[Hotseat] A Kingdom of Ice (Joffrey Open)

[vozd]

Did Vahir solve his problem with the game?

Sorry for duble post...

[Pinkie Pie]

I do not remember a bonus and if you think neither can play a game without blitzing then you are delusional

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...2#post10904872
Turn 4 I started the attack as the Greyjoys and at the end I had claimed victory and won the hotseat.

3 turns of peace will not end it for either Stannis or Greyjoy.

[Mithridate]

No, but it will cripple us when were already fighing with sticks vs swords

if i get to attack as stannis from turn one, id take two castles on turn two for certain.
Im OK with Joffrey getting a free turn to prepare and thereby possibly stop me. But three turns?

It simply makes no sense out of neither in or out of game perspective

Theres also a major differance between Stannis and Gj situation. Lannister is fighting a war usually on two/three fronts leaving him vounerable. Gj can easily muster two stacks while stannis can manage half of that with a couple militia from what i can tell. I agree its by no means over but it will severely cripple me.
Ill have to sit on my starting forces not to go into debt being unable to make vital forts, while Joffrey gets to build up his defences to two stacks ( can support three ) not only that but on turn 4 he will be able to have made a ships so that he can land on my isles before i even take my turn... I wont be able to stop that, my only hope would be to mass troops making it impossible for me to fort.

I do not understand why you want 3 turns peace beside for stark to move down making lannisters job way harder, for tyrell n renly to move into position. Arryn will be able to build up... Sure Stannis and GJ can strike at other places, but why on earth would we leave our hearlands poorly defended against very likely enemies with their corse strenght next door? Its like using divine powers to restrict instead of encouraging diplomacy, deals and tactics.

Please, enlighten me... As i simply can not compute

[Pinkie Pie]

No, but it will cripple us when were already fighing with sticks vs swords

if i get to attack as stannis from turn one, id take two castles on turn two for certain.
Im OK with Joffrey getting a free turn to prepare and thereby possibly stop me. But three turns?

It simply makes no sense out of neither in or out of game perspective

Theres also a major differance between Stannis and Gj situation. Lannister is fighting a war usually on two/three fronts leaving him vounerable. Gj can easily muster two stacks while stannis can manage half of that with a couple militia from what i can tell. I agree its by no means over but it will severely cripple me.
Ill have to sit on my starting forces not to go into debt being unable to make vital forts, while Joffrey gets to build up his defences to two stacks ( can support three ) not only that but on turn 4 he will be able to have made a ships so that he can land on my isles before i even take my turn... I wont be able to stop that, my only hope would be to mass troops making it impossible for me to fort.

I do not understand why you want 3 turns peace beside for stark to move down making lannisters job way harder, for tyrell n renly to move into position. Arryn will be able to build up... Sure Stannis and GJ can strike at other places, but why on earth would we leave our hearlands poorly defended against very likely enemies with their corse strenght next door? Its like using divine powers to restrict instead of encouraging diplomacy, deals and tactics.

Please, enlighten me... As i simply can not compute

One reason, it was voted for. This was not a decision I made but the players. Stannis has 3 turns to move and prrepare to attack.
Stannis can use the fact that his islands can not be touched for 3 turns to move against the Stormlands, SDorne, Vale or even the North
Stannis could even negotiate, it is not set in stone that he has to fight Joffrey for the throne. If you believe this leaves no option but death for Stannis then your not thinking straight.

[Mithridate]

One reason, it was voted for. This was not a decision I made but the players. Stannis has 3 turns to move and prrepare to attack.
Stannis can use the fact that his islands can not be touched for 3 turns to move against the Stormlands, SDorne, Vale or even the North
Stannis could even negotiate, it is not set in stone that he has to fight Joffrey for the throne. If you believe this leaves no option but death for Stannis then your not thinking straight.

I never said it spells death, im saying that this is a crippling blow... a severe disadvantage, and blind majority rule is a flawed way of thinking If i move vs lets say the stormlands, that means ill have to give up dragonstone and risk everything on striking him down hard and fast, fighting a superior foe on his ground where i cannot get reinforcements to quickly if at all. While i could simply strike hard and fast at the joffster while NOT risking much at all while keeping said things The problem i see with the vote is that it favours the majority while binding the few (who also happens to hold the weaker cards).

Where would you put forts on two small islands, almost completely dominated by their castles?

