oath of fealty to Basileus Ioannis Tagaris.

Technically the way that this is worded the house leaders need only swear an oath of fealty to the Basileus at the moment they are elevated to the position of house leader. It does not actually say an existing house leader needs to swear an oath to a new Basileus.