BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Locals => Dwilight => Topic started by: dustole on March 06, 2013, 02:09:17 PM
-
A couple if months ago the northern realms declared war on Aurvandil at the behest of Terran to give them penalties in their regions for so many realms being at war with them. The northern realms even with sea travel have no real chance to march that far south.
It seemed to me that they simply were gaming the system.
Now they are all declaring war on Falkirk. They have no hope of doing anything meaningful. They likely cant even get troops from Darfix to Madina.
It seems gamey to declare a war you have no intention or capability to wage simply to cause negative game effects against another realm.
-
It seems gamey to declare a war you have no intention or capability to wage simply to cause negative game effects against another realm.
Capability shouldn't really enter the equation. It's perfectly OK to send a declaration of war even if it's simply as a show of support to your allies. It can also entail commercial embargoes, ability to arrest priests of the other realm should they preach in your lands, etc.
Intention, now, I'll give you.
-
I kind of remember Allison saying that a declaration of war was preferable to meaningful action at the time. Do I remember this wrong?
-
Nonsense. Merely declaring war should always have consequence, even if no fighting takes place. Its a political statement, and holding a state of war has consquences for both sides. It expresses a desire to fight, and to seek the destruction of another, even if they can't realistically do so. A realm that provokes an continent into declari g war on it deserves to suffer the consquences and the fallout.
-
Vellos admitted on the forums that his purpose behind getting the northern realms to declare war was so that the peasants of Aurvandils regions would revolt.
That to me is gaming the system.
-
I kind of remember Allison saying that a declaration of war was preferable to meaningful action at the time. Do I remember this wrong?
I don't recall that. Allisons plan was to move nobles to D'hara and wage war from there while being funded from the north. Also using priests at the same time.
-
That to me has real world connotations. Threatening war and or declaring it to foster revolt and weaken a common enemy is completely valid. Look at pre WWII and how much Hitler got from local revolutions, surrender and treaty by saber rattling.
-
but the purpose behind it was to exploit game mechanics against a realm that the game won't let the northerners war. The distance from realm penalties have been tweaked once and the north still can't march that far. If the game won't let you fight someone but you still go ahead and declare war because of certain game mechanics then you are gaming the system.
At the time the north declared war on Aurvandil they had no decent reason to do so. At present time, yes they have reason to declare war, when they first did though there was not. This is simply gaming the system.
Perhaps we should remove the penalties to region Morale/Loyalty for being at war.
-
Vellos admitted on the forums that his purpose behind getting the northern realms to declare war was so that the peasants of Aurvandils regions would revolt.
That to me is gaming the system.
We addressed this issue at the time, and there were several other factors at play, including comical tax rates, a lack of courtier/diplo work, and a bug that wasn't evident until Aurvandil complained loudly enough. Then it was fixed. Please don't rewrite history when you dredge things up.
-
Declaring war to overcome TMP was against the game rules, and this is pretty much the same but in reverse, what happened to the ruling that you only declare war if you intend to fight it, and declaring war just to game the war coding was against the rules? Besides which peasant revolts and protests over war declarations seems to be entirely against the Serious Medieval Atmosphere anyway, not least because the peasants wouldn't even know realms like Iashalur exist when they're tens of thousands of miles away, much less care about their war declaration.
Really, if there were any depth to this coding, the peasants of Aurvandil would cease to care about the wars and cease to protest after a certain period of time of non action. Most of the realms at war have barely launched an attacked upon Aurvandil for the many months of their "war", why the peasants would still care about the state of war is beyond me, the nobles don't. As if the kingdom would put up with any form of continued peasant complaining anyway.
-
We addressed this issue at the time, and there were several other factors at play, including comical tax rates, a lack of courtier/diplo work, and a bug that wasn't evident until Aurvandil complained loudly enough. Then it was fixed. Please don't rewrite history when you dredge things up.
Nonsense.
There was nothing wrong with our tax rates they were hardly "comical", as evidenced by the fact we were able to run them perfectly fine for more than a year before the war protests, in fact by Dustoles standards Aurvandil is running very low tax rates, by my old standards, the tax rates of Aurvandil were low.
At the time the north declared war on Aurvandil they had no decent reason to do so. At present time, yes they have reason to declare war, when they first did though there was not. This is simply gaming the system.
They hadn't so much as spoken to Mendicant beforehand, and haven't afterwards either. Poor gaming to just declare war to hope that war protests will beat us, whilst not even bothering to roleplay the war at all. I'm sure that if Aurvandil and Falkirk simply tried to exploit game coding to win wars we'd be up to our necks in complaints about abuses.
-
Declaring war to overcome TMP was against the game rules, and this is pretty much the same but in reverse, what happened to the ruling that you only declare war if you intend to fight it, and declaring war just to game the war coding was against the rules? Besides which peasant revolts and protests over war declarations seems to be entirely against the Serious Medieval Atmosphere anyway, not least because the peasants wouldn't even know realms like Iashalur exist when they're tens of thousands of miles away, much less care about their war declaration.
Really, if there were any depth to this coding, the peasants of Aurvandil would cease to care about the wars and cease to protest after a certain period of time of non action. Most of the realms at war have barely launched an attacked upon Aurvandil for the many months of their "war", why the peasants would still care about the state of war is beyond me, the nobles don't. As if the kingdom would put up with any form of continued peasant complaining anyway.
Wars aren't only fought on the battlefield. The peasants of Aurvandil don't care if the armies of the North haven't marched on them (and aren't aware that they can't feasibly do so because of a game mechanic) they care that your foreign policy is so dicked up that virtually the entire continent wants to destroy you, and they are between them, and you.
A war doesn't need to hit home to be protested.
-
Wars aren't only fought on the battlefield. The peasants of Aurvandil don't care if the armies of the North haven't marched on them (and aren't aware that they can't feasibly do so because of a game mechanic) they care that your foreign policy is so dicked up that virtually the entire continent wants to destroy you, and they are between them, and you.
A war doesn't need to hit home to be protested.
This is the Medieval era.
-
Declaring war to overcome TMP was against the game rules
No, you have misunderstood.
Declaring war to overcome TMP was utterly ineffective. TMP never cared if you had 50 declared wars or none. It was all about actual battles, looting, and takeovers.
-
Peasants obviously know about war declarations.
That means it isn't just an announcement– it has some public element. Town criers start yelling in the streets that XYZ realm has declared war on ABC.
Peasants don't know if XYZ is big or small or strong or weak– they just know that the town crier is yelling in their face.
Should threatening messages about war cause big penalties? No.
Should a mechanic clearly intended to have direct effects on peasants have effects? Yes.
Declaring war in solidarity to allies, especially when you are actively fighting an ally of the target of war, or when you are actively supporting realms doing said fighting, is an entirely reasonable proposition. Just because Iashalur, for example, is far away from Falkirk should not prohibit them from declaring war on Falkirk: same for Zuma and Morek.
-
Nonsense.
There was nothing wrong with our tax rates they were hardly "comical", as evidenced by the fact we were able to run them perfectly fine for more than a year before the war protests, in fact by Dustoles standards Aurvandil is running very low tax rates, by my old standards, the tax rates of Aurvandil were low.
I'm pretty sure you saw these already, but since you've either forgotten or just disagree with the premise, I've decided to help by pointing you toward the relevant facts.
I would like to point out a few things, that I hope that Mendicant will take to heart, and into the in-game discussion (I can't remember, is he played by DamnTaffer or NoblessChevaleresque?):
- The devs have already located two separate bugs that, together, made this effect much greater than it would otherwise have been. These bugs have been fixed. No, the damage hasn't been reverted: we just don't do that. We didn't take away the family gold that Thulsoma got through exploits, either.
