The Age of Heroes Hotseat CCM2HS -France Available

[Jiub]

It shouldn't be a problem.

Is everyone ok with me being admin ?
Also please start reading the rules, we should fine tune them now. Anyone have anything to say about rules, do it now.
Also install you mods, and take them for a spin, make sure everything is in good order.

Also, u guys want the embassy submod or not ? It'll make loosing regions, even if temporarily, a bigger problem, since you have to rebuild the embassy to be able to recruit troops (sorta like waiting to restore order). http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...b-Mod-Released

[themzr]

I'm not a fan of the embassy submod. I feel that it would really slow down the pace of the campaign

[Vipman]

Rules are good, here some possible additions I think should be considered, I really think this one should be added:

Not allowed to draw out enemy army from ambushing position by attacking it with smaller army and being defeated on purpose.



These ones are not so important but if others might want

Prisoners cannot be ransomed after battle. Release or execute.

Ballista can assault wooden walls, catapult required to assault city with stone walls or higher.


Don't quite like the embassy submod. It makes no difference between core regions and foreign regions, better without it...

[Fernandez_1492]

I say no to the embassy thing

[Jiub]

Ok, no embassy.
What about the rules proposed by Vipman.
I'm ok with them for one.

I'm gonna look into more detail over the rules tomorrow morning and last but not least IS EVERYONE OK WITH ME BEING ADMIN ? nobody said anything, shall we find someone else to hold the admin pass ? I'd go for Macrath, he's solid. If he agrees to install the mod and start our game.

[themzr]

I would like to have spies, although they can be spammed or overused. Could we make it so that we can use them against Ai and what about 3 spies necessary to open a settlement gate, 70% chance or more to enter?

[Loose Cannon]

On spies-
If we look at and compare the relevant sections of descr_campaign_db between SS6.4 and CCM2HS it appears UK made enough changes to reduce the chance of success of spies (but we won't know until we play some).
Forts cost 5000 florins (according to thread) and do not disappear when empty (according to descr_campaign file).

So do we need to restrict spies or not?

Don't like that "no drawing out of ambush" rule. My explanation requires too much time tonight. But drawing your enemy out of position on a battlefield has always been a tactic used in wars.

[Macrath]

Don't like that "no drawing out of ambush" rule. My explanation requires too much time tonight. But drawing your enemy out of position on a battlefield has always been a tactic used in wars.

I have to agree with LC here. I was recently just dominated by Jiub in a HotSeat Campaign and i had a moment of.. pure rage(not my proudest moment ) due to Jiub drawing one of my armies out from ambush and effectively destroying what little chance i still had at a successful campaign. After i took a moment to let my Rage disappear and I reflected on what had occurred i realized he simply used the terrain and the bad positioning of my forces to gain an advantage over me, it doesn't get more strategic than that in my opinion. Wars, after all, have been won and lost due to positioning and knowledge of the terrain more so than pure force of arms. Also an Ambush can be a devastating strategy. But an enemy that has prepared a counter for your ambush and is able to lure your forces into a trap is simply a beautiful strategic move, one that simpletons like myself can often mistake as an exploit.

EDIT: Also i am downloading the mod now. I will be ready to start the game up once Jiub gives me the go ahead

[Vipman]

Well strategic or not I view it as exploiting game mechanics, just because you left an army in ambush position it gets drawn out by 1 unit and has been separated by it's reinforcements that are 1 square away. Not an expert, but I think in RL you don't send the equivalent of a full stack after a skirmishing unit, and that stack, the "ambusher" gets ambushed and is defeated while rest of the army stays and do nothing back across the hill or something. So to repeat I view it as exploiting game mechanics, if you don't, oh well, what more can I say, each one with his own apinion.

[Jiub]

I'm gonna try an make this short, but the gist of it is, unfortunately, that the game is flawed in the first place.
If you put two armies near eachother, one, or both in ambushes, the ambush sprung by one of the armies will be centered on the army which is ambushed, leaving the other army outside of the fight more often than not. A perfect example is the Masters of the Sea Macrath was talking about.
I know it sounds wrong, but the mechanic just doesn't really work properly, so thus I can just place another army on the battlefield where the ambush will take place while hurling another army in the ambush - centering the fight on the army I hurled in, so i know where the battlefiled will be - and thus your second stack is useless ambush and all. actually you can't bring a second army against the ambushing stack, just tested it and the second army, althou on the battlefield LOL, doesn't join in the fight. Still, the second enemy army doesn't join, and if the ambushed is approached from a different side then it just doesn't ambush and is like two normal stacks just sitting around.

Nevertheless, this is not an argument against your proposition, I'm fine either way.

I'll be pro this rule, or against, however the majority wants cos it'll apply for everyone so no fairness is lost, so no reason to take any strong stance on it.


RULES HAVE CHANGED SLIGHTLY, PLEASE CHECK!



Also, we have to choose from the following options. I've hovered my mouse over the yes/no options to make my own suggestions.


ALSO (for the n'th time) - I propose a change in the turn order to -> Denmark, Poland, Sicily, Egypt, France and Byzantium. This is by order of their starting strength.

[Fernandez_1492]

Reloading much?

[Loose Cannon]

-Forting resources is allowed since the forts are so expensive;

Now everybody guess what you CANNOT do per the descr_campaign_db yes Uk fixed that exploit. Go ahead test it yourself.

Good to see discusion on that "drawing out" rule. I think it was developed by Westeros players who have to use cavalry as scouts instead of spies. I agree this game has a lot of mechanical flaws and I've seen too many support armies not show up in battles despite being there (like Jiub). But most times it was only MY second army that didn't show in the fight. (no testing-just my memories from games). Now of course with reloading we can always find a way around this but you'll have to save your turn many times each turn. And sometimes get up and walk away for a while.


edit: I went looking for a quote (that I didn't use) so my post took forever (like 30 minutes). I agree with all your setup choices Jiub. And the turn order.

[Jiub]

Answer my above questions ppl so we can start the campaign!
If by the end of the day ppl don't raise any concerns over my stated proposed rule changes, campaign starting conditions and options, then we will start it.

Edit: OH, so you the campaign map doesn't allow forts on resources lol. Ok, will remove the rules since it's irrelevant.
Also added that agent limitations don't apply versus AI, except when concerning the spread of plague.

[themzr]

I would like to propose that no buildings are allowed to be destroyed.

[Vipman]

Don't have time, rules seem good, settings good, as for ambushing rule I don't care about it much so whatever majority wants is fine by me.

Edit but already most buildings can't be destroyed. Not sure what's the reason why religious b. and inns can be destroyed, but guilds should be allowed, with the reason that I want another guild in the settlement, so maybe a limitation like "only destroying if not at war" or something if you insist...

[Jiub]

The rules were copy pasted thats why
I did change things tho.
We could go with no destructible buildings tho that really doesn't seem ok with me. I always liked the appeal of getting someone's settlement and razing a military building to weaken him militarily. (i know I;m aware military buildings are against the rules - i copy pasted them and thought that would be a radical change for the campaign if you guys probably didn't want it, so i stuck with what I got from the other campaign)

[Macrath]

As long as everything goes smoothly i will have the first turn up later tonite or at the latest tomorrow morning/afternoon

[Macrath]

It begins. Have a good campaign everyone
Denmark up
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6UB...w3cUN0VDg/edit

[Vipman]

I hope you used the allow validation failure 0 and validate data 1 settings in cfg too?

[Macrath]

I hope you used the allow validation failure 0 and validate data 1 settings in cfg too?

Yeah i did... unless i spaced out.. 90% sure i did lol