So TMP is gone. Are you enjoying all the new wars?

[egamma]

Ummm... just thought I'd quote this very well thought out idea. Because everyone missed it, and this makes the issue of looting your allies a choice and not a matter of fact. It would also add some interesting rp elements if a Marshal ordered the army to do this in a realm currently at peace with his own.

I like the idea, but how to implement? Have it use any spare hours? only hours in excess of a 12-hour pool?

[Gustav Kuriga]

He already states that they would use some hours at the turn change (so you would get less hours per turn effectively, think of it like the way you have less hours to use after a battle, you also have less hours to use because your men are foraging each turn).

[egamma]

He already states that they would use some hours at the turn change (so you would get less hours per turn effectively, think of it like the way you have less hours to use after a battle, you also have less hours to use because your men are foraging each turn).

I don't want to lose hours, I want the men to do this in their spare time, not when the army should be marching.

I would like a drop-down box to choose--either use all available hours, or be sure that I get 12 hours next turn.

Example: 25 year old, 5 hours remaining at turn change. Men could either use 1 hour looting, or 5 hours.
Example, 50 year old, 5 hours remaining: men either don't loot at all (because 5+6=11, so less than 12), or spend 5 hours.

We will also need to vary costs depending on the amount of looting done.

[Shizzle]

I think that would cause problems with the payroll, making things more difficult than they should be. If you don't want to lose hours, pay your men. It could be that simple Basically, it would mean the reverse of being a Vanguard unit. Lower wage, lower travelling rate. (actually, you could make this a new unit setting even, just like Vanguard is. Vagabond?)

[Gustav Kuriga]

I don't want to lose hours, I want the men to do this in their spare time, not when the army should be marching.

I would like a drop-down box to choose--either use all available hours, or be sure that I get 12 hours next turn.

Example: 25 year old, 5 hours remaining at turn change. Men could either use 1 hour looting, or 5 hours.
Example, 50 year old, 5 hours remaining: men either don't loot at all (because 5+6=11, so less than 12), or spend 5 hours.

We will also need to vary costs depending on the amount of looting done.

They are doing this in their spare time. Which they shouldn't have if they're marching...

Look at it this way. If you wanted to be on a hard march (think the 20 miles a day that the roman army was capable of back in the day), then you would march from sun up to sun down in a forced march. There would be no "spare time" in which to gather food from the country side and do a forced march, as you are saying you want to do. They would be sleeping any chance they get. In order to gather food, you would have to stop, organize a defensive postion (not necessarily build a temporary camp. I would consider that the dig-in option, which is not what you are doing), and then send out an organized foraging party so that they would not get taken out one by one. This takes time. Thus why clicking the "foraging" option (what we should really call it, to separate it from looting) would take some time out of the time you get each turn. I think a reasonable amount would be 2 or 3 hours per turn, thus you still get 6 or 5 hours a turn. Enough to slow you down a bit, but not so much that you can't do anything.

[Velax]

Yeah...no thanks. It's already difficult enough getting armies to move cohesively without adding another potential delay in there. We made things better with "delay arrival", let's not make them worse again. Just put it under "Orders" like any other thing you can have your unit do.

[Norrel]

Just have all wasted hours (hours that would put you above 12) automatically used if you have it enabled.

[De-Legro]

Just have all wasted hours (hours that would put you above 12) automatically used if you have it enabled.

There really aren't that many "auto" features in the game, I'm not sure I see this one getting through either. Besides if this happened at TC its just one more thing the scripts have to check and calculate, increasing the time taken for the turn to run.

[Tom]

Yeah...no thanks. It's already difficult enough getting armies to move cohesively without adding another potential delay in there. We made things better with "delay arrival", let's not make them worse again. Just put it under "Orders" like any other thing you can have your unit do.

If this happens, this is how it will. I can imagine a unit action like this, but no automation.

[Shizzle]

If this happens, this is how it will. I can imagine a unit action like this, but no automation.

So basically add an option to looting? "Find your own pay"

[Gustav Kuriga]

If this happens, this is how it will. I can imagine a unit action like this, but no automation.

How about we make it like hunting enemies then? You click the order, it uses some hours, but doesn't run through until the end of the turn. (makes sense, since your men would be out foraging) This would make it not automatic.

[loren]

So I'll provide some high level reasons that I've seen in both Westmoor and Sirion not to goto war even though both have been at peace for some time.

In Westmoor:
- If we goto war with any of our eastern neighbors we'll get crushed by Sirion.
- If we goto war with our western neighbors we'll get crushed by their superior numbers.
- We cannot hope to play off Perdan/Caligus vs. Sirion/Nivemus at present.

In Sirion:
- If we goto war we can't gain anything due to a lack of nobles to fill estates. But damnit Oligarch is ours!
- We need to fight Westmoor for honor.  But people don't want to just goto war for no reason.  See above. (A candidate for PM had a rather length idea for a limited war of honor that was based on if we win X amount of large battles the winner gets a cash tribute paid to them by the loser.  That was shot down as being dishonorable.
- We should wait for Nivemus to repair its regions before considering any future wars of aggression.  For now we need to be able to appeal to being the injured party in a war.

In other words.  Diplomacy is holding back a war b/c its unwinnable.  Estates are holding back war because there is nothing to gain.  Player RP'ing is restricting what is honorable/permissible.  A lengthy protracted war where because we couldn't hold more regions due to a lack of nobles saw instead (this is true down south too) that looting regions until they went rogue was a better option in the war than holding on to them.  Scorched earth warfare has led to completely devestated regions that are taking really long to repair.

[Indirik]

Wait, who do you consider your western neighbors? Obsidian Islands? Or Perdan?

And, seriously, you think Sirion would still come to Fontan's rescue? That treaty is over. Fontan needs to get up and stand on its own now.

But, meh... I left Fontan last week. Most. Boring. Realm. EVER. The entire EC is headed back to a giant peace just like before. The only ones that have a chance to break it is a Westmoor/Fontan war, or a Westmoor/Caligus war. Fontan/Caligus would just be dumb.

[Draco Tanos]

Western would be Perdan.  Caligus is more South...  OI is North, but...  Frankly, why would we want to fight for wasteland regions? :|

[De-Legro]

So really what we need is a way to truly profit from wars that doesn't revolve around taking regions?