I would probably be able to block you with my fleet so you cant do this but:

By the third turn, you will have built up and have the ability to defend ( possibly not your southeasternmost castle ), the ability to invade me with overwhelming force and the ability to dictate my moves... All this while im either going deep into the red or have one stack to fight you with. The reason we do this? So that stark can move south and renly / tyrell move wherever (assuming they stay allied). I depend on getting a foothold before i can be overwhelmed , 3 turns makes a huge differance to my chances of doing that. Its half the way on war galleys and 70% on proper ships, not to mention all those small ships id have to block against All while im going into the negative

I simply find it senseless

Im against this rule, i think it is unfair and un-neccesary use diplomacy and tactics to subdue and gain advantage, not divine powers

[Pinkie Pie]

I never said it spells death, im saying that this is a crippling blow... a severe disadvantage, and blind majority rule is a flawed way of thinking If i move vs lets say the stormlands, that means ill have to give up dragonstone and risk everything on striking him down hard and fast, fighting a superior foe on his ground where i cannot get reinforcements to quickly if at all. While i could simply strike hard and fast at the joffster while NOT risking much at all while keeping said things The problem i see with the vote is that it favours the majority while binding the few (who also happens to hold the weaker cards).


I would probably be able to block you with my fleet so you cant do this but:

By the third turn, you will have built up and have the ability to defend ( possibly not your southeasternmost castle ), the ability to invade me with overwhelming force and the ability to dictate my moves... All this while im either going deep into the red or have one stack to fight you with. The reason we do this? So that stark can move south and renly / tyrell move wherever (assuming they stay allied). I depend on getting a foothold before i can be overwhelmed , 3 turns makes a huge differance to my chances of doing that. Its half the way on war galleys and 70% on proper ships, not to mention all those small ships id have to block against All while im going into the negative

I simply find it senseless

Im against this rule, i think it is unfair and un-neccesary use diplomacy and tactics to subdue and gain advantage, not divine powers

You are basing everything on the assumption that you have to be at war with Joffrey. You seem to be refusing the possibility of actualy negotiating with him. You could even negotiate with Renly or Arryn and launch a co-ordinated attack upon joffrey which with the extra 2 turns of peace would be more successful.

[Monty501]

You are basing everything on the assumption that you have to be at war with Joffrey. You seem to be refusing the possibility of actualy negotiating with him. You could even negotiate with Renly or Arryn and launch a co-ordinated attack upon joffrey which with the extra 2 turns of peace would be more successful.

I don't like this idea.

[Selukon]

Ill have to sit on my starting forces not to go into debt being unable to make vital forts, while Joffrey gets to build up his defences to two stacks ( can support three ) not only that but on turn 4 he will be able to have made a ships so that he can land on my isles before i even take my turn... I wont be able to stop that, my only hope would be to mass troops making it impossible for me to fort.

Where would you put forts on two small islands, almost completely dominated by their castles?

[Vahir]

Nope. I don't know why; This really ought to be working. It may be that tomorrow I'll find a miracle solution, but start looking for another Arryn for the likelier situation in which I simply cannot play.


I blame the supernatural aura that surrounds me that automatically causes all electronics in my vicinity to cease to function correctly.

[Selukon]

I'm Renly not Joffrey.

[Mithridate]

I'm Renly not Joffrey.

i know

You are basing everything on the assumption that you have to be at war with Joffrey. You seem to be refusing the possibility of actualy negotiating with him. You could even negotiate with Renly or Arryn and launch a co-ordinated attack upon joffrey which with the extra 2 turns of peace would be more successful.

I want war with joffrey, rich lands at the most strategically sound place for me to strike carrying the least risk and most gain imho.
But setting a divine shield of protection i am forced to cut deals, im Stannis and im Iron... i do not do these things and would like to stay in character^^

being forced to rely on others is not something i would bet on, Joffrey is not without influence either and betrayal or counter alliances are likely. The more war the merrier imho and if im nto bound i can act as a counteragent against anyone being too big n strong keeping things interesting.

I still do not see why stannis/gj is to be bound up and id complain if i was Lannister as well, i sure hope he has been busy making alliances.

[Pinkie Pie]

That is like the Greyjoys complaining because that want a war with the Vale but will lose their islands before they get there.
Different rules require different moves and you seem unable to do that. If it was just me making this rule up then I could understand your annoyance but it has been voted for and will stay no matter what. If the vote had been to give Renly all of the Tyrell lands and it got a majoraty vote for yes we would do that too.

