I've noticed it's posibly to catch a scout belonging to your own realm.Had a cout vanish whn scouting one of our own areas.And captured a scout belonging to our own nobles.Do these scouts disapear after geting caught?
They get beaten up. They're useless afterwards. If someone from your realm catches a scout but the scout is still worth anything afterward, chances are he's not a real noble.
Rather crazy feature.
It's quite fun RP-wise. When I lost one, I told the noble who caught mine not to worry about it, because if a scout could not remember to take his official papers stating he is in my service with him, he deserves to be beat and thrown off the side of the road. Now to get an adventurer to role-play the scout...
Or you could ban scout catcher for being a traitor.
Quote from: mikm on November 25, 2011, 09:27:38 PM
Or you could ban scout catcher for being a traitor.
...for beating up a commoner?
he's not a very good scout if he got caught! He could have led the enemy back to your camp!
The conversation usually goes like this:
Noble A: My lord B, it seems that my men have captured one of your scouts, sir. I beg your pardon.
Noble B: Worry not, my lord A. I do not tolerate such incompetence among my scouts. He is released from my service, sir.
Noble A: Very well, sir. I shall send him back to his guild for re-training, after his wounds heal.
It's a cost of waging war I'm afraid.
For complicating things for your army. As for beating a comonor you can get punished for that.Depends on realm policy.Some nobles may claim certain comoners to be under their protection-adventurers-hapened to me.
Anyway-wish there was an active way nobles could catch scouts, instead it all being acidental.
Ah, but beating up an adventurer is something that you actively chooses to do. Beating up a scout is something the game inflicts on you. You don't have a choice in the matter.
No sane Judge would try to punish someone for beating up a scout. His peers would protest him out of office within the day, because it can literally happen to anyone.
Quote from: GoldPanda on November 26, 2011, 01:54:49 PM
Ah, but beating up an adventurer is something that you actively chooses to do. Beating up a scout is something the game inflicts on you. You don't have a choice in the matter.
No sane Judge would try to punish someone for beating up a scout. His peers would protest him out of office within the day, because it can literally happen to anyone.
The game mesage says you beat him up to find out who he is working for.Why doesn't the scout just tell you without the need of beating up?After all this isn't an enemy noble.
Because any enemy scout will tell you he's friendly as well.
Quote from: Telrunya on November 26, 2011, 06:14:39 PM
Because any enemy scout will tell you he's friendly as well.
A beat up scout could lie no?If the scout has no papers on him or material proof how can you trust his words?
Quote from: mikm on November 26, 2011, 07:01:44 PM
A beat up scout could lie no?If the scout has no papers on him or material proof how can you trust his words?
If you move into enemy lands, would you carry papers with you that identifies you as the enemy?
And, according to medieval thinking, once you've beaten him up enough, he'll stop lying.
It's ot always enemy land.It can be your own realm's regions for instance.
Quote from: mikm on November 26, 2011, 07:53:25 PM
It's ot always enemy land.It can be your own realm's regions for instance.
Right, but you don't know if the scout was sent by an enemy, into your lands.
Maybe you can tell your men to ignore any scouts they see.
Quote from: mikm on November 26, 2011, 05:14:32 PM
The game mesage says you beat him up to find out who he is working for.Why doesn't the scout just tell you without the need of beating up?After all this isn't an enemy noble.
Quoting Atia in Rome, "it is not a legal confession unless there's torture!". ;D
Quote from: mikm on November 26, 2011, 10:54:28 PM
Maybe you can tell your men to ignore any scouts they see.
your men can't tell a scout from a badger. all he knows is that there is some suspicious dude dressed shiftily and look like he's got something to hide. enemy soldier! kill!
Quote from: mikm on November 26, 2011, 07:53:25 PMIt's ot always enemy land.It can be your own realm's regions for instance.
And how do you know that those papers are authentic?
Or that the enemy scout didn't capture one of your realm's scouts, kill him, and steal *his* papers?
You can tell by beating the crap out of him. Beat the incompetent fool enough, and he'll tell the truth. After all, no one would lie and besmirch their own honor just to stop a little bit of pain, right?
Quote from: Tom on November 26, 2011, 07:13:38 PM
If you move into enemy lands, would you carry papers with you that identifies you as the enemy?
