The Marrocidenian war

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

It is absurd to say Barca was the reason for you to not help Terran and Asylon. It was proved that Barca could complain all it would like because of the regions you stole, but nor in diplomatic neither military way it could do anything to get them back. Did you see Barca as a threat? At this point it sounds just ridiculous. And we still have got the Provincia di Fiorenza matter. That was an awful way to prove your good intentions towards Terran and D'Hara.

Barca threatened future war and hostile actions against Aurvandil, whilst insulting the High Sovereign and telling Aurvandil we owed our existence to them and we should do as they say on that basis, yeah that didn't go down well. You can call it absurd, but Aurvandil likes to be SMA about diplomacy, and insulting and threatening a monarch is not something that would have been tolerated by a foreign realm.

In "single combat" Fissoa could have beaten Falkirk. And I think you underestimate your enemy if you think a combined force of Fissoa, D'Hara and Luria Nova couldn't put you in a tight spot. Moreover, I don't think you could indefinitely support economically and in food supply Falkirk. You have already squeezed your regions and pushed the peasants to their limits, and maybe a new war declaration from Luria Nova and D'Hara could induce to a civil rebellion.

If they could have beaten Falkirk, they would have, but as you have seen Falkirk consistently destroyed and defeated the Fissoan army in the field more than five times. The Fissoan armies were being consecutively destroyed by Falkirk every time they marched over.  Oh I'm sure they could put us in a tight spot, but we know our !@#$ when it comes to war. Falkirk especially, as they are all veterans of the League of Free Nations and the continent wide war, they've shown they can take down bigger, stronger enemies despite being in a tight spot.

And civil rebellion? I doubt it, not now that Aurvandil has a lot of diplomats, courtiers, priests and indigenous religion, plus enough nobles that allow us to police and work on our regions whilst still being able to send over 50 nobles on campaign.

Maybe in a short term if Falkirk falls it would be beneficial for you. But your lands can't produce enough gold and food to maintain the army that would correspond to 90 nobles. At some point, they wouldn't just be able to pay their troops, and of course it would help to block the eventual commerce you could have with the current Falkirkian lands. They would have to start using their own family wealth and if there is actually some kind of rivalry between you, maybe they would start to be willing to return to the lands they owned although they were called in a different way and sustained a new realm.

You underestimate what Aurvandil can do on  a limited budget, and food? We're rolling in a surplus of thousands even after supplying the Freestate, we won't be short on food at any point due to maintaining an army, and we don't recruit to the maximum at all times, we reserve the bulk of recruitment before we go on campaign so our forces aren't sitting in the capital eating gold and food needlessly.

And the Falkirkian's are professionals, that means we can put aside our personal rivalries when our duty/honour/mutual causes call for it. Plus, Aurvandil would re-found them a realm anyway, Mendicant doesn't like the Averothoi, he respects them, but he doesn't like them.

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

the Averothoi and Vandils are definatly more brother some as Fissoa and any ally.
There realms are ruled and strategy conducted in a similiar way with Aurvendil the only one to have an identity.
Thats also why your two realm cooperate the best (which will hopefully change or else having allies is still useless)

I said it and say it again that the reason falkrik is a realm has mostly to do because the players where already a group before they joined BM.
Aurvendil has finally grown in a real realm with indentity and diferent kind of families form different backgrounds, quite alot also report its fun playing there.
Falkirk on the other hand still mostly is those same few players.

I would actually look forth to see those nobles integrate in Aurvendil, perhaps that would give them some more character.
I am still puzzled why they actually all should join Aurvendil and not leave the continent all together.

Falkirk is made up of the Averothoi, who came to Aurvandil over a fairly extensive period during the Madinian war.

Dwilight has the best prospects for founding  a new realm, and it's the home of the Averothoi, so they wouldn't leave to a different continent that wouldn't make any IC or OOC sense, and it'd be far harder to orchestrate, not that foreign continents take very kindly to anyone even remotely related to Averoth being together from what I've heard anyway.

Plus, Aurvandil is made up partly of nobles and government who tried to support Averoth and Caerwyn, so really Aurvandil was one of the few realms they could join.