- The situation that Aurvandil has come across is, indeed, an unusual one. In addition to the bugs (one of which may have caused extremely high sympathy to the SA realms in some regions), they had a large number of realms declare war on them, immediately after a secession, when they had already been running very high tax rates, and without any non-combat-class nobles available to mitigate the damage beforehand or repair it afterwards. This unusual—even unprecedented—confluence of circumstances can make it appear as though there's something shady going here. However, if you take it all apart and look carefully, you'll find that only the bugs have anything to do with the devs' actions or lack thereof. All the rest is due to Aurvandil's own action and inaction.
- Despite what has been claimed, both previously in Thulsoma and Averoth and again in Aurvandil, the devs do not run SA. In fact, there are only two devs in SA, and neither of them writes code. I know of at least three other devs on Dwilight (including myself) who have, at various times, interacted with SA, but who have never been on better than lukewarm terms with them. As a concrete example, Alanna Anaris, during her time as Queen of Pian en Luries, invited SA priests to the realm, but had already ensured that they would find next to no interest in the religion amongst the nobility. She has always opposed SA hegemony in the southeast.
Naturally, you can dismiss all this as lies designed to take suspicion away from the true conspiracy. Indeed, that's the usual response when someone provides evidence that contradicts a conspiracy theory, even when it is not provided by someone who is accused of being part of the conspiracy. However, I would hope that Mendicant's player has enough integrity to at least provide this information to his realm in-game, to let them see a rebuttal of all the hatred and flaming being spewed there in OOC messages, even if some of them will dismiss it as nothing but propaganda.
You can listen to me or you can plug your ears and go "la la la", the choice is yours, but only one of these options will actually help you.
Yes, you could run those taxes BEFORE HALF THE WORLD DECLARED WAR ON YOU.
Does that mean they have no effect? No.
Does it mean you should be able to run them now? No.
Your regions WERE getting those tax complaint messages every day, weren't they? Before, however, positive effects compensated, so you were essentially having stable morale.
Now with the war protests, you feel the FULL force of the war protests. If you weren't running a limit tax rate, you would NOT - you would have some positive morale effects left to compensate for parts of it.
You run your engine on its physical limits, don't be surprised if it blows up when it meets a bump in the road, and while you can blame the bump, your driving style DID contribute.
And until you realize that and act on it, we have nothing to discuss. I see that a few of your regions have now reduced tax rates, though by far not as much as I had suggested. But you will probably notice a difference in the morale drops between those and the other 2/3rd of your regions which are still running high tax rates.
I'm inclined to believe the guy who designed the game and the guy who contributes the lion's share of the coding.
-
Peasants obviously know about war declarations.
Well considering that in many areas English peasants late into the hundred years war had no clue they had been at war with France even after a century, I'm inclined to disagree.
Should threatening messages about war cause big penalties? No.
Should a mechanic clearly intended to have direct effects on peasants have effects? Yes.
Why? It has yet to be adequately stated why the peasants of Aurvandil would at all care, when they are not in the least bit threatened and when Aurvandil is consecutively winning campaigns, which if anything should provide regional bonuses. Winning battles, taking regions and beating your opponent should make the commons happy, not the other way around. Realms would hold big celebrations when they win after all, the peasants would celebrate etcetera. If war protest coding has negative affects, then it should have positive depending on the context.
Declaring war in solidarity to allies, especially when you are actively fighting an ally of the target of war, or when you are actively supporting realms doing said fighting, is an entirely reasonable proposition. Just because Iashalur, for example, is far away from Falkirk should not prohibit them from declaring war on Falkirk: same for Zuma and Morek.
Well then their war declaration should have no negative affect, as its relatively meaningless to the commons anyway and won't affect them.
-
Oh, also, let's not phrase things as people "admitting." That makes it sounds like I, for example, feel somehow guilty, or have any cognizance that I may have done something wrong– and those just ain't true.
There is absolutely nothing wrong either in the spirit or in the letter of the rules with engaging in extensive RP, involving numerous players, to convince people to declare impossible wars in the name of political or religious reasons that can't necessarily be backed up by force. I'm actually rather proud of the fact that one of my characters has had a part, however small or large, in such a peculiar undertaking as the current one. The task of convincing a realm that another realm 2,000 miles away is truly worth declaring war on is a very large one.
-
Well considering that in many areas English peasants late into the hundred years war had no clue they had been at war with France even after a century, I'm inclined to disagree.
Why? It has yet to be adequately stated why the peasants of Aurvandil would at all care, when they are not in the least bit threatened and when Aurvandil is consecutively winning campaigns, which if anything should provide regional bonuses. Winning battles, taking regions and beating your opponent should make the commons happy, not the other way around. Realms would hold big celebrations when they win after all, the peasants would celebrate etcetera. If war protest coding has negative affects, then it should have positive depending on the context.
Well then their war declaration should have no negative affect, as its relatively meaningless to the commons anyway and won't affect them.
Peasants aren't rational.
They don't know Aurvandil is so much stronger than other realms.
Also, winning shouldn't really matter. Did peasants die in your victorious battle? Yes? Then they're unhappy.
You assume an improbably large amount of nationalistic feeling among peasants.
-
Peasants aren't rational.
They don't know Aurvandil is so much stronger than other realms.
Also, winning shouldn't really matter. Did peasants die in your victorious battle? Yes? Then they're unhappy.
You assume an improbably large amount of nationalistic feeling among peasants.
How could they not know, when all they hear is reports of great victories and seeing a massive army wander around every now and then, we've even won battles in our own land. More Terranese died than any peasant in these battles, I find it hard to believe the entire Commonwealth is unhappy because a handful of peasants from the other part of it were killed.
Peasants did care whether or not you won, and they tended to celebrate and consider it a good thing when you did as opposed to you losing ... and them likely being raped and killed by savage hordes of Republicans.
-
Oh, also, let's not phrase things as people "admitting." That makes it sounds like I, for example, feel somehow guilty, or have any cognizance that I may have done something wrong– and those just ain't true.
There is absolutely nothing wrong either in the spirit or in the letter of the rules with engaging in extensive RP, involving numerous players, to convince people to declare impossible wars in the name of political or religious reasons that can't necessarily be backed up by force. I'm actually rather proud of the fact that one of my characters has had a part, however small or large, in such a peculiar undertaking as the current one. The task of convincing a realm that another realm 2,000 miles away is truly worth declaring war on is a very large one.
Oh.. so there was roleplay and a basis behind the war. You know we honestly haven't the slightest clue down in Aurvandil, since you all declared war "out of the blue" without explanation or even a letter before or after the war (This being SA), but I suppose we're not relevant enough to warrant being in the loop?
-
A case of "you didn't RP with me, therefore you didn't RP at all", eh?
-
More that we didn't see any indication at all that any was going on, and that includes through our foreign contacts. Of course it was an open secret that it was going to happen anyway.
You'd have thought they'd at least give their reasons behind the war, or open up some kind of dialogue about it.
-
Well, it's a comfort to know that your "foreign contacts" aren't really all that good then.
-
Well, it's a comfort to know that your "foreign contacts" aren't really all that good then.
Quite so, I wouldn't want them ruining all the surprises.
-
Oh.. so there was roleplay and a basis behind the war. You know we honestly haven't the slightest clue down in Aurvandil, since you all declared war "out of the blue" without explanation or even a letter before or after the war (This being SA), but I suppose we're not relevant enough to warrant being in the loop?
Um, yeah, there has been quite a lot of work and roleplaying behind all of this.
If it didn't take any work, then all of this would have happened many, many months ago.
How could they not know, when all they hear is reports of great victories and seeing a massive army wander around every now and then, we've even won battles in our own land. More Terranese died than any peasant in these battles, I find it hard to believe the entire Commonwealth is unhappy because a handful of peasants from the other part of it were killed.
Peasants did care whether or not you won, and they tended to celebrate and consider it a good thing when you did as opposed to you losing ... and them likely being raped and killed by savage hordes of Republicans.
Bro.
Soldiers are peasants.