Honestly, why not? Since he's gonna beat it out of the scout anyways, and since the information of who sent him is pretty much useless anyhow, why should we not want him to carry papers? Since not having any papers is just as bad as having enemy papers in almost every case, I'd rather he have papers so that at least if allies catch him, he'll be released. Just sayin', though, I'm not actually asking that game mechanics be changed, as I doubt it'd be worth the trouble.
Quote from: Chénier on November 28, 2011, 09:57:48 PM
Honestly, why not? Since he's gonna beat it out of the scout anyways, and since the information of who sent him is pretty much useless anyhow, why should we not want him to carry papers? Since not having any papers is just as bad as having enemy papers in almost every case, I'd rather he have papers so that at least if allies catch him, he'll be released. Just sayin', though, I'm not actually asking that game mechanics be changed, as I doubt it'd be worth the trouble.
Better a suspect than a proved criminal. A beating is good compared to an execution.
Quote from: JPierreD on November 28, 2011, 10:28:10 PM
Better a suspect than a proved criminal. A beating is good compared to an execution.
He isn't given back after the beating. Since he's a "proven criminal" after the beating anyways, what's the point?
Quote from: Chénier on November 28, 2011, 11:15:13 PM
He isn't given back after the beating. Since he's a "proven criminal" after the beating anyways, what's the point?
How do you know that? Maybe he's too injured to return and be of use, so he goes to healing and then back to the scout guild, as suggested before.
Quote from: JPierreD on November 28, 2011, 11:55:35 PM
How do you know that? Maybe he's too injured to return and be of use, so he goes to healing and then back to the scout guild, as suggested before.
Why would he be executed if he is caught with papers saying he is from an enemy realm, but not if he verbally admits to being part of an enemy realm? Either he's executed in both cases, or just beaten up in both cases, as whether it would be by paper or by word, the enemy would conclude the same: he's an enemy scout. There's no reason to treat him differently because you found his origins out differently.
Quote from: Chénier on November 29, 2011, 01:41:51 AM
Why would he be executed if he is caught with papers saying he is from an enemy realm, but not if he verbally admits to being part of an enemy realm? Either he's executed in both cases, or just beaten up in both cases, as whether it would be by paper or by word, the enemy would conclude the same: he's an enemy scout. There's no reason to treat him differently because you found his origins out differently.
If a commoner is caught peeking at your troops he can get beaten up and released, so he learns not to put his nose where it doesn't belong. Now, if he is also carrying papers saying he /works/ for the enemy...
Would medieval people even carry "papers". Sounds like a decidedly modern concept to me.
Quote from: JPierreD on November 29, 2011, 01:45:46 AM
If a commoner is caught peeking at your troops he can get beaten up and released, so he learns not to put his nose where it doesn't belong. Now, if he is also carrying papers saying he /works/ for the enemy...
Well if he admits to working for the enemy while you beat him up... Because the texts offer only the following two options, as far as I know: either he refuses to tell you who he works for until you beat him to death, either you beat him 'till he tells you who he works for. If he had papers, you could simply beat him up if he's an enemy, or allow him to return to his employer if he's from an ally.
Quote from: De-Legro on November 29, 2011, 01:47:37 AM
Would medieval people even carry "papers". Sounds like a decidedly modern concept to me.
Good question. I have no idea.
If serving a noble, I would imagine someone working on that lord's behalf to carry something that has his seal on it.
That is mot modern, as carrying something to represent your master's authority is an ancient concept.
Quote from: Draco Tanos on November 29, 2011, 04:10:58 AM
If serving a noble, I would imagine someone working on that lord's behalf to carry something that has his seal on it.
That is mot modern, as carrying something to represent your master's authority is an ancient concept.
If on a VERY important mission you would carry THE seal of your master, at least in fantasy works. But these are different to scouting missions, more akin to diplomatic matters, trade matters etc where they would be acting as a proxy for the lord. So simply carrying something bearing a coat of arms or seal is hardly going to be a great way to determine ones affiliation, it would be trivial to produce fakes. You are also ignoring the fact that as a spy/scout, I would be trying NOT to carry things that would identify my lord, for plausible deny ability reasons.