[Phellan]

If they could have beaten Falkirk, they would have, but as you have seen Falkirk consistently destroyed and defeated the Fissoan army in the field more than five times. The Fissoan armies were being consecutively destroyed by Falkirk every time they marched over.  Oh I'm sure they could put us in a tight spot, but we know our !@#$ when it comes to war. Falkirk especially, as they are all veterans of the League of Free Nations and the continent wide war, they've shown they can take down bigger, stronger enemies despite being in a tight spot.

Without Aurvandil's intervention, Falkirk would be on it's deathbed already - they hardly "destroyed" the armies of Fissoa.   Each time Fissoa refitted it's mobile strength grew, while Falkirk's weakened.   That is not a good sign when fighting a prolonged war of attrition.    A quick look at the last two months comparing both Realms effective CS shows the attrition war was being lost by Falkirk.

As for a tight spot -  well executed pillaging and burning raids to ruin the food production and stores of Aurvandil over the course of a few months would likely result in wide spread starvation - you'd need to pick either your cities or food producing regions to feed.  Leaving you short either on food or gold as a result - which either way ruin your ability to wage war.

After that it's a waiting game till the internal economy of Aurvandil collapses and it's regions rebel.

The destruction of Aurvandil is possible through the destruction of its outer regions - which the Moot has easy access to should they bother to actually war. 

[Lychaon]

Barca threatened future war and hostile actions against Aurvandil, whilst insulting the High Sovereign and telling Aurvandil we owed our existence to them and we should do as they say on that basis, yeah that didn't go down well. You can call it absurd, but Aurvandil likes to be SMA about diplomacy, and insulting and threatening a monarch is not something that would have been tolerated by a foreign realm.

I'd really like to see those conversations, from Julius' point of view Mendicant was rather trying to turn every word he said as an insult, while talking to him with disdainful manners. Since you confirmed some time ago your OOC intention to keep the regions on your side, I guess you was just trying to force a situation that allowed you to act feeling insulted. So, you would be able to say "you've insulted the High Sovereing, and failed diplomatically in your attempt to have back your regions", rather than "we're going to keep these regions because our army is much stronger, so don't even try".

It's already a recurrent topic but I think it's not very "SMA about diplomacy" to offer a realm peace and then put a puppet state in its lands. As it isn't either to raid the lands of other realm to help your allies and then offering peace.

Someone who is consequent with his own actions don't do such thing. It can be interpreted as an attempt to have some guarantees that war won't come from that side whilst you don't start it, or just a way to keep civil population calm. If you raid an enemy's lands, or interfere in its politics, what kind of non-imposed peace could you expect?

You've mentioned SMA and also your recently founded indigenous religion, and in my humble opinion a religion called "Cult of Reason" sounds rather a late 18th century philosophical current than a medieval-looking religion. Things like that could make other players think that it's been founded in order to keep the peasants tied to their lords and fight the spreading of other religions, included the Orthodox Astroism. I insist, it's just my opinion.

[Kwanstein]

I'd really like to see those conversations, from Julius' point of view Mendicant was rather trying to turn every word he said as an insult, while talking to him with disdainful manners. Since you confirmed some time ago your OOC intention to keep the regions on your side, I guess you was just trying to force a situation that allowed you to act feeling insulted. So, you would be able to say "you've insulted the High Sovereing, and failed diplomatically in your attempt to have back your regions", rather than "we're going to keep these regions because our army is much stronger, so don't even try".

It's already a recurrent topic but I think it's not very "SMA about diplomacy" to offer a realm peace and then put a puppet state in its lands. As it isn't either to raid the lands of other realm to help your allies and then offering peace.

A mendicant is a beggar. It is very ironic that the character, Mendicant, is rather arrogant and imperious. If you slavishly bow and kiss his feet, he will nonchalantly give you what you wish. If you try -- at all -- to stand head to head with him, he will demonstrate his superiority by cowing you into submission. I'm not privy to what went on between Mendicant and Julius, but I wouldn't be surprised if Julius refused to submit to Mendicant; that unwilling to sacrifice his dignity, he attempted some form (however timid) of posturing instead. In this light, Mendicant's actions make perfect sense -- although, this is all postulation, perhaps I've read him entirely wrong.

