[Britannia Expansion - Custom Submod] The Isles of Chaos (Roleplay Hotseat)

[The Wise Coffin]

Also, here's the images from the battle against Wales.

https://imgur.com/8A8YHS3

https://imgur.com/XDisPZe

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

Well, prior offer stands, though it remains incomplete.

Time to poke Jadli again...

[Jadli]

Do I have to say also that the result of AR battle should be similar to the result of manual battle (if possible)? You can win the AR battle and not kill the prince pretty easily, so please go ahead for replay and do that...


OLBs can work only if players show some fair play, as the rules around it are pretty free and based on agreement between players paticipating in the battles moreless. If players cant do that, we will have no online battles, as it can be exploited easily.

[Der Böse Wolf]

Ouch, it seems the welsh got crushed. Did King Llewellyn die?

Guys, why all this drama?
We're all just trying to have some fun here.

It's just a game.

It's simple:
1- Follow the rules of the HS.
2- Don't whine if you lose and don't take it personally.

Barons: what do you mean you're subjugated? If you're pissed for having to replay your turns, its because you breached a rule:
- You didn't post battle screenshots.
- You didn't use the required artillery to capture a settlement.
- You killed the Prince in AR while he didn't die in OLB. PS: how can Barons player know if the Prince died in AR, does the game say it?

It's just fair and correct.

England: I also enjoy RP but if a player is aggressive against you, it's still part of the RP. RP doesn't mean passive play, even if usually RP TEND to be more passive. It's still Total War after all. Also, the Barons are in a delicate situation and maybe can't afford to be too passive especially that they were pinched by you and Scotland.

Come guys, let's just take is as it is, a game, play fair, and have some fun while at it, shall we?

[ScotlandIsBest]

^^^^^^^^^^

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

Ouch, it seems the welsh got crushed. Did King Llewellyn die?

Guys, why all this drama?
We're all just trying to have some fun here.

It's just a game.

It's simple:
1- Follow the rules of the HS.
2- Don't whine if you lose and don't take it personally.

Barons: what do you mean you're subjugated? If you're pissed for having to replay your turns, its because you breached a rule:
- You didn't post battle screenshots.
- You didn't use the required artillery to capture a settlement.
- You killed the Prince in AR while he didn't die in OLB. PS: how can Barons player know if the Prince died in AR, does the game say it?

It's just fair and correct.

England: I also enjoy RP but if a player is aggressive against you, it's still part of the RP. RP doesn't mean passive play, even if usually RP TEND to be more passive. It's still Total War after all. Also, the Barons are in a delicate situation and maybe can't afford to be too passive especially that they were pinched by you and Scotland.

Come guys, let's just take is as it is, a game, play fair, and have some fun while at it, shall we?

> Llywelyn did survive the battle, though a number of his units are eliminated.
> You can simply check the fort to see if the prince is still in; he would be unable to move beyond before and after the battle.

Indeed, the idea is to simply have fun with all this. If necessary, and if LordPure doesn't want to be in any longer, I could attempt to sub Barons until a suitable replacement comes along.

[LordPureLegacy]

For one by subjugating I mainly just mean Wise Coffin for he is saying he is annoyed by me so much that every deal he makes is to make other factions go against me which in my opinion isn't really rp like for it was more than just a defeat that forced others to attack someone, Barons for example how would the Welsh feel about attacking their friendly relations of the Barons. Two I am not mad because I gotta replay I am mad because Coffin gets mad at me for everything I do. Third the battle we did was to conduct both of our armies which is the king and prince army, Coffin we took units out of both so I only took out what I was suppose to and its not my fault your prince is in a fort I don't know for sure if you can have any generals survive from a fort siege btw I did use night fighter on both for thats the only way I could've done it without reloading constantly. If you don't like the results then you shouldn't have agreed I didn't say I was going to give pity on your generals and me killing the prince is a good reason for peace you payed up for some of the reason of the Baron Rebellion and as I said I was reminded that a rebellion did not need to do their goal so soon.

One last thing I think I forgot to mention I ransomed I think the prince army it was around 1000 and accepted I will only redo for that but what I took out was reasonable. Also I don't want to be subbed while I find a replacement I will do it I mainly am leaving because one person has a problem with me and coffin its a hot seat deal with the results even if its suppose to be roleplay in the other British isles hot seat barons are kicking my ass as wales and kicking England's ass and Barons have control of london, Nottingham and many other England settlements and your mad because I defeat two armies.

[The Wise Coffin]

For one by subjugating I mainly just mean Wise Coffin for he is saying he is annoyed by me so much that every deal he makes is to make other factions go against me which in my opinion isn't really rp like for it was more than just a defeat that forced others to attack someone, Barons for example how would the Welsh feel about attacking their friendly relations of the Barons. Two I am not mad because I gotta replay I am mad because Coffin gets mad at me for everything I do. Third the battle we did was to conduct both of our armies which is the king and prince army, Coffin we took units out of both so I only took out what I was suppose to and its not my fault your prince is in a fort I don't know for sure if you can have any generals survive from a fort siege btw I did use night fighter on both for thats the only way I could've done it without reloading constantly. If you don't like the results then you shouldn't have agreed I didn't say I was going to give pity on your generals and me killing the prince is a good reason for peace you payed up for some of the reason of the Baron Rebellion and as I said I was reminded that a rebellion did not need to do their goal so soon.