Quote from: De-Legro on November 29, 2011, 04:15:23 AM
If on a VERY important mission you would carry THE seal of your master, at least in fantasy works. But these are different to scouting missions, more akin to diplomatic matters, trade matters etc where they would be acting as a proxy for the lord. So simply carrying something bearing a coat of arms or seal is hardly going to be a great way to determine ones affiliation, it would be trivial to produce fakes. You are also ignoring the fact that as a spy/scout, I would be trying NOT to carry things that would identify my lord, for plausible deny ability reasons.
Not to carry blatent visual identifiers, at least.
As for "plausible deniability", when it comes to people of the ranks of the scouts, I think that's something that didn't really matter in the judicial system of the time.
Quote from: Chénier on November 29, 2011, 04:25:35 AM
Not to carry blatent visual identifiers, at least.
As for "plausible deniability", when it comes to people of the ranks of the scouts, I think that's something that didn't really matter in the judicial system of the time.
For the Lord though. If I'm sending out scout, I don't really want anything linking them to me necessarily, I would prefer there was nothing even linking them to my realm. The scout is a resource, he is is caught, I find another.
Quote from: De-Legro on November 29, 2011, 04:27:42 AM
For the Lord though. If I'm sending out scout, I don't really want anything linking them to me necessarily, I would prefer there was nothing even linking them to my realm. The scout is a resource, he is is caught, I find another.
Finding another takes time, costs gold. I'd rather mine be released if captured by allies so that I may send him on other errands when he comes back, personally, and couldn't care less if my enemies know easily the useless information they would have otherwise acquired brutally.
;)
Quote from: Chénier on November 29, 2011, 04:33:13 AM
Finding another takes time, costs gold. I'd rather mine be released if captured by allies so that I may send him on other errands when he comes back, personally, and couldn't care less if my enemies know easily the useless information they would have otherwise acquired brutally.
;)
Hint, medieval armies didn't release scouts that were found near their encampments, doesn't matter if they knew the source or not.
Problem is there is no way to control scout caching one way or the other.If there some sort of a skill involved, the skilled nobles would be able to avoid harming allied scouts and could easily catch enemy ones.
There would be situations where an enemy noble would send like 5 scouts in a row and lose them all.
Again, you have no way of knowing which scouts are friendly, and which not. There are no infallible tokens of identity or loyalty (ever read the Lensman books?), and any enemy scout would doubtless tell you /anything/ he thought you wanted to hear in order to get you to let him go. And only a complete idiot would let scouts roam free around his encampment, knowing that they could full well belong to enemies who want to scout his encampment in preparation to /killing/ him.
well.. you can't catch your own scout.. (eh.. right?). that's probably as close to knowing it's friendly as you will ever get.
The curent system isn't exactly efficient-since most scouts get away.Strangly enouch the only acouts I ever caught were allied oanes and that wasn't often.
well.. i've caught enough of all sorts over the years. efficiency is not necessarily desirable.
Hmm, losing scouts to our own realm lands, that's pretty tough. I propose we make scouts losing apply only to enemy lands? 8)
Quote from: mikm on November 29, 2011, 05:46:40 PM
The curent system isn't exactly efficient-since most scouts get away.Strangly enouch the only acouts I ever caught were allied oanes and that wasn't often.
That is a stupid statement. If the chance of success for scouts wasn't reasonably high then people wouldn't use them. The question you should be asking is why are you sending scouts to a region that contains your own sides troops. In most cases it would be more efficient to have them scout the surrounding regions.
Quote from: De-Legro on November 30, 2011, 04:46:43 AM
That is a stupid statement. If the chance of success for scouts wasn't reasonably high then people wouldn't use them. The question you should be asking is why are you sending scouts to a region that contains your own sides troops. In most cases it would be more efficient to have them scout the surrounding regions.
To see movement rates, silly.
Quote from: Chénier on November 30, 2011, 05:05:19 AM
To see movement rates, silly.
You mean that thing Marshals and Vice Marshals can see by clicking a button?
Quote from: De-Legro on November 30, 2011, 05:59:46 AM
You mean that thing Marshals and Vice Marshals can see by clicking a button?
Yea, that tells you everything when your realm has multiple armies and you are coordinating with allies, right?
Also, marshals get to know the status of the units in their armies, so yea, they can know if the unit is moving. They cannot, however, know *where* the unit is moving. Scouting is needed for that.
True, but if you want to have micro control at that level, you can pay the penalties. There is more then likely reasons the devs didn't just give that info directly to the marshals.