You've mentioned SMA and also your recently founded indigenous religion, and in my humble opinion a religion called "Cult of Reason" sounds rather a late 18th century philosophical current than a medieval-looking religion. Things like that could make other players think that it's been founded in order to keep the peasants tied to their lords and fight the spreading of other religions, included the Orthodox Astroism. I insist, it's just my opinion.

"Cult" makes it sound antiquated, however "reason" brings to mind the age of reason, which is more modern. So it does sound odd. I'm not familiar with it's tenets though, so I will not judge. For all I know, it' could be very clever.

[Glaumring the Fox]

Do you know the definition of cult? The word was first used in the 17th century its hardly antiquated... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult

[Kwanstein]

For some reason 'cult' makes me think of something primitive and ancient. Maybe it's from reading C'thulu stuff...

[Indirik]

Do you know the definition of cult? The word was first used in the 17th century its hardly antiquated...

Are you trying to say that the word doesn't fit with SMA, because the game targets things no later than, what, the 1300's?

[Chenier]

Are you trying to say that the word doesn't fit with SMA, because the game targets things no later than, what, the 1300's?

No specific date, for if I remember correctly, some aspects of BM fit better with the 900s, whereas many others fit better with the late 1500s.

[Tandaros]

Simple, Falkirkian Freestate are a tyranny as a government system, but they're not tyrannical in the modern interpretation of the word. I've always thought that Battlemaster tyrannies are simply self made realms under self made rulers kind of thing, with no overtones as to a "tryannical" nature as we might interpret it on an OOC level through a modern perspective on the word.

And Freestatism is juxtaposed to Monarchism, which they consider to be tyrannical in the modern sense, dictatorships basically. As Freestatism overthrew the Averothian Monarchy for much the same reasons.

Okay, I think I follow. Thanks for the explanation!

[Indirik]

No specific date, for if I remember correctly, some aspects of BM fit better with the 900s, whereas many others fit better with the late 1500s.

700-1300, I think, is the semi-official guideline. It's on the wiki somewhere...

[Penchant]

A mendicant is a beggar. It is very ironic that the character, Mendicant, is rather arrogant and imperious. If you slavishly bow and kiss his feet, he will nonchalantly give you what you wish. If you try -- at all -- to stand head to head with him, he will demonstrate his superiority by cowing you into submission. I'm not privy to what went on between Mendicant and Julius, but I wouldn't be surprised if Julius refused to submit to Mendicant; that unwilling to sacrifice his dignity, he attempted some form (however timid) of posturing instead. In this light, Mendicant's actions make perfect sense -- although, this is all postulation, perhaps I've read him entirely wrong.

"Cult" makes it sound antiquated, however "reason" brings to mind the age of reason, which is more modern. So it does sound odd. I'm not familiar with it's tenets though, so I will not judge. For all I know, it' could be very clever.

From what I have heard about the Galvez family with diplomacy, it was likely that and more and I don't really doubt the insults or whatever else Noblesse claims related to negotiations with Barca oringinally.

[Glaumring the Fox]

Are you trying to say that the word doesn't fit with SMA, because the game targets things no later than, what, the 1300's?

Well, the definition of the word 'cult' was coined in the 17th century but I think we can agree that cults have existed since antiquity. I think you could classify the Knights Templar as  a type of cult or there appears to be a 'cult of saints' etc in medieval times, plus the people who used to whip themselves, there are many medieval cults.

"deriving their inspiration from outside of the predominant religious culture" Mainstream culture is SA.

[Stabbity]

Do you know the definition of cult? The word was first used in the 17th century its hardly antiquated... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult

1600 is most definitely antiquated. Unless you wish to continue to march around with a flintlock.

[Glaumring the Fox]

I went goat hunting on a small island in the Pacific once with this Aboriginal guy and he had a homemade flintlock, we were climbing jungle cliffs hacking through super dense jungle, like 3ft every 15 -20 minutes, the foilage was so dense we just sat on the trees and grass and roots on the side of the mountain and ate the inside of some betel palm that tasted like raw bamboo. Well anyways we didnt find any goats and ended up shooting trees in a small valley at the base of the mountain.flintlocks are loud!