{HS} Through the Fire and Flames {HS} A ~Dragon Break ~ HotSeat Campaign

[Jadli]

This is no coincidence. I wanted to besiege Ebonheart and mainly block the port as the rule allows us. I saw i can easily do both, so I did this. I didnt break any rule. If this isnt allowed, then i would be the one who should have the right to replay, because all moves i have done depends on this rule. Aparently I could have easily divided my army into two parts and do both. The result would be the same.

Admins decided, play on

[Ventos Mustel]

Here is a demonstration of my point:

[Macrath]

Correct. When you first move onto the tile, the blockade is put into effect. When you then lay siege from that tile, the blockade disappears.

If you have a unit standing on the port tile, then besiege with a different army from a different tile, the blockade remains in place.


The little details are important. Failing to notice that there is no blockade in place after laying siege with the intended blockading army is no different than failing to notice a 1-tile gap in one's fort wall, or slightly underestimating an enemy army's movement range. Its a misplay.

I agree completely this was simply a failure to notice the port blockade was lifted when laying siege to the settlement. A clear mistake, if we are going to start replaying because of simple mistakes players make then we are going to have a ton of replays to do in the near future.

[Jadli]

If i had noticed that i would have divided my armies i guess. No big deal tho

[saleska2]

Jadli did something which was clearly written in the rules and therefor assumed it was legal right? There are a ton of small bugs/glitches w/e in this game. I would have done the same thing, assuming it was a visual bug as the action is something that is written in the rules. If anything Jadli should get a replay.

[Ventos Mustel]

Its always bad practice to assume something is a glitch without confirming it.

[Macrath]

The rule about being able to blockade a port with ground units has NOTHING to do with this situation. He blockaded the port when his army was moved to the port, the port blockade was then lifted when he laid siege to the city. This is so clear cut I don't even see the debate here. The game clearly does not allow you to blockade a port and a city at the same time with one force.

[saleska2]

Like I said, there are alot of glitches, most of em are clearly glitches. Some of them, like these are much less clear. Therefor there are rules, these rules make sure you dont abuse such things and you go look whats in the rules about this sudden glitch you found and look, there just happens to be an exact line in the rules saying that what you just did is legal.

And in this case, (even tho its just this case, it might be different in others) both admins first agreed to Jadli and the move was forbidden so even if he asked it would have been allowed. Either Jadli gets a replay or you replay here imo.

The problem is that you dont know if the game doesnt allow it or whether its a visual bug. I dont see the point for a debate either, BOTH admins agreed on a rule and appearently we are still not going on. Yes, even if admins make a mistake or something like that(Even tho I disagree) you continue. Thats what admins are for, they are here to enforce what the rules say in their perspective and not to just happen to point out that they think something should be replayed. Admin's decision is final and the decision was made.

[Macrath]

The blockade was lifted.. It is shown in game when you lay siege to the settlement. Why would you assume this is a glitch. Just being silly now.

[Jadli]

Yup, and as I said, I just havent noticed the blockade was lifted after the siege begun. If i saw that, i would have divided the army.

[Ventos Mustel]

It happens. Just the previous turn I also made such a costly oversight of the bribe cost calculations.

[saleska2]

Im not assuming it is a glitch, Im assuming actions are made based on rules which say that ports can be blockaded by ground units, however, even when you follow exact rules appearently sometimes these rules just dont count. Im not gonna continue debating as its appearently already solved, but I recommend that this is updated in the rules.

[Macrath]

Nowhere in the rule does it state that you can blockade ports and besiege city at the same time with one army. And it certainly doesn't say that if the port blockade is lifted then it should be assumed it is still being blockaded simply because the unit is on the tile. As I said the rule you are quoting has nothing to do with this situation. Port was blockaded as the rules state that it can be. Then the blockade was lifted and the army attacked the city. So clear cut, no additions need to be made to the rule.

[Jadli]

Nowhere in the rule does it state that you can blockade ports and besiege city at the same time with one army. And it certainly doesn't say that if the port blockade is lifted then it should be assumed it is still being blockaded simply because the unit is on the tile.

yeah, i agree.

[saleska2]

But because this is such a rare situation which most likely barely ever happend before it had no need to state that exact thing in the rules and its safe for people to assume thats its legal imo. The rule can be looked at from multiple perspectives, and from my perspective this isnt clear at all.

[Macrath]

Here is the rule

-

Ports can also be blockaded by ground forces. At least two units are required for each ship in port in order to hold the blockade.

Interpret the rule however you want but it is very straightforward. What other perspectives does one have with this rule? It was implemented simply because some people were not aware that ground forces could blockade a port. And because we decided to make it require 2units per ship. Again this rule has very little to do with this situation. And is simply a case of Jadli not noticing the blockade being lifted and you assuming the port should be blockaded even tho the blockade was lifted, somehow based on a different perspective of the above rule.

[Ventos Mustel]

It sounds like theres no longer any dispute between Jadli and I's positions, so I guess we proceed with the Bretons' turn from here?

[saleska2]

Because you look at the rules dont say, so you look at the rules and see that it does not say you can siege both a settlement and blockade a port

I look at what the rules exactly say, the rules say to me I can blockade a port, and im allowed to siege a settlement. But appearently one rule doesnt count suddenly anymore.

[Macrath]

The rule does not need to state that you can not blockade a port and city at the same time. The game itself does not allow it and if you try it the blockade on the port is clearly lifted.
It is like saying I need to include a rule stating you can not use one army to lay siege to two forts at once. The game does not allow it to happen so it does not require a rule.

[King Athelstan]

It seems like that, yes