One last thing I think I forgot to mention I ransomed I think the prince army it was around 1000 and accepted I will only redo for that but what I took out was reasonable. Also I don't want to be subbed while I find a replacement I will do it I mainly am leaving because one person has a problem with me and coffin its a hot seat deal with the results even if its suppose to be roleplay in the other British isles hot seat barons are kicking my ass as wales and kicking England's ass and Barons have control of london, Nottingham and many other England settlements and your mad because I defeat two armies.

How am i upset with you? I don't even know you. Your just an avatar image and text on a post to me. What i am doing is disaproving of your actions that constantly break hotseat rules by not posting images of your actions and taking my city without the proper tools to do so. Also you seem to not understand the multiplayer battles. We agreed to fight on a open battlefield with a stack that represented all my armies involved, and yet you confess of doing a night battle, making the autoresolve unfairly balance in your favor so that you can pick my armies one by one. Something that didn't happen on our agreement of meeting in a open battlefield, because if in battle both of your armies went to battle, why wouldn't the army i the fort go to?. Such results are sometimes impossible to be done in AR so i suggest manual disband of units so to replicate loses and then one can discuss after battle reparations.

Also, i don't know where are you coming from with this accusations of me instigating players to attack you. Are you guessing like you did with that secret message to scotland, or are players telling you of such things, because i'm not seeing that.

But to be fair i am already sick of this situation. I already expressed that i wanted to relieve my love for the hotseat, so let the rules be applied and the battle result be justly put into my faction so that we can continue to play.

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

I should note that it is immaterial if it is impossible to win by AR at first glance, because the file can be sent to the Admin for conflict resolution. Coffin will have to do the same, because if I understand correctly, his army can't actually beat mine in a fair go with AR.

[LordPureLegacy]

One you ignored what I said which was that I was not mad about replaying my turns. You have constantly said that I should just leave without saying it by constantly saying that you hate my moves and that it somehow breaks the rules of role play you act like your near death when all I did was step into your territory. Also your damn right I night fighted it I never agreed or knew of that we were to play the exact same scenario I thought it would go whoever wins gets to move forward with a heroic victory. By the way me doing night fight helps you even more for I can just leave a unit to maintain sieging go around fight both battles without having to deal with the fort defense bonus then take out both armies then go back to take a fort with only losing 200 men instead of 500. Why should I spare an army you used in the battle that I defeated be glad your king is alive and for your prince he was already a fool strategically and historically he caused financial near bankruptcy to England and his father paying off his debt and his general along with him was a better commander overall than him. You didn't bring your prince in yet I brought my other general in its a pity King Henry does not trust his own son to hold his own.

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

and for your prince he was already a fool strategically and historically he caused financial near bankruptcy to England and his father paying off his debt and his general along with him was a better commander overall than him.

...I should note that this should really have little relevance or bearing to anything, considering the "alternate history" nature of hotseats.

Especially since it isn't historical for him to die, either. If we base of historical accuracy, Simon Montfort's ultimate mission was to make the English Crown responsible. He never became king, and indeed, didn't actually slay the king either - they coexisted, only King Henry was very heavily weighted in his decision making with the influence of Montfort and allied barons. That is, King Henry ended up no longer having the power to do absolutely everything he pleased.

[The Wise Coffin]

This is the last thing i shall writte on this matter. We agreed upon an OPEN battlefield, meaning that the armies would meet and face each other, so the army that was sieging shouldn't then be sieging, and whend you denied the end of hostilities you said you would leave me be for 2 turns. From the beginning of the hotseat whend the word for the multiplayer battles came it was to determine very important battles and replicate their results on the campaign map. So i feel wrongly betrayed whend you do the exact opposite whend you begin to create results different from what the multiplayer battle concluded. Even to the point of destroying my entire force i nthe fort.

But it is also true that such deals can't be forced in the hotseat rules, so indeed you can break faith and make different results from what it was stipulated. So please, Barons, do your turn, post your screenshots and let us continue this hotseat. I do not want to fall back in this stupid arguments that are the bane of all hotseat. Not just to say that it's petty. With so much bad going on in the world and where fixating in this small thing for so long.

[LordPureLegacy]

Look I am not gonna argue no more I will replicate the battle exactly how you wanted although I agreed to just a battle not knowing the specifics. I will redo the battle and give my less causualties like you wanted but I am taking the fort for its logical in both ways I leave the units I did not use in the battle to maintain the siege Lord Simon along with the second army will attack them both and king will retreat while Prince is stuck. After the Prince will die from either of the three armies when I get approval I will redo it. This way it seems logical for both ways for what idiot would lift a siege on a fort when he can immediately win.