Did soldiers die? Yes? Then the peasantry are unhappy.
You don't actually think that the peasants WANT to fight your wars, do you? Even the "volunteers"– that probably isn't patriotic adoration as much as material need. A soldier peasant makes a whole lot more money than a farmer peasant (I remember somebody did this calculation one time but I forget where...).
Just because you kill more Terran peasants and manage to pay your soldiers on time doesn't mean your peasants enjoy it.
-
Penalizing realms before any battles, looting or takeovers are fought is problematic and unrealistic. It's a poor mechanic by game play standards, in that it can be abused, and it's poor by role play standards as well, as it doesn't make sense and contrives the setting.
This game would do well to borrow from the war exhaustion systems of other games. Europa Universalis, for instance, gives you a war exhaustion rating. The score of the rating scales the size of the penalties you receive and is influenced by battles, occupied regions, blockades and other such things. The merit of this system is that it penalizes players only for things that have actually happened, and so it is both balanced and realistic.
Because, you see, it's the consequences of war that should matter, not merely the fact of war itself. Peasants should care if there are foreign armies marching through their lands, or if their sons are being sent off to die in battles. Currently, they do not care about that at all, instead they care about their state's diplomatic situation and are completely ambivalent towards the effects of the war; they merely care about the existence of war. It makes no sense and should be changed.
-
Um, yeah, there has been quite a lot of work and roleplaying behind all of this.
If it didn't take any work, then all of this would have happened many, many months ago.
I didn't say there wasn't any work but as from our perspective in Aurvandil, there wasn't any roleplay reasons behind the war, and even after we gave SA a reason it hasn't amounted to much.
Bro.
Soldiers are peasants.
Did soldiers die? Yes? Then the peasantry are unhappy.
I thought you made the distinction between soldiers and peasants. Not all soldiers are peasants anyway, and soldiers die as a matter of course, it's their profession, why would this cause great unhappiness in the Commonwealth? Particularly as the Commonwealth is an honour society entirely built around men-at-arms.
You don't actually think that the peasants WANT to fight your wars, do you? Even the "volunteers"– that probably isn't patriotic adoration as much as material need. A soldier peasant makes a whole lot more money than a farmer peasant (I remember somebody did this calculation one time but I forget where...).
What a strange outlook.
The notion of the armies being entirely comprised of unwilling peasants there only out of necessity is a bit... dark age, rather than Medieval.
-
To the point raised about being unfamiliar with the reasons for why a declaration of war was made...
Show of hands: how many of you have had your realm blindsided by a declaration? How many of those declarations were the result of intrigues undertaken well before the war began?
-
To the point raised about being unfamiliar with the reasons for why a declaration of war was made...
Show of hands: how many of you have had your realm blindsided by a declaration? How many of those declarations were the result of intrigues undertaken well before the war began?
The only war declaration I can think of in the past years that might pass as a "blindside" is the Norland/Minas Ithil declaration some four years back.
-
Because, you see, it's the consequences of war that should matter, not merely the fact of war itself. Peasants should care if there are foreign armies marching through their lands, or if their sons are being sent off to die in battles. Currently, they do not care about that at all, instead they care about their state's diplomatic situation and are completely ambivalent towards the effects of the war; they merely care about the existence of war. It makes no sense and should be changed.
You (and NoblesseChevaleresque) have a fundamental misunderstanding of the existing mechanic, and how it works. In short, you demonstrate that you have no idea how the system works at all. I suggest that instead of critiquing something you don't understand, and thus have no basis from which to critique it, you learn how it works. Once you understand that, then you can go about suggesting ways to improve it.
-
You (and NoblesseChevaleresque) have a fundamental misunderstanding of the existing mechanic, and how it works. In short, you demonstrate that you have no idea how the system works at all. I suggest that instead of critiquing something you don't understand, and thus have no basis from which to critique it, you learn how it works. Once you understand that, then you can go about suggesting ways to improve it.
Understandings of the mechanics are entirely irrelevant to the topic which as opened was:
A couple if months ago the northern realms declared war on Aurvandil at the behest of Terran to give them penalties in their regions for so many realms being at war with them. The northern realms even with sea travel have no real chance to march that far south.
It seemed to me that they simply were gaming the system.
Now they are all declaring war on Falkirk. They have no hope of doing anything meaningful. They likely cant even get troops from Darfix to Madina.
It seems gamey to declare a war you have no intention or capability to wage simply to cause negative game effects against another realm.
Try to stay on topic?
-
Understandings of the mechanics are entirely irrelevant to the topic which as opened was:
They are very germane to this discussion, as two of the people involved are using inaccurate data as their reason why they don't like it, and offering suggestions on how to change it. So if I'm OT, then it's because the people to which I'm responding have drifted OT. So... how come you're not complaining to them about how they're OT?
-
We addressed this issue at the time, and there were several other factors at play, including comical tax rates, a lack of courtier/diplo work, and a bug that wasn't evident until Aurvandil complained loudly enough. Then it was fixed. Please don't rewrite history when you dredge things up.
Sure, you fixed the feature was worse than intended however, Dustole has stated Vellos made war declarations to use the fact that wars being declared damage the stats of the realm, this is gaming the system. Please read what you reply to before you make idiotic replies
-
They are very germane to this discussion, as two of the people involved are using inaccurate data as their reason why they don't like it, and offering suggestions on how to change it. So if I'm OT, then it's because the people to which I'm responding have drifted OT. So... how come you're not complaining to them about how they're OT?
Because quoting every post that is off topic would make a very long post
-
...wars being declared damage the stats of the realm...
This is not true.
Please read what you reply to before you make idiotic replies
Please learn the game mechanics. This stuff is important.
-
You (and NoblesseChevaleresque) have a fundamental misunderstanding of the existing mechanic, and how it works. In short, you demonstrate that you have no idea how the system works at all. I suggest that instead of critiquing something you don't understand, and thus have no basis from which to critique it, you learn how it works. Once you understand that, then you can go about suggesting ways to improve it.
As I understand it, the peasants of a region do not like it when their realm wars against another realm which they like. Feel free to correct this understanding if it's wrong. This can lead to situations as described in the opening post, where regions are suddenly penalised at the onset of a war, regardless of whether the war has any sort of persistence beyond it's declaration. Of course, this can lead to game play abuse as well as strain verisimilitude, as I explained before.
-
Do you think it's abuse if a realm declares war only to fix its own region, who dislike peace with realms they like?
-
Do you think it's abuse if a realm declares war only to fix its own region, who dislike peace with realms they like?
Me? Sort of. It's definitely not using a feature as intended, therefore it's a sort of abuse. However, when I call the type of war declarations indicated in OP abuse, I do so because they have the potential to unbalance the game, by allowing numerous, but weak, realms to cause serious damage to a single strong realm through no merit of their own.
-
As long as we're talking about gaming the system listen to my idea:
I'm gonna make a new character, have them sit around and funnel gold into our family wealth so Karibash can continually put family investments into the Shrine! What do you guys think?
I think it's a little suspect but is it really gaming the system?
-
It's definitely not using a feature as intended, therefore it's a sort of abuse.
What do you think the feature is intended for then?
-
As long as we're talking about gaming the system listen to my idea:
I'm gonna make a new character, have them sit around and funnel gold into our family wealth so Karibash can continually put family investments into the Shrine! What do you guys think?
I think it's a little suspect but is it really gaming the system?
Er...that's been done by dozens of players going back to the beginning of BattleMaster.
It's not exactly well-regarded, but unless it's being done on a massive scale, I don't see it as being gaming the system.
-
As I understand it, the peasants of a region do not like it when their realm wars against another realm which they like.
And does that not suggest any simple way to inoculate yourself against this sort of thing? Simply being at war with someone *does not* cause your realm to resent the war, and go into revolt. You could have the entire island at war with you and suffer no ill effects at all, if you bother to take the simplest of precautions. A few days ambassador/diplomat/priest work and you're done.