Quote from: De-Legro on November 30, 2011, 06:06:57 AM
True, but if you want to have micro control at that level, you can pay the penalties. There is more then likely reasons the devs didn't just give that info directly to the marshals.
Micro? Micro is ordering people to give you unit reports, micro is ordering people to report when they set movement or change line settings, micro is making flowcharts with the nobles' activity rates in order to be able to statistically predict the rate at which various orders are followed.
Imo, spending 1 hour to know what everyone is doing in a given region is just normal. And I always carry a ton of scouts with me, so losing one or two usually doesn't matter. If you ask me, since scouts are as cheap as they are, this is how it was meant to be all along.
To be clear, I'm perfectly fine with how things are right now.
Quote from: Chénier on November 30, 2011, 06:11:27 AM
Micro? Micro is ordering people to give you unit reports, micro is ordering people to report when they set movement or change line settings, micro is making flowcharts with the nobles' activity rates in order to be able to statistically predict the rate at which various orders are followed.
Imo, spending 1 hour to know what everyone is doing in a given region is just normal. And I always carry a ton of scouts with me, so losing one or two usually doesn't matter. If you ask me, since scouts are as cheap as they are, this is how it was meant to be all along.
To be clear, I'm perfectly fine with how things are right now.
Dom to be clear, most of the things you do to play BM are not normal. You only have to look at the amount of time each day you used to dedicate to the game to know that. Most armies I've been in will set orders, and next turn the Marshal can examine who followed them. We will scout ahead if entering enemy lands, both to see our forces and to see enemy forces that might be entering to defend. At a stretch if we are defending we might scout our own region, but it is highly unlikely because the reality is we aren't going to change orders.
Quote from: De-Legro on November 30, 2011, 06:22:48 AM
Dom to be clear, most of the things you do to play BM are not normal. You only have to look at the amount of time each day you used to dedicate to the game to know that. Most armies I've been in will set orders, and next turn the Marshal can examine who followed them. We will scout ahead if entering enemy lands, both to see our forces and to see enemy forces that might be entering to defend. At a stretch if we are defending we might scout our own region, but it is highly unlikely because the reality is we aren't going to change orders.
Maybe you just don't play generals and marshals in the same circumstances as I do. I've had a lot of fights alongside allies, where poor communication and poor obedience were rather rampant. Hell, even when it's just the army I'm marshal of, I regularly spot people moving to the wrong regions.
Sure, above-normal time spent on BM does account for some (a lot (most)) of that, though.
Quote from: De-Legro on November 30, 2011, 04:46:43 AMThe question you should be asking is why are you sending scouts to a region that contains your own sides troops.
Wut? You don't scout your own regions, or regions that your own troops are in? I thought everyone did that. How else can you share that info with your allies? Or even with other people in your own realm so you can plan strategies as a group? Or look at again tomorrow to see movement patterns? Or to see who's arriving and who's leaving? (Marshal status screens only show you who's traveling, and make distinction between heading into and out of a region.) In fact, I consider scouting of your own troop positions to be required in just about all circumstances.
Quote from: Indirik on November 30, 2011, 03:39:14 PM
Wut? You don't scout your own regions, or regions that your own troops are in? I thought everyone did that. How else can you share that info with your allies? Or even with other people in your own realm so you can plan strategies as a group? Or look at again tomorrow to see movement patterns? Or to see who's arriving and who's leaving? (Marshal status screens only show you who's traveling, and make distinction between heading into and out of a region.) In fact, I consider scouting of your own troop positions to be required in just about all circumstances.
I knew I wasn't a micromanaging crazy person. :P
Wanting to know where people are, and what they're doing, isn't micromanaging. That's called good intelligence. The marshal/general's summaries are good, but they still lack essential information. And besides, you can't share that information with anyone. And it doesn't tell you what your allies are doing. Or the enemy troops that might happen to be in the region with you.
So, yeah, not needing to scout regions that have your own troops int it? I can only assume that De-Legro had a bit of a lapse there...
Quote from: Indirik on November 30, 2011, 07:27:58 PM
Wanting to know where people are, and what they're doing, isn't micromanaging. That's called good intelligence. The marshal/general's summaries are good, but they still lack essential information. And besides, you can't share that information with anyone. And it doesn't tell you what your allies are doing. Or the enemy troops that might happen to be in the region with you.