[Mithridate]

Its related, but nowhere the same martin. Not to mention the vastly different circumstance around the two factions, that he has got twice my income and no rivaling fleet. it would take Lannister at least 12 turn to match him on the naval front while joff can match in 7. During wich time Arryn often seem to be left doing nothing and able to war with stannis or Joffrey. Greyjoy also have Lannister vounerable vs multiple enemies, Stark coast weak. Tyrell is about as much a threat as martell is to stannis, little more than plunder^^

I become forced to seek easier targets, to make deal with joffrey unless i want to figh. I can still pursue war with him but its not gona be anywhere as advantagegous, and he knows it. This puts me at a disadvantageous bargaining position not to mention hamstring my military and expansive possibilities.

I still simply cannot find the sense in this above the many taking advantage over the few

[Pinkie Pie]

Becuase it was voted for, that is all that is needed.

It is exactly the same, the Greyjoys can not keep a fleet large enough to protect an army during the trop to the Vale and keep one large enough to protect the iron islands.
As yet another example.
With no peace Tully gets the short end of the stick because they can lose their army and leader before they have even played their first turn.
With 3 turns of peace you have a much more difficult situatuion but it is not impossible.
Why does it seem to me that you want to have a solution that is perfect for your plan rather than change your plan to fit the situation.

[Mithridate]

Becuase it was voted for, that is all that is needed.

That is exactly the attitude that is wrong with a lot of modern america
majority rule is not an universal convept to slap on any situation

It is exactly the same, the Greyjoys can not keep a fleet large enough to protect an army during the trop to the Vale and keep one large enough to protect the iron islands.

he has four isles and twice the income, less enemies that can muster proper fleets and most of all he can trap enemies on his isles even if he is invaded while stannis can not ( three good recruitment hubs ). To be safe the enemy would need three stacks as opposed to one. If dragonstone falls, im done for unless i get one damn good foothold somewhere.

As yet another example.
With no peace Tully gets the short end of the stick because they can lose their army and leader before they have even played their first turn.

Ive not argued against one turn, im arguing against three turns. This rule is like using a sledgehammer to get rid of the thin sheet of ice of your windscreen. But since you mention it:

Better to have one turn of lannister not being allowed to attack tully while tully can attack to eaven the odds. In previous 1 turn or more settings he could just move into position immune to attack then fort away anyway capturing half of tullyland Or better yet that you say "cannot attack the forces around rivverun" as they should be INSIDE riverrun

as i said, sledgehammer

With 3 turns of peace you have a much more difficult situatuion but it is not impossible.
Why does it seem to me that you want to have a solution that is perfect for your plan rather than change your plan to fit the situation.

I want the solution to allow for eventualities, not one that forces me down set paths or un-necessarily cripples me for what i percieve to be senseless reasons. I want diversity to be encouraged!

[Pinkie Pie]

*Sigh*
1: I am british and I asked people to vote, if I then ignored that then what sort of admin would I be?

2: If the Greyjoys attacked Arryn they would have to send all their men and their ships makling it easy to attack their lands.

3: Not sure what you did not understand about the word "example".

4: It does not force you to do anything, Every single one of your defences is based on you attacking Joffrey on your own, why can you not see there are other ways of playing? Any faction can get units close to or in the Crownlands within 3 turns so go get an ally.

[Dr Mac]

If you havn't found a new Arryn could I fill in please? Now that exams are over I can have a boom of hotseats I didn't know you were British Martin. Woo!!

[Pinkie Pie]

If you havn't found a new Arryn could I fill in please? Now that exams are over I can have a boom of hotseats I didn't know you were British Martin. Woo!!

Go for it, the turn is up on the previous page (no password as of yet).

[Dr Mac]

OK I will have it up by noon tomorrow! I'm extrmemly tired now so I'm going to bed sorry

[Mithridate]

1: I am british and I asked people to vote, if I then ignored that then what sort of admin would I be?

One who does not set the breaking point at 50%, not uncommon

2: If the Greyjoys attacked Arryn they would have to send all their men and their ships makling it easy to attack their lands.

greyjoy? Arryn are a danger to Stannis, being able to raise a proper fleet and being close at hand

3: Not sure what you did not understand about the word "example".

It is a poor example if its unrelated and cannot even stand to scrutiny on its own imho

4: It does not force you to do anything, Every single one of your defences is based on you attacking Joffrey on your own, why can you not see there are other ways of playing? Any faction can get units close to or in the Crownlands within 3 turns so go get an ally.

They are not, but it is what i want to do. The thing is that if i sail south or north i leave my land exposed while if i go for joff whom also is a very good target out of a strategic and lore-based view while keeping my heartlands relatively safe at the same time... not to mention the various other stated reasons