If you're going to make a habit about pissing off most of the island, perhaps you should think about that *before* you go ahead and goad them into wars?
-
And does that not suggest any simple way to inoculate yourself against this sort of thing? Simply being at war with someone *does not* cause your realm to resent the war, and go into revolt. You could have the entire island at war with you and suffer no ill effects at all, if you bother to take the simplest of precautions. A few days ambassador/diplomat/priest work and you're done.
If you're going to make a habit about pissing off most of the island, perhaps you should think about that *before* you go ahead and goad them into wars?
I was not aware that it took only a few days of ambassadorial work to protect again. In that case, I do not see it as being a serious issue.
What do you think the feature is intended for then?
When I referred to it not using a feature as intended, I meant in regards to war. Declaring war for no reason than for positive morale effects strikes me as a misuse. It cannot be justified in character, due to the fact that it uses out of character knowledge, and this game is meant to be a sort of character simulation, therefore such an act defeats the intended purpose of this game.
-
I was not aware that it took only a few days of ambassadorial work to protect again. In that case, I do not see it as being a serious issue.
When I referred to it not using a feature as intended, I meant in regards to war. Declaring war for no reason than for positive morale effects strikes me as a misuse. It cannot be justified in character, due to the fact that it uses out of character knowledge, and this game is meant to be a sort of character simulation, therefore such an act defeats the intended purpose of this game.
It took at least a few days of work for each reach Maeotis had problems which (had about 4 or 5), and my dude has 100 oratory fame.
Proofing the entire realm against the whole continent takes more than a few days for sure.
-
I was not aware that it took only a few days of ambassadorial work to protect again. In that case, I do not see it as being a serious issue.
To be fair, that is *per region*, and *per realm*. i.e. a competent ambassador (they get bonuses to this type of work) can sway the sympathy of a region toward a single realm several percent per turn. If they are also a priest, they get lots of hours per day. They should be able to remove the penalties that one region suffers, due to war with one realm, in only two or three days. Less if you are not worried about completely removing it. Diplomats may take slightly longer, but not too much. Priests can do it, too. And they can tag-team it and add their results. If you start early enough, you could completely remove any possible penalty long before the war even starts. In addition, this will also make TOing your own regions harder for the enemy.
I have seen realms that have done this with devastating effectiveness.
And, also to be fair, if you do get slammed with several war declarations that you didn't see coming... you could be in trouble. But then again... maybe you deserve it. You *do* need to be aware of the political and diplomatic situation on the island, especially as concerns your realm.
-
Proofing the entire realm against the whole continent takes more than a few days for sure.
So does preparing for war. Walk and chew gum at the same time. Any successful realm should be able to do it.
-
Why not have war protests in regards to the size of the enemies who declared and not the amount? As it goes 5 little kingdoms could drive a single larger kingdom rogue, even if that larger kingdom is clearly stronger.
-
Why not have war protests in regards to the size of the enemies who declared and not the amount? As it goes 5 little kingdoms could drive a single larger kingdom rogue, even if that larger kingdom is clearly stronger.
So how define a larger realm? Amount of regions? Square km? Noble count? Total CS? Max CS over the past year? Most won battles?
The way I see it, Aurvandil and Falkirk have made quite a few enemies. Even without the penalties applied to region stats (which I'm even all but unaware of) I'm sure some realms would have declared war to show their support to their allies or future partners in trade.
Also, Astrum managed to send a force (though small) all the way across to the Madinian Isle. So despite their failure, their clearly was an intent to actually join the war effort.
-
Why not have war protests in regards to the size of the enemies who declared and not the amount? As it goes 5 little kingdoms could drive a single larger kingdom rogue, even if that larger kingdom is clearly stronger.
No, they couldn't.
The magnitude of the effects that Aurvandil felt was drastically increased by the bug that caused sympathy for a number of realms to skyrocket to absurd values in many regions.
-
A couple if months ago the northern realms declared war on Aurvandil at the behest of Terran to give them penalties in their regions for so many realms being at war with them. The northern realms even with sea travel have no real chance to march that far south.
It seemed to me that they simply were gaming the system.
Now they are all declaring war on Falkirk. They have no hope of doing anything meaningful. They likely cant even get troops from Darfix to Madina.
It seems gamey to declare a war you have no intention or capability to wage simply to cause negative game effects against another realm.
Happens to me in Civ and Crusader Kings, and every other 4x game, all damn time.
-
I didn't say there wasn't any work but as from our perspective in Aurvandil, there wasn't any roleplay reasons behind the war, and even after we gave SA a reason it hasn't amounted to much.
I thought you made the distinction between soldiers and peasants. Not all soldiers are peasants anyway, and soldiers die as a matter of course, it's their profession, why would this cause great unhappiness in the Commonwealth? Particularly as the Commonwealth is an honour society entirely built around men-at-arms.
What a strange outlook.
The notion of the armies being entirely comprised of unwilling peasants there only out of necessity is a bit... dark age, rather than Medieval.
With all due respect– if your RP says all your soldiers are nationalistic volunteers, but game mechanics say all your people are protesting the war... game mechanics are right, and your RP loses. You can't claim they're all patriots fighting purely for honor and glory when it's quite clear that in fact they're fighting for a rather hefty paycheck: just watch what happens when you stop paying them.
The ONLY soldiers who fit the patriotic volunteer stereotype are the ones you get from the hero feature "recruit volunteers." That's why it's there, it simulates that effect. Besides that, your soldiers are somewhere between "loosely organized peasant rabble with a few knights among them" and "hardcore professional unit, either mercenaries from the peasant and urban classes or landless lordlings collected in a royal court somewhere." That's pretty much your options for infantry, MI, and archers. SF and cavalry you might be able to argue come from a different class of people.
But, broadly, you ask why dying soldiers would cause unhappiness... because those soldiers are peoples kids and parents and stuff. You don't actually think that the French and English peasantry LIKED the 100 Years War, do you? They weren't exactly (until Joan of Arc) lining up to go lop off each others' heads in a fit of nationalistic glee.
Long story short: peasants aren't patriots. They're pragmatists trying to survive in a noble's world.
-
So does preparing for war. Walk and chew gum at the same time. Any successful realm should be able to do it.
I was just saying, not arguing that it should be any other way.
-
A couple if months ago the northern realms declared war on Aurvandil at the behest of Terran to give them penalties in their regions for so many realms being at war with them. The northern realms even with sea travel have no real chance to march that far south.
It seemed to me that they simply were gaming the system.
Do you have any evidence at all that the part underlined is true?
As far as I know, and I was in D'Hara at the time, war was declared because the SA realms wanted to actually fight Aurvandil, only to discover that even with mercenary settings, Aurvandil was too far away. Also, nobody knew about the bugged sympathy settings--do you have any evidence to the contrary?
I'd like to point you to the Social Contract (http://battlemaster.org/socialcontract.php?review=true), which states:
Do not publicly accuse anyone of cheating, abuses or violations of this contract without proof or evidence.
-
This whole discussion is pretty silly considering every nation at war with Aurvandil and/or Falkirk has sent troops at some point to fight the war.
Just because its really hard and they haven't been successful doesn't mean the aren't trying.
-
Do you have any evidence at all that the part underlined is true?
As far as I know, and I was in D'Hara at the time, war was declared because the SA realms wanted to actually fight Aurvandil, only to discover that even with mercenary settings, Aurvandil was too far away. Also, nobody knew about the bugged sympathy settings--do you have any evidence to the contrary?
I'd like to point you to the Social Contract (http://battlemaster.org/socialcontract.php?review=true), which states:
Oh, I definitely knew that war decs would hurt Aurvandil. No doubt about it. I did NOT know about the bug, nor did I expect the shockingly severe effects. But I certainly expected continent-wide declarations to hurt Aurvandil.