So, yeah, not needing to scout regions that have your own troops int it? I can only assume that De-Legro had a bit of a lapse there...
No I didn't. If I need to see where people are I can either use the map or the marshal screen. I never made it my job as marshal to check that people were moving. If orders were issued in good time then I expected the nobility to follow them. If I found the following turn that was not the case then I could do something about it. I never considered that I was required to check that every knight or ally had set movement orders. What would it achieve, either I would have sent reminders which since they ignored the first orders were likely to do little anyway, or try and change my orders which was likely to result in other mistakes.
I suppose that if you're the only marshal involved, planning all on your own without help, no allied around, and there are no enemy troops involved in any of the regions your own troops are in, *then* maybe, just maybe, I could see not necessarily wanting a scout report of the regions with your own troops in them. In all other situations, I consider them essential when marching to war. Scout *everything*. It has nothing to do with wanting to change orders, or to check up and see if all the nobles in the army are moving or not. There are very limited situations in which late-turn orders make sense. It has to do with wanting to see who is in what region, with what troops, in a convenient, comprehensive, and easily disseminated format. Marshal summaries, while helpful in some circumstances, are very lacking in utility, especially when there are people beyond just the marshal involved.
Quote from: Indirik on December 01, 2011, 05:30:34 AM
I suppose that if you're the only marshal involved, planning all on your own without help, no allied around, and there are no enemy troops involved in any of the regions your own troops are in, *then* maybe, just maybe, I could see not necessarily wanting a scout report of the regions with your own troops in them. In all other situations, I consider them essential when marching to war. Scout *everything*. It has nothing to do with wanting to change orders, or to check up and see if all the nobles in the army are moving or not. There are very limited situations in which late-turn orders make sense. It has to do with wanting to see who is in what region, with what troops, in a convenient, comprehensive, and easily disseminated format. Marshal summaries, while helpful in some circumstances, are very lacking in utility, especially when there are people beyond just the marshal involved.
For me that is what communication with the Marshals and Generals of other armies and realms are for. Is it as efficient as simply getting all the info via scouts? Of course not but to me it seems much more fitting to the atmosphere as well as fostering communication and co-operation. If I'm a marshal of an army, my job is to command MY army, not worry about where other marshals or allies armies might be, that is a job for the General.
Quote from: De-Legro on December 01, 2011, 06:11:28 AM
For me that is what communication with the Marshals and Generals of other armies and realms are for. Is it as efficient as simply getting all the info via scouts? Of course not but to me it seems much more fitting to the atmosphere as well as fostering communication and co-operation. If I'm a marshal of an army, my job is to command MY army, not worry about where other marshals or allies armies might be, that is a job for the General.
Who said that only marshals could scout their own armies, and that generals couldn't also be marshals?
Quote from: Chénier on December 01, 2011, 06:27:45 AM
Who said that only marshals could scout their own armies, and that generals couldn't also be marshals?
No one, read more carefully. I also said I prefer such information to come from the marshals/ generals responsible.
I look at it this way, if I was a noble, full of my own self importance and honour, and some other noble from another damn army was sending scouts just to check I was doing my job and my noble followers were accompanying me, well I would very much consider running them through, scout, noble and all.
When I'm general, I usually can't afford to wait for my peers to tell me their status before I can make suggestions. Scouting my allies therefore allows me to know their status right away, and cut to the chase by immediately making a suggestion. Likewise, I can send him copies of scout reports of my own armies.
That way, instead of exchanging letters with each other about each other's statuses (which is really inconvenient if both aren't on at the same time, early after turn change), cutting this out of the discussions is quite useful.
Quote from: Chénier on December 01, 2011, 07:04:16 AM
When I'm general, I usually can't afford to wait for my peers to tell me their status before I can make suggestions. Scouting my allies therefore allows me to know their status right away, and cut to the chase by immediately making a suggestion. Likewise, I can send him copies of scout reports of my own armies.
That way, instead of exchanging letters with each other about each other's statuses (which is really inconvenient if both aren't on at the same time, early after turn change), cutting this out of the discussions is quite useful.