[Der Böse Wolf]

Look I am not gonna argue no more I will replicate the battle exactly how you wanted although I agreed to just a battle not knowing the specifics. I will redo the battle and give my less causualties like you wanted but I am taking the fort for its logical in both ways I leave the units I did not use in the battle to maintain the siege Lord Simon along with the second army will attack them both and king will retreat while Prince is stuck. After the Prince will die from either of the three armies when I get approval I will redo it. This way it seems logical for both ways for what idiot would lift a siege on a fort when he can immediately win.

Just make sure you have the adequate artillery for the siege so that the admin doesn't penalise you:

Siege Mechanics
Siege Equipment Prerequisites

Catapults can take out wooden walls and forts solo

Next Stage of Sieges
This is where things get more interesting.
> If there are less than 4 full units or less than 250 men in a besieged settlement, only a battering ram is required to be able to breach a set of walls.
> If there are more than 4 full units or 250 men in a besieged settlement, you must have a 1:1 ratio of ground units to enemy ground units (you do not need to match enemy artillery or cavalry). If this condition is met, you must create a ladder for four foot units in the case of a castle, five ladders against a fortress, and six ladders against a citadel.
> If a besieged town isn't big enough for ladders to be relevant, skip these rules, and only use the equipment rules above.

Q> How many ladders required for a fort?

[LordPureLegacy]

I would like to remind you wolf of the spy rules for I am sure enough that I can kill enough men and get spies in but its your choice. If you want I can also remind you that on my next turn the fort starves out and England can't in every possible Scenario I have checked reinforce it so its just inevitable. Not to be rude just stating facts like you did.

[Der Böse Wolf]

I would like to remind you wolf of the spy rules for I am sure enough that I can kill enough men and get spies in but its your choice. If you want I can also remind you that on my next turn the fort starves out and England can't in every possible Scenario I have checked reinforce it so its just inevitable. Not to be rude just stating facts like you did.

I'm perfectly aware of the spies rules. If you can starve them out or get a spy to open the gates, then by all means do it.

I was just trying to remind you of this so it is properly done and we can move forward, for this has been stalling.

[The Wise Coffin]

Oh, yeah. I believe the barons didn't have catapults nor ballistas, so they wouldn't be able to storm in the fort.

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

Q> How many ladders required for a fort?

It would have been best if I had simply approached that directly, but if you can make ladders at a fort, the above rules apply. That is the least ambiguous interpretation.

[Der Böse Wolf]

It would have been best if I had simply approached that directly, but if you can make ladders at a fort, the above rules apply. That is the least ambiguous interpretation.

If there are more than 4 full units or 250 men in a besieged settlement, you must have a 1:1 ratio of ground units to enemy ground units (you do not need to match enemy artillery or cavalry). If this condition is met, you must create a ladder for four foot units in the case of a castle, five ladders against a fortress, and six ladders against a citadel.

Which ones apply for a fort? 4 ladders like in a castle?
What about cities, now that we're at it?

Oh, yeah. I believe the barons didn't have catapults nor ballistas, so they wouldn't be able to storm in the fort.

Unless he has a spy with a 60% chance of opening the gates and you have less than 720 men in the fort.

>>Spies may enter settlements and be recruited without a numbers cap. In the case of settlements, you may only use the [Assault] option if there is over 60% chance of opening the gates and if there are less than 720 men in the settlement. If both conditions are not met, the spy will fail to open the gates, regardless of what the game tells you.

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

If there are more than 4 full units or 250 men in a besieged settlement, you must have a 1:1 ratio of ground units to enemy ground units (you do not need to match enemy artillery or cavalry). If this condition is met, you must create a ladder for four foot units in the case of a castle, five ladders against a fortress, and six ladders against a citadel.

Which ones apply for a fort? 4 ladders like in a castle?
What about cities, now that we're at it?



Unless he has a spy with a 60% chance of opening the gates and you have less than 720 men in the fort.

>>Spies may enter settlements and be recruited without a numbers cap. In the case of settlements, you may only use the [Assault] option if there is over 60% chance of opening the gates and if there are less than 720 men in the settlement. If both conditions are not met, the spy will fail to open the gates, regardless of what the game tells you.

Yet another ambiguous segment. Thanks me.

Cities are treated with rough equivalency to castles in the case of siege equipment, so one could carry castle logic from siege equipment over to cities (4 for city, 5 for huge city, n/a if you can't build anything). Forts are unfortunately somewhat more ambiguous. On one hand, I'd treat them to be on the same level as wooden castles, as per the rules for how much siege equipment to bring. On the other, there are no ladder rules for wooden structures. Still, forts are a different matter from wooden structures. Thus, I would say, knowing that this has no premise in intended meaning (I simply didn't think about forts much in regards to ladders) and established rules (there isn't a too simple correlation; castles are harder to take than forts), that 3 ladders seems like a fair spot for forts.

If I was being even more complete, I'd add some segments regarding the heavy siege towers, but I'd like to see if the above makes sense/is acceptable first.