It's not bad to use a game mechanic that is designed to hurt an enemy realm in order to hurt an enemy realm, especially given that virtually every realm that has declared has sent troops at least once, in several cases twice, and several have sent gold and food. The war declarations are far from empty declarations. They have manifested in real troop deployments and resources spent and they are grounded in significant RP and game politics. There is absolutely nothing wrong with going, "Oh– I realize diplomacy is designed to be able to affect a realm's internal efficiency. Maybe I should try and diplomatically outmaneuver my enemy." Aurvandil certainly wasn't ignorant of diplomatic effects: the game gives you notices about peasants' sympathies in various circumstances. They were ignorant of how big the effects would be (as was I, and I think pretty much everybody)... but to call a war declaration abusive when it has been paired with actual soldiers, battles, and invasions, as well as other acts that qualify as aggression, simply because the declarers were aware that the declaration would cause damage... that's total nonsense. It's not like, if the war declarations hadn't been damaging in and of themselves, Hireshmont would have been twiddling his thumbs not seeking diplomatic support. Anybody who has ever interacted with him should realize he basically never does anything without first having consulted with a half-dozen allies first. He's a compulsive coalition-builder.
-
Do you have any evidence at all that the part underlined is true?
As far as I know, and I was in D'Hara at the time, war was declared because the SA realms wanted to actually fight Aurvandil, only to discover that even with mercenary settings, Aurvandil was too far away. Also, nobody knew about the bugged sympathy settings--do you have any evidence to the contrary?
I'd like to point you to the Social Contract (http://battlemaster.org/socialcontract.php?review=true), which states:
I'm going by Vellos' own admission to this fact in a different thread on this forum.
-
As far as I can remember I've never seen Morek or Iashalur troops nor Libero Empire or Farronite. Astrum and Corsanctum made it 1 region south of D'hara IIRC.
-
1) FR isn't at war (yet) with Falkirk nor Aurvandil. Kabrinskia was, though, and has sent troops south.
2) No, you haven't seen Astrum/Corsanctum/Iashalur/Morek troops, because they had too low morale to make it all the way south. However, it's clear that the intention to fight was there, and that's what counts in this case.
3) In case I missed it: yes, Aurvandil was able to run high taxes during peacetime. People don't mind being leeched of from if that's the only thing they have to worry about. In war, though, a lot of other worries crop up, and on top of high taxes, the negative feelings pile up.
-
for what its worth, Libero Empire isn't at war with Aurvandil or Falkirk either.
It seems clear to me based on other posts in the forum that the northern realms thought they would be able to fight Aurvandil and didn't realize the morale penalties would be so severe as to make it basically impossible.
-
1) FR isn't at war (yet) with Falkirk nor Aurvandil. Kabrinskia was, though, and has sent troops south.
2) No, you haven't seen Astrum/Corsanctum/Iashalur/Morek troops, because they had too low morale to make it all the way south. However, it's clear that the intention to fight was there, and that's what counts in this case.
3) In case I missed it: yes, Aurvandil was able to run high taxes during peacetime. People don't mind being leeched of from if that's the only thing they have to worry about. In war, though, a lot of other worries crop up, and on top of high taxes, the negative feelings pile up.
I get that. My point here is not to complain about the war declarations on Aurvandil. There were bugs, bad things happened, northern realms thought they could get there etc... The point I'm trying to get across now is the war declarations on Falkirk. Its even further away than Aurvandil so the northern realms can't do anything to them. Yet they are declaring war. Why? The only reason to do so is to cause game effects. They could send priests or infiltrators but you don't need a war declaration to do so. I feel that the war declarations on Falkirk are nothing more than a means to cause side effects to the peasants within their realm even though their is no reason for those peasants to fear anything from the north.
-
As far as I can remember I've never seen Morek or Iashalur troops nor Libero Empire or Farronite. Astrum and Corsanctum made it 1 region south of D'hara IIRC.
Morek has lost one army making attempts to sail to Aurvandil and two other armies in the Paisly area to defend the city.
Iashulur also sent a sprinkling of nobles south to aid in the attack on the Italian Paisly Puppet.
Corsanctum and Astrum have both sent forces a number of times to aid. Most recently just this last week. Corsanctum to Celitberia and Astrum to the Falkirks.
Farronite Republic has sent forces as well. Most recently this past week in Celitberia.
So... yeah. Again, this is a pointless discussion because every realm has indeed sent forces to the war effort. All of them.
I play the General of Terran, I would know.
-
I get that. My point here is not to complain about the war declarations on Aurvandil. There were bugs, bad things happened, northern realms thought they could get there etc... The point I'm trying to get across now is the war declarations on Falkirk. Its even further away than Aurvandil so the northern realms can't do anything to them. Yet they are declaring war. Why? The only reason to do so is to cause game effects. They could send priests or infiltrators but you don't need a war declaration to do so. I feel that the war declarations on Falkirk are nothing more than a means to cause side effects to the peasants within their realm even though their is no reason for those peasants to fear anything from the north.
Astrum's army was on Falkirk's doorstep just a few days ago....
-
Astrum's army was on Falkirk's doorstep just a few days ago....
And they got annihilated rather quickly ;)
-
And they got annihilated rather quickly ;)
Just not by Falkirk.
-
And they got annihilated rather quickly ;)
By their own allies.
DOH!
-
I'm going by Vellos' own admission to this fact in a different thread on this forum.
He admits he knew it would hurt but unless you are going to quote where he admitted to doing it supposedly only for those effects, he has done nothing wrong.
-
He admits he knew it would hurt but unless you are going to quote where he admitted to doing it supposedly only for those effects, he has done nothing wrong.
And I think Hireshmont's repeated successful efforts to get northern realms to send (hopeless and futile) armies have clearly demonstrated, no, the war declarations were not just for show.
-
And I think Hireshmont's repeated successful efforts to get northern realms to send (hopeless and futile) armies have clearly demonstrated, no, the war declarations were not just for show.
They aren't as hopeless and futile as you think. If Astrum can attack the Falkirks, they should be able to attack Aurvandil, even if its a crappy attack though looting would make them effective and able to stay longer.
-
The main issue here is how peasants are coded to react to wars: as others pointed out, it doesn't suit a SMA that they protest war declaration from realm they barely have heard before, they should react to battles won and lost, regions taken and more than anything looting.
It should be perfectly fine to realm far away to put pression by declaring war, but if this automatically led to peasants protest then we have a problem
-
The main issue here is how peasants are coded to react to wars: as others pointed out, it doesn't suit a SMA that they protest war declaration from realm they barely have heard before, they should react to battles won and lost, regions taken and more than anything looting.
It should be perfectly fine to realm far away to put pression by declaring war, but if this automatically led to peasants protest then we have a problem
And does that not suggest any simple way to inoculate yourself against this sort of thing? Simply being at war with someone *does not* cause your realm to resent the war, and go into revolt. You could have the entire island at war with you and suffer no ill effects at all, if you bother to take the simplest of precautions. A few days ambassador/diplomat/priest work and you're done.
If you're going to make a habit about pissing off most of the island, perhaps you should think about that *before* you go ahead and goad them into wars?
-
So on to another war declaration. Asylon vs Terran.
I was not aware that since FR was allied with both Asylon and Terran that in order for Asylon to declare war on Terran they/we (FR) had to drop our alliance. Its seems to me if Asylon wanted a war with Terran they should be able to do so without dropping the alliance with FR even though FR has an alliance with Terran.
-
I would have assumed that FR would have had to choose a side...
-
I would have assumed that FR would have had to choose a side...
Why don't you? ;D
-
FR should join Asylon and together, they should destroy Terran 8)
-
FR should join Asylon and together, they should destroy Terran 8)
Where do you get these ideas?!? Attack Terran? Help Asylon and Aurvandil? You have got to be kidding me?
-
Yeah, this whole thing is wacko.