I understand this mindset, I really do. What I am saying is that based on Toms comments about such things as General supposed to be providing the strategic objectives and other comments, I believe it is not the desired mind set
Here is how I see it, the General sends his orders
"Armies of the Golden Harlot and Silver Rabbit, move your forces to Northcote Caste within 4 days. From there we will assault New Yorks rural plains before weeks end. Our glorious allies shall arrive at the same region within the same time frame"
I know the game allows in many instances for scout to give you real time up to date info, but basing military strategy and tactics on the absolute reliance of large amounts of such reports smacks of modern military thinking with our spy drones and other technology. Of course the problem is if you don't play this way you stand to lose battles.
If you fight battles and wars by imposing upon yourself some of the restrictions that real medieval armies would have faced with regards to organisation, then the need for such constant updates is diminished.
Quote from: De-Legro on December 01, 2011, 07:19:53 AM
I understand this mindset, I really do. What I am saying is that based on Toms comments about such things as General supposed to be providing the strategic objectives and other comments, I believe it is not the desired mind set
Here is how I see it, the General sends his orders
"Armies of the Golden Harlot and Silver Rabbit, move your forces to Northcote Caste within 4 days. From there we will assault New Yorks rural plains before weeks end. Our glorious allies shall arrive at the same region within the same time frame"
I know the game allows in many instances for scout to give you real time up to date info, but basing military strategy and tactics on the absolute reliance of large amounts of such reports smacks of modern military thinking with our spy drones and other technology. Of course the problem is if you don't play this way you stand to lose battles.
If you fight battles and wars by imposing upon yourself some of the restrictions that real medieval armies would have faced with regards to organisation, then the need for such constant updates is diminished.
Keep in mind that often the general is also the marshal of the main army. There used to be days where there were more people wanting to be marshals than sponsors ready to fund armies. Sadly, those days are over, and I'd say quite long gone. And of the few actually willing to take the job, few are actually good at it.
As such, when multiple armies move together, the superior (the general) tends to take command for simplicity and efficiency's sake.
As a marshal, I always expected great autonomy, and exercised it with zeal. When I later became general, however, it just seemed like most marshals were just begging for the general to give orders for them. I know what Tom tried to push, but in the realms I played, the only marshal who ever really stood up for his right to lead his army as per his own instructions was myself.
Quote from: Chénier on December 01, 2011, 07:27:22 AM
Keep in mind that often the general is also the marshal of the main army. There used to be days where there were more people wanting to be marshals than sponsors ready to fund armies. Sadly, those days are over, and I'd say quite long gone. And of the few actually willing to take the job, few are actually good at it.
As such, when multiple armies move together, the superior (the general) tends to take command for simplicity and efficiency's sake.
As a marshal, I always expected great autonomy, and exercised it with zeal. When I later became general, however, it just seemed like most marshals were just begging for the general to give orders for them. I know what Tom tried to push, but in the realms I played, the only marshal who ever really stood up for his right to lead his army as per his own instructions was myself.
Did you ever think the reason so few people WANT to be marshal is that the expectations of masses of scout analysis, on line times and other factors are simply more then people want to commit to for a recreational game? I've known so many marshal that felt amazing pressure to be online just before and after every turn change, to have scout reports in analysed and plans made within the hour of turn change so that nobody would log in and out before orders were given etc.
Attitudes like, "I can't afford to wait for my peers to tell me their status" etc only go to increase this hectic need, for a game that only has turns every 12 hours this is bordering on insane. They are your PEERS treat them with the respect a medieval noble would demand and forget the 21st century need to plan out meticulous strategies and tactics. Great medieval generals anticipated their enemies moves on info that was days if not weeks old, not on a scout report telling them what was happening 5 minutes ago.
Quote from: De-Legro on December 01, 2011, 07:39:19 AM
Did you ever think the reason so few people WANT to be marshal is that the expectations of masses of scout analysis, on line times and other factors are simply more then people want to commit to for a recreational game? I've known so many marshal that felt amazing pressure to be online just before and after every turn change, to have scout reports in analysed and plans made within the hour of turn change so that nobody would log in and out before orders were given etc.
Attitudes like, "I can't afford to wait for my peers to tell me their status" etc only go to increase this hectic need, for a game that only has turns every 12 hours this is bordering on insane. They are your PEERS treat them with the respect a medieval noble would demand and forget the 21st century need to plan out meticulous strategies and tactics. Great medieval generals anticipated their enemies moves on info that was days if not weeks old, not on a scout report telling them what was happening 5 minutes ago.
