binTravkin said:
Make an exception from the rules for Mecklemburg and Pommerania and make those two fair game. Apart from that, the rules are fine IMHO.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Make an exception from the rules for Mecklemburg and Pommerania and make those two fair game. Apart from that, the rules are fine IMHO.
Nono, this is not going through, I won't make an exception just because you happen to be playing Denmark.
There will be new rule, not exception, which would encompass all such situations (because there are a lot places where one can ahistorically bash pagans/muslims), so please suggest something more global.
There will be new rule, not exception, which would encompass all such situations (because there are a lot places where one can ahistorically bash pagans/muslims), so please suggest something more global.
binTravkin said:Nono, this is not going through, I won't make an exception just because you happen to be playing Denmark.
Well, I think that the original rules are fine, really. I just noticed that the effect in the southwest Baltics would be to award some areas to some players before the game even begins. Unlike Iberia, Mecklemburg and Pommerania are weak, the HRE and Poland can take them out at leisure. So IMHO it would benefit the game and encourage competition to allow those two, as well as Denmark and Sweden(and possibly others), to compete for the areas.
It's not a big problem though, and I understand that you want to have coherent rules. Just wanted to mention it.
Well, stepping back is neither a way to go.
I myself feel that rules are a bit too deterministic in these cases, and there are some who also think they're too harsh.
I was hoping someone would provide an alternative and a bit looser rule.
Unless it's provided, or I have a brilliant idea (don't even hope so!), the rules will remain as-is.
Note - I deleted the marriage restriction.
Another note - I will add ethiquette-related rules a bit later so there's no problems with players later saying 'I know it's an exploit, but it was not in the rules'.
And the last note - It seems that either the agresiveness level or difficulty will be lowered as VH/F renders Wales unplayable for a human.
I myself feel that rules are a bit too deterministic in these cases, and there are some who also think they're too harsh.
I was hoping someone would provide an alternative and a bit looser rule.
Unless it's provided, or I have a brilliant idea (don't even hope so!), the rules will remain as-is.
Note - I deleted the marriage restriction.
Another note - I will add ethiquette-related rules a bit later so there's no problems with players later saying 'I know it's an exploit, but it was not in the rules'.
And the last note - It seems that either the agresiveness level or difficulty will be lowered as VH/F renders Wales unplayable for a human.
binTravkin said:
Oh no! I can find a stratigy! If we have a human in France and Scotland, eventually
Wales might form an Auld Allience between the three of them! France can have her Normandy back, Scotland can have York, and Wales can have carve out the rest!That is, unless -others- wish a lower level. hehe. It might all be a mute point though, I still need to test to see if I can enter into the game.
A question regarding this rule:
Suppose I ally with a spanish lord or a muslim ruler, and is then asked by that lord to join him in war against muslims/pagans, would it be a breech of the rules?
Denmark just might want to reclaim the Danelaw too...
binTravkin said:
Suppose I ally with a spanish lord or a muslim ruler, and is then asked by that lord to join him in war against muslims/pagans, would it be a breech of the rules?
Drachenfire said:
Denmark just might want to reclaim the Danelaw too...
Varyar said:Denmark just might want to reclaim the Danelaw too...
Well there you have it then! An Auld Allience Quartette!
Just have a bastard to contend with!
By the By, DOES Denmark's royal family have a claim on the English crown in 1066?
Drachenfire said:
No, they don't. Some courtier does have such a claim IIRC. What the Knytlings have are claims to lots of counties in northeastern England, from Norfolk to York and Lancashire.
Hey Varyer, I need to test to see if I can connect to an online game... do you have the scenario downloaded? Do you have time for a quick test?
WOW! Denmark has claim on half of England! I just looked it up!
WOW! Denmark has claim on half of England! I just looked it up!
Last edited:
Drachenfire said:
I have all the time in the world
But do I have to download a scenario file? I thought we'd play vanilla Hasting(1066).Varyar said:I have all the time in the world
I think I copied over mine.
When I pull it up the Welsh names are corrected to Mathrafal and Dinefwr now. It took me the better part of all night to be sure I had it correct. Hehe.
The dynasties and country.csv will overwrite. That's why I said you should make a backup of them.Drachenfire said:I think I copied over mine.
@Varyar, yes you have. The game was the reason I made the scenario. It will be like vanilla hastings except some points anyway.
CSK said:
Where can I find it?
EDIT: nevermind, found it. Should perhaps be included in the original post together with the rules though.
CSK said:
I did make a back up... but am unsure how to toggel between them when I would play a game. Thanx for that CSK by the way!
It's perfectly okay if you honour your alliance, no matter who the offender is (and thus you can logically thinking take all of that muslim/pagan).
I will put up scenario link on the first post, so one doesn't have to search, once I get home.
Regarding rules:
There is a problem that Duchy of Gwynedd cannot survive in VH/F, therefore me and CSK decided to tune down difficulty and agressiveness a little, alas both by 1 level.
Therefore game will be played at H/A.
If you have objections, say soon or silence forwever..
Also in anticipation of easier claiming in H/A, we also thought up a rule:
One is allowed to only claim titles that are exactly one tier lower than his, unless the target realm is an independent count(then there are no restrictions as there can't be any).
That means, that if a king wants to attack some kingdom, he must claim a duke title in that kingdom, and then realise the claim. Once he will have 2/3 of needed duke titles and thus a proportional amount of land in that realm, he can usurp the king title.
If a portion of those duke titles is owned by a character you don't have a claim, on, like king or other duke, you are not eligible to claim count titles for that land, only that other duke who's owning it.
If there are no duke to target (for king tier players), you are allowed to target counts, but only on this special occassion and you're still not allowed to claim king title.
This rule intended to ensure all players, no matter be they duke or king tier claiming at comparable rate, as it would be approximately as hard for king tier player to claim duke as for duke tier player to claim count.
It is also expected to ensure that the growth of realms will be somewhat proportional, thus keeping the powerbalance as intact as possible.
Your opinions are expected.
Updated first page, two more updates coming soon:
Latest rule change + etiquette rules.
First session date and time.
Latest rule change + etiquette rules.
First session date and time.
binTravkin said:
Good to know.
Sounds complicated, but doable. I assume that it means that you can claim count titles if the count in question is a direct vassal of a king? (As with the case of Holstein-Hamburg IIRC)
Yes, as I said, if there is no duke title to claim for target area, you are allowed to claim count titles.
Re: Pagans/Muslims, I think the Baltic pagans should be fair game, but other than that the blanket rule in place is fine. It would just be much, MUCH more interesting to see a Swedish/Polish/Russian power struggle over the baltics, and a German/Danish/possibly English struggle over the north German pagans, then to have them basically auto-assigned to particular countries. And it's beside the real danger, which is everyone rushing to conquer North Africa & the Middle East...
But I leave it to you.
But I leave it to you.