Asylon decides on a war against Terran, because they want to attack D'Hara? They will never get all the way to D'Hara through Terran.
EVEN THOUGH Glaumring is always going on about how Sanguis Astroism is so bad and how Astrum is so bad for their region. Yet they choose to fight Terran.
Terran, the small Republic. Great way to support Glaumring's philosophy of small independent realms.
-
How do we fight big bad Astroism if you destroy Aurvandiil?
You guys are the ones who want to play the big alliance and big realm game. Well I will play it your way and show you exactly why its so much fun! Prepare for a taste of your own medicine! Jeez you guys spend weeks picking apart my philosophy and then when I join your side you complain because I'm so much better at it than you.
You should have thought about this when you abandoned us to fight Kabrinskia alone because it didnt fit your strategy, how is your strategy working out now?
-
How do we fight big bad Astroism if you destroy Aurvandiil?
Oh, I don't know. How about by, like, fighting Astroism?
You guys are the ones who want to play the big alliance and big realm game. Well I will play it your way and show you exactly why its so much fun! Prepare for a taste of your own medicine! Jeez you guys spend weeks picking apart my philosophy and then when I join your side you complain because I'm so much better at it than you.
Oh yeah we play a huge big realm game. Our huge realm with 20 nobles trying to fight a realm with like 70. Aurvandil is SUCH an underdog man. Their existence is SO threatened.
You should have thought about this when you abandoned us to fight Kabrinskia alone because it didnt fit your strategy, how is your strategy working out now?
I knew it must have to do with this grudge. Once again. We didn't abandon you at all. We fought and won the war. Then we marched troops to defend Via. Get off it already. You are the one who went out on a limb and invaded Kabrinskia when we specifically said not to and that it would ruin the war. Oh yeah, the day after you signed a cease fire with them. Oh yeah, a few days after you declared war on them.
Literally everyone knows the reality of that situation, Glaumring. Get off it, already, man. It's ridiculous.
-
I dont want to fight Astroism. I dont know where you get this from. D'Hara for killing Ven. We have Astroist temples and Astroists, Asylon isnt interested in a holy war. We dont even care about Astrum. Our issues lay with the D'Harans and the Terrans betraying us, lying about the events of the last war and general flakiness. This is what happens when you betray Asylon.
-
That was quite a last minute declaration of war on Terran. Hope the other declarations come soon.
Am curios how the peasants protesting war works for us.
-
Peasants don't protest war in general. They protest specific wars, for a specific reason.
-
The moot exists purely to maintain status quo. Its role is to stomp out any dynamic fun in the game. Now their long held collective roleplaying of cowards is coming to bite them in the ass.
-
The moot exists purely to maintain status quo. Its role is to stomp out any dynamic fun in the game. Now their long held collective roleplaying of cowards is coming to bite them in the ass.
Are you guys eating that Bloodmoon irl? If so, mail me some?
-
Its Asylons goal to create peace, unity and freedom wherever we go.
-
Its Asylons goal to create peace, unity and freedom wherever we go.
And it does so by declaring war and breaking alliances. How fascinating!
-
Teran better respond soon. This is getting boring.
-
And it does so by declaring war and breaking alliances. How fascinating!
Are you refering to the fact that I was forced by game mechanics to break the alliance with The Farronite Republic? Because as far as I am concerned it has not changed the IC status between the Farronites and Asylon.
Luckily Grimrog seems a lot more reasonable.
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ8OHVdqr973D-cDiPT3n895WU5_DpTI2ZHSxbzdGp_aKWpzZh1)
-
Are you refering to the fact that I was forced by game mechanics to break the alliance with The Farronite Republic? Because as far as I am concerned it has not changed the IC status between the Farronites and Asylon.
For the bazillionth time, RP does not trump game mechanics.
-
Asylon exists for entertainment. Don't get me wrong, we have strong in character motivations for our actions but we are here to entertain. A stagnant Western Dwilight is boring. It is BATTLEmaster after all. Win or lose we will have provided players something to do.
-
I actually like Grimrog's Asylon, both IC and OOC. They're actions may well have disrupted the broken record that is the Moot's seemingly eternal tryst with Aurvandil, not to mention a few other IG things I won't comment on yet. 8)
-
I knew Asylon and Aurvandil were firendly... but I thought Asylon would at least wait for a cassus belli of some kind.
This will be interesting.
-
This would have come sooner but the wedding delayed our plans.
-
I knew Asylon and Aurvandil were firendly... but I thought Asylon would at least wait for a cassus belli of some kind.
This will be interesting.
The Casus belli was D'hara/Terran attacking Falkirk our ally.
-
This would have come sooner but the wedding delayed our plans.
Peace and Love, baby. Peace and Love. 8)
-
From my character's perspective, as a Terran, the war with Kabrinskia was started (by us) for no reason, we started getting our asses kicked by a smaller army, then the Zulu got involved and slaughtered the Kabrinskian army (by accident), then people started talking about how Asylon was coming to save our asses and then the war abruptly ended with Kabrinskia giving in to outrageous demands (outrageous given the fact that they mopped the floor with our army at every occasion and could do so again with impunity in the future). So, it would seem to me that what Glaumring says is true, Asylon helped out Terran and then Terran profited by quickly betraying Asylon by forcing the profitable treaty.
-
I've got to admit, Asylon siding with Aurvandil/Falkirk is very good for SA. Their armies can't reach too far south -- well, Asylon is a good deal closer. Onward to war!
-
OK... Time for some official business:
- I've cleaned the thread by deleting nearly half of it.
- Warnings have been issued where appropriate. Despite the massive amount of flames, insults, and baiting, I have issued only one warning to each person involved. If I sent out warnings for each insult/flame sent, we'd probably have some locked forum accounts by now.
- Please remember to be civil to other players. Even if you think they are insulting or baiting, that doesn't entitle you to do the same in return. The proper response to flames and insults is NOT to insult and flame back, but to report the post.
- If you can't keep your temper, and you can't keep from flaming and insulting, the go away. Really. I mean it. Delete your forum account, and go play something else.
- Please stop rehashing and returning to old topics that you know will just piss off everyone involved. Everyone has already made up their minds on that junk, and no one wants to hear it again, regardless off what side you're on. No one has anything new, useful, interesting or productive to say about it.
Having said that, I'm going to unlock this topic, and see if we can get manage to get back to the discussion.
-
The Casus belli was D'hara/Terran attacking Falkirk our ally.
Terran hasn't attacked Falkirk?
Still, that's an interesting reason.
Hasn't been said IC yet to anybody in Terran as best I can tell.
-
I've got to admit, Asylon siding with Aurvandil/Falkirk is very good for SA. Their armies can't reach too far south -- well, Asylon is a good deal closer. Onward to war!
This is true.
-
Terran hasn't attacked Falkirk?
Still, that's an interesting reason.
Hasn't been said IC yet to anybody in Terran as best I can tell.
I can only think of one or two in Terran that I have given partial reasons for going to war. And that did not include anything about Falkirk.
