If they someone gets 250 prestige and someone else gets 100 regions the same turn, it's a tie. As for the second, I suppose it'd be a tie as well, as they both reached the winning requirement. Or we could make prestige overrule region count in those scenarios. Rhinelander's post 1) Counter an any attacks from Rhine 2) attack any African regions if he fails in any of his attacks I propose a new rule that you are not allowed to make moves like this. he basically says that if I attacked a region he would immediately take it back what would make any of my moves senseless. And as this is a turnbased game it is not actually possible to do that. I think we should decide on this, as it concerns our moves and how we word them to the GM. Number 1 is okay, as it's logical for your army to counterattack when your opponent's siege fails, and advance into their own territory. Number 2 is not; it is metagaming and illogical for your faction to know and move to where your opponent failed to take a region (a similar thing would be saying 'send an assassin to whoever sent one against me'. It can't be done). So you shouldn't be allowed to make moves based on another factions results, unless they directly influence you (like I said above). /sergeantIkaroqxout
Okay I'll support that and stop doing that.
Members of the Santori league: If I were to support France in the war (just for balancing the numbers more) and I wouldn't only campaign in French lands, would all of you attack me? Even my allies in your league?