Gee, you've never played a general, go figure.
Great medieval generals also didn't face enemies that could, over a few days of walking only, reach neighboring capitals from their own. Or armies that could triple their size in a day. This is a game, you've said it yourself. The pace is therefore significantly faster. Because really, nobody wants to spend a month to travel from a realm to the next, else there'd be more people on the colonies.
Great generals could also go and contact the ones under their command directly to make sure everyone got the instructions right.
In BM, we don't. We have 12 hour rounds, and we have to send the orders before the players' last logins of the turn, or else no amount of harassing them will make them move. Also, the battlefield can drastically change within the few minutes that TC takes. Breaking into a city often tooks months IRL, it takes 5 minutes in BM.
Why don't people want to be marshals? You have your theory, but I think that's putting too much emphasis on the marshal out of his context. I would rather ask: why don't people want any promotions at all? This last 6 months, in about almost all elections I've seen, there was no competition whatsoever, or very, very little. People of no history get elected because they were the only ones who, on the last day, bothered to put their names in the list. Same for dukes, and other lords, and other government positions. It's not just marshals, it's every single title in the game. Doesn't seem like anyone is seriously running for them anymore. Hell, on AT, when the judge left, I put my name in the ballot, never sent a single word to campaign. That character is a total nobody, a lord of a rural, and he won. I can't even tell you who the realm's enemies are, and I'm the judge.
There was a time where I was marshal of an elite army and I never logged in 'till like 8 hours after TC during a good period. You can't do that with every army, but with some it's easy to pull off "IF X, then Y" set of orders. Late enough scouts to have an idea of what things will look like are a boon in this case, though. The problem I've seen with the few new marshals, though, is not that they aren't timely enough: it's that they rarely even give orders.
Quote from: Chénier on December 01, 2011, 08:27:31 AM
Great medieval generals also didn't face enemies that could, over a few days of walking only, reach neighboring capitals from their own.
Yep they could, in small realms.
Quote from: Chénier on December 01, 2011, 08:27:31 AM
Great generals could also go and contact the ones under their command directly to make sure everyone got the instructions right.
Nope they could not, in large realms.
Quote from: JPierreD on December 01, 2011, 10:19:11 PM
Yep they could, in small realms.
Nope they could not, in large realms.
The vast majority of european kingdoms were more than a day's marsh in radius. The handful of exceptions doesn't make the rule.
As for the "not in large realms", which I suppose you mean kingdoms, I don't see why not. Regardless of how large their lands were, allies would, when marching, not be that far apart. The distance between their homes has no relation with the distance between their tents.
Quote from: Chénier on December 01, 2011, 10:32:06 PM
The vast majority of european kingdoms were more than a day's marsh in radius. The handful of exceptions doesn't make the rule.
As for the "not in large realms", which I suppose you mean kingdoms, I don't see why not. Regardless of how large their lands were, allies would, when marching, not be that far apart. The distance between their homes has no relation with the distance between their tents.
Not until the later periods did they march together, and even then not as a massive block. Logistics require that large armies move separated in most cases, and before that parts of the army would basically take whatever path they wished to reach the designated marshalling point, often taking detours in order to secure a food supply for themselves or loot some tasty target. This was long one of the biggest hurdles for armies, first you had to know which of your nobles was actually going to honour their commitments and march, then you had to hope everyone that intended to fight actually got to the location in time.
Quote from: Chénier on December 01, 2011, 10:32:06 PM
The vast majority of european kingdoms were more than a day's marsh in radius. The handful of exceptions doesn't make the rule.
Check the Holy Roman Empire and northern Italy, they are not a handful of exceptions. I'd say that most realms in BM are more than a day's march in radius too, though that depends on the continent, of course.
Most armies in real life aren't trapped in movement limbo for 12 hours either, making real time scout report even more powerful in game. Real Life armies can't "store" hours set marching order for a distance of x hours and move their within the hour if they time it right either.
I'm not saying my way of playing would actually be that successful, it will lose to those that even slightly competent and play the "standard" way. I am saying I think the standard way of playing is neither truly in the spirit of the game and I think it is one reason why so many realms avoid war since they know they lack military leader with the "time" to ensure a good chance of success playing the standard way.