-
Well we really wanted was to war D'Hara only. But you see if Farronites went and married someone in D'Hara so there is no going that way. Terran is allied with D'Hara so there is no going that way, if we sailed around Dwilight it would take ages and leave our frontline open because we knew as soon as a war was declared on D'Hara, Terran and 50 Astroists would jump in. So we figured !@#$ it, declare war on Terran, help Aurvandiil end the Moot conflict on the mainland since no one other than Aurvandiil was going to help us take out D'Hara.. Why do we want to destroy D'Hara? Because of Chenier, everyone in Asylon can't stand him, he is on our #1 list and right below that is Vellos. Two very unpopular people in Asylon. The thing is we don't even hate Vellos and we don't really want to war Terran but Terran is protecting D'Hara and the Astroists are protecting the Moot and without Aurvandiil no one is protecting Asylon because Asylon isn't a part of the Moot or the Theocracies, so basically once Aurvandiil was destroyed it was only a matter of time before D'Hara or the Moot or Astroists declared war on Asylon for supporting the Falkirkians and Provencia de Florenza etc and being sympatheic to Aurvandiil. If the Moot beats Aurvandiil it leaves Asylon completely isolated, we want freedom of religion, we want freedom of culture, if the Moot wins with Astroists help the Astroists are going to want some favours, all of western Dwilight will be Astroist, Asylon sticks out like a sore thumb. If Aurvandiil is destroyed basically the whole map is Astroist or Astroist sympathetic. The Farronites are a puppet state of the Astroists , they live in complete fear of Astrum, they can't choose their own culture or run their own kingdom, who wants to live like that? Swordfell is in the same boat they can't run their own country, SA says jump and they start licking boots and jumping at the same time. Who wants to run a kingdom like that? Who wants to live under the hammer of a hegemony? Not Asylon, Now is the best time to fight back, now is the time to shake off the shackles and fight back because if this combined alliances wins there will not be a second chance, not this year or the next anyways, the game will go into stagnant peace mode for a year or two or something like that.
We are fighting for Truinism, for Verdis Elementum, for CoB, for whatever goat the Lurias worship, and for free kingdoms and choice. And we would rather die than live in a kingdom that is told how to be or what to do or you can't do this because of this or this or this fear. You guys can live like slaves, in Asylon we'd rather die fighting as free men!
-
Asylon isn't a part of the Moot or the Theocracies, so basically once Aurvandiil was destroyed it was only a matter of time before D'Hara or the Moot or Astroists declared war on Asylon for supporting the Falkirkians and Provencia de Florenza etc and being sympatheic to Aurvandiil.
True, because, well, you did support what is likely the biggest insult to D'Hara since its founding.
But hey, now you provide an enemy that is just as loathable as Aurvandil, but MUCH EASIER to destroy, to people were were starting to get desperate for victories and easy battles. Enjoy sacrificing Asylon in vain, 'cause even Aurvandil can't save your skins now.
-
True, because, well, you did support what is likely the biggest insult to D'Hara since its founding.
But hey, now you provide an enemy that is just as loathable as Aurvandil, but MUCH EASIER to destroy, to people were were starting to get desperate for victories and easy battles. Enjoy sacrificing Asylon in vain, 'cause even Aurvandil can't save your skins now.
I was born in Port Raviel... I'm going to retire there.
-
I was born in Port Raviel... I'm going to retire there.
Unless you plan on joining D'hara you aren't. Asylon can't TO D'hara and I doubt Aurvandil can either. I am talking about the islands of course btw. I am pretty sure way too far for Asylon to ever sustain and probably the same for Aurvandil.
-
Read Glaum's rant.
lol'd.
Read it again.
Laughed harder.
-
Any realm that owns a coastline can TO any region that is also coast, I think. That's how Astrum started a TO down on Madina isle. Not that we could've kept it...
-
Unless you plan on joining D'hara you aren't. Asylon can't TO D'hara and I doubt Aurvandil can either. I am talking about the islands of course btw. I am pretty sure way too far for Asylon to ever sustain and probably the same for Aurvandil.
We will just move our capital to Port Raviel. Asylonians are like mongol horde, you guys can attack our north, take our lands, we'll just take a new one. How do you know we ain't just moving anyways? Fixed static borders are a weakness, we are liquid, you squeeze us and we just run all over the place. The more you clench your fist the more Asylonians will slip through your fingers.
-
Glaumring, please quit acting like without Asylon and Aurvandil there will be no conflict. Perhaps because you are no longer ruler, or because of your isolation you don't know much of the politics, but there are many possibilities ahead.
Any realm that owns a coastline can TO any region that is also coast, I think. That's how Astrum started a TO down on Madina isle. Not that we could've kept it...
I know that, I mean TO and actually keep.We will just move our capital to Port Raviel. Asylonians are like mongol horde, you guys can attack our north, take our lands, we'll just take a new one. How do you know we ain't just moving anyways? Fixed static borders are a weakness, we are liquid, you squeeze us and we just run all over the place. The more you clench your fist the more Asylonians will slip through your fingers.
You couldn't take the D'haran isles even if you did move your capital. Way too expensive, which no one realizes.
-
Read Glaum's rant.
lol'd.
Read it again.
Laughed harder.
lol I know my rants are the best, they are like poetry, people should lay in bed reading them all night they are so hilarious, they are filled with funny jokes and stupid things. I like to write them with all sorts of rhymes and drama. Everything should be like a thunderball in the face! Everything awesome all day, thats how you win dwilight! 8) 8) 8)
-
Glaumring, please quit acting like without Asylon and Aurvandil there will be no conflict. Perhaps because you are no longer ruler, or because of your isolation you don't know much of the politics, but there are many possibilities ahead.I know that, I mean TO and actually keep.You couldn't take the D'haran isles even if you did move your capital. Way too expensive, which no one realizes.
Without Glaumring there isn't a cheeseburgers chance in a fat farm.
-
lol I know my rants are the best, they are like poetry, people should lay in bed reading them all night they are so hilarious, they are filled with funny jokes and stupid things. I like to write them with all sorts of rhymes and drama. Everything should be like a thunderball in the face! Everything awesome all day, thats how you win dwilight! 8) 8) 8)
A great improvement to the rants would be if you broke them up some. The huge text blocks are very unappealing.Without Glaumring there isn't a cheeseburgers chance in a fat farm.
Weird analogy...but just because you don't know of any of the possibilities does not mean there aren't any. I know of several, but the only one I will state due to its obviousness is D'hara-LN.
-
A great improvement to the rants would be if you broke them up some. The huge text blocks are very unappealing.
Thats the style, they are supposed to be a wall of text, its supposed to be intimidating, its supposed to be confusing. The words come at you like a ninja, its like a lawnmower chucked at you in a mosh pit, all you can do is just get chopped up by the awesomeness of a guitar solo lawnmower. Writing on a forum is like a comic book , every word is a panel, every person an actor , every word a wasps sting , every man a flashing ninja sword.
This is the theme song for Asylon...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3MXiTeH_Pg
-
I'm just enjoying having Hireshmont heckle the Asylonian army.
I can do this all day.
-
I'm just enjoying having Hireshmont heckle the Asylonian army.
I can do this all day.
yea, It kinda makes me sad to see my countrymen (well, not mine, but Grimrogs, bah, you know what i mean) fall for such a easy bait. =)
-
yea, It kinda makes me sad to see my countrymen (well, not mine, but Grimrogs, bah, you know what i mean) fall for such a easy bait. =)
Nah, these kinds of arguments are a big part of the fun. It gives low-ranking players a chance to make higher-up connections abroad.
I always hate it when rulers try to silence cross-realm discussions after battles and such, because it's one of the few times that less-connected nobles have a chance to communicate with lots of foreigners.
-
Nah, these kinds of arguments are a big part of the fun. It gives low-ranking players a chance to make higher-up connections abroad.
I always hate it when rulers try to silence cross-realm discussions after battles and such, because it's one of the few times that less-connected nobles have a chance to communicate with lots of foreigners.
Ah, yes indeed, I do not argue against cross-realm conversations, its just a very slippery slope that easy turns to insults. Or maybe its just us Asylonians that are that loose with our tounges =)
-
Ah, yes indeed, I do not argue against cross-realm conversations, its just a very slippery slope that easy turns to insults. Or maybe its just us Asylonians that are that loose with our tounges =)
Nope, that's pretty common ;D
-
In the case of Vellos you know hes filtering everything off to SA with " this is gotta be crusade!" " how about this juicy info! Crusade! " " ok elders got some juicy crusade info on Asylon!"
-
In the case of Vellos you know hes filtering everything off to SA with " this is gotta be crusade!" " how about this juicy info! Crusade! " " ok elders got some juicy crusade info on Asylon!"
Well of course he is.
Just like ya'll are filtering off what he's saying as propaganda about how Terran is full of deceivers.
Everybody does it.
-
Not Grimrog, and that is what might be his undoing. We all know what happens to Honorable characters...
-
Not Grimrog, and that is what might be his undoing. We all know what happens to Honorable characters...
LOL.
Yeah man.
Surprise attacking a realm with KRB looting through their homeland.
That's honorable.
Not.
-
Actions forced by honor is honorable, but also, I belive the concept of honor might be different between people depending on culture, and point of view.
What does KRB means?
-
Well of course he is.
Just like ya'll are filtering off what he's saying as propaganda about how Terran is full of deceivers.
Everybody does it.
Who would we filter it to? Aurvandiil?
-
KRB = Kill, Rape, Burn (the looting option)
-
Yeah there was one instance of killing peasants. Which we dont allow. But decimating economies yes, yes we like that.
-
KRB = Kill, Rape, Burn (the looting option)
Aha, thanks.
Oh, yea, it happend once, that Knight was corrected, and it have not happend after that incident.
-
Aha, thanks.
Oh, yea, it happend once, that Knight was corrected, and it have not happend after that incident.
If by "once" you mean "three times."
AFAIK, looting is not reported with 100% accuracy to the realm doing the looting.
-
Actions forced by honor is honorable, but also, I belive the concept of honor might be different between people depending on culture, and point of view.
What does KRB means?
Terran did nothing to provoke Asylon.
Seriously, RPing Asylon as gone mad with bloodlust would be fun and makes sense.
But there's really no humanly possible way of construing Asylon's invasion as some honorable high road; not in any culture.
-
Terran did nothing to provoke Asylon.
Seriously, RPing Asylon as gone mad with bloodlust would be fun and makes sense.
But there's really no humanly possible way of construing Asylon's invasion as some honorable high road; not in any culture.
I disagree, Sure Glaumring plays his character mad, he was our mad king after all. But majority of us are not mad, nor would we find it fun to break our characters to fit your and others conception of Asylon, that you have mostly built on Glaumrings behaviour ingame and here on the forums(atleast I assume so). **edit** Forgot about lady Ven. She was mad aswell according to D'hara.
Once again I disagree. But since Grimrog dont trust any of his Terran contacts to forward a letter with his war declaration among other things without manipulating it, it will be spread after the war has been won, and I will also post it on the forum, but I doubt we will agree by then either, since no one of us consider himself the "bad guy".
-
Well FR can't let you all have all the fun...
-
It's really no surprise that Asylonians would agree with Glaumring. He was ruler during the events in question, so Asylon will have seen the war as filtered through Glaumring. It is common knowledge that rulers do this, even if unintentionally.
I'm not slamming or insulting anyone with this. It happens. We know it happens. It shouldn't surprise anyone.
-
Asylon is changing into a war kingdom. Its the way we'd rather go out. We want perpetual war. Its been our goal for a long time. Our kingdom is strategically difficult, our neighbors our plenty and all allied, we could sit for years being good and waiting for war crumbs to come our way or actually just play BM. So what Asylon could be destroyed, it is better to die fighting than through boredom. Over the last few days so many Asylonians have said personal thanks for making Asylon fun again. You guys have made war into a beauracracy,so many reasons, so many rules, dont step on his or her feet. To hell with it. No one knew the vikings would raid, we are the barbaric horde of Dwilight, we want land and gold and more armies we want to be the Aurvandiil horde. And we will learn from them, adapt and evolve and continue to war. You guys can play the long game thats fine but I'd rather fight it out. We'd rather fight it out. So if you like war join us or fight us because now that we are on a roll hopefully its not going to end and we keep fighting like mad until we have burned all of Dwilight.
-
In other news, FR has decided to side with Terran and co. against Asylon.
Stay tuned!
-
In other news, FR has decided to side with Terran and co. against Asylon.
Stay tuned!
Wow didnt see that coming... ;)
-
Mmmm... Itau...
-
I knew we should have crushed Perfidious Asylon when we had the opportunity 8)
-
We still do! We still can!
-
Well at least now we got a fighting chance. 8)
-
Asylon is changing into a war kingdom. Its the way we'd rather go out. We want perpetual war. Its been our goal for a long time. Our kingdom is strategically difficult, our neighbors our plenty and all allied, we could sit for years being good and waiting for war crumbs to come our way or actually just play BM. So what Asylon could be destroyed, it is better to die fighting than through boredom. Over the last few days so many Asylonians have said personal thanks for making Asylon fun again. You guys have made war into a beauracracy,so many reasons, so many rules, dont step on his or her feet. To hell with it. No one knew the vikings would raid, we are the barbaric horde of Dwilight, we want land and gold and more armies we want to be the Aurvandiil horde. And we will learn from them, adapt and evolve and continue to war. You guys can play the long game thats fine but I'd rather fight it out. We'd rather fight it out. So if you like war join us or fight us because now that we are on a roll hopefully its not going to end and we keep fighting like mad until we have burned all of Dwilight.
Down with sanity?
-
Personally, I'm glad that Asylon put on the red shirt and stood up. It will certainly make things much more interesting for the north.
-
Personally, I'm glad that Asylon put on the red shirt and stood up. It will certainly make things much more interesting for the north.
No problem Indirik... See you in Libibbbizzib or whatever its called 8)
-
Down with sanity?
Down with banality...
-
You're welcome to stop by any time.
-
The real question is: what will post-Asylon look like?
-
I'm all for setting Turin up in Itau.
Itaulur? Iashatua?
-
The real question is: what will post-Asylon look like?
Well it will be in better shape than Post-Terran...
-
Not too sure if Leopold would like a person he deposed in charge of place pretty close to him.
-
Itau is going to FR! >:(
-
Itau is going to FR! >:(
::)
-
Oo! oh!
Dibs on Koshtlom!
-
Oo! oh!
Dibs on Koshtlom!
If we're starting dibs, then DH gets dibs Echiur ;) Great place to launch our armadas to... buy all that scrumptious west coast food! What food does Asylon produce anyway? Squirrels? Caterpillars? Three-eyed goats?
-
Hallucinogenic fruit. I'm pretty sure that's the only crop they grow.
-
Hallucinogenic fruit. I'm pretty sure that's the only crop they grow.
And Glaumringlings. Yes. They grow them.
-
Hallucinogenic fruit. I'm pretty sure that's the only crop they grow.
D'Hara has all the high grade Bloodmoon in Raviel, I dunno what they're growing in Asylon. Must be riddled with brain-parasites or something.
-
Not too sure if Leopold would like a person he deposed in charge of place pretty close to him.
This would be fun.
Anyway, I thought it was agreed that those blood moon groves had to burn ::)
-
D'Hara has all the high grade Bloodmoon in Raviel, I dunno what they're growing in Asylon. Must be riddled with brain-parasites or something.
The famous brain maggots, indeed. I hear they hatch into tiny flies that then come out of your nose.
-
Not too sure if Leopold would like a person he deposed in charge of place pretty close to him.
Indeed, he'd not like it. Of course, as a player, I wouldn't object to this scenario. ;)
Since Turin's campaign to restore his throne in Iashalur doesn't seem to have found much support, I believe Echiur might just be the place he'll settle down. He surely is raising hell to have Aslyon burnt to the ground.
-
I am strongly in favor of an Eston-style solution to Asylon.
Boot its leaders off the continent, divide into parts, co-opt one of them as an ally. Leave a rump Asylon in Via with a re-arranged leadership.
We could put Turin in Echi'ur with 6-8 other colonists maybe. Spin off Koshtlom too. Echi'ur is super defensible and would keep Via and Koshtlom in check, especially with a larger FR nearby.
-
Lol you guys smoking Bloodmoon? Hubris is a hell of a drug...
-
Lol you guys I'm smoking Bloodmoon? Hubris is a hell of a drug...
Far more fitting.