[The Elder Scrolls - Unofficial Patch 1.42] Black Drake

**Mergor** · August 30, 2020, 12:46 PM

That was just training, I took Haven with the catapult. But yes, I did overlook that, so I guess ramble will remove the traits I got.

**Potatoto** · August 30, 2020, 12:59 PM

- Huge stone walls, citadelsand capitals cannot be assaulted by any unit of siege equipment, only a siege.

**Mergor** · August 30, 2020, 01:08 PM

You gotta be kidding me lol. That is kinda a dumb rule, considering that can be abused, and you can set a village without walls to be a capital, so it can't be taken

I'll replay if I need to, but I want to talk about this, And also, about Jadli rescuing Valenwood to some faraway place valenwood never lived RP wise so the faction doesn't die out.

**Jadli** · August 30, 2020, 01:21 PM

If you took it with catapult then its fine, but no idea why you posted the pics then

. I suppose its not needed that Ramble takes the traits away, after all you can train them on every settlement/army around them, so not a big deal for me...

Originally Posted by Mergor

You gotta be kidding me lol. That is kinda a dumb rule, considering that can be abused, and you can set a village without walls to be a capital, so it can't be taken

I'll replay if I need to, but I want to talk about this, And also, about Jadli rescuing Valenwood to some faraway place valenwood never lived RP wise so the faction doesn't die out.

village doesnt have walls, so you obviously dont need to somehow "breach" them.

Not sure what is there to talk about... The Khajiits helps out the bosmer people reclaim their rightful home. Either we both die in that attempt, or we succeed and you die, thats pretty much it

**Mergor** · August 30, 2020, 01:29 PM

So what, now you agree with me that the capital rule is dumb since it can be abused so much?

I am very confused now.

Also, if you can do that, I can rescue the Tribunal to a settlement in southern Blackmarsh I guess

**Potatoto** · August 30, 2020, 01:36 PM

"If you took it with catapult then its fine"

It is againt a rules. It is not allowed to take capitals with catapults. Rules are clear in that matter. Rules don't say anythink about lore capitals, but about capitals in general. Yes, it can be exploited a bit. It in general allows any faction to set one settlement on higher requirements for the spy infiltration and siege eq.

**Mergor** · August 30, 2020, 01:44 PM

The problem is that, valenwood didn't consciously choose Haven to be his capital. It is just the next settlement in a line of settlements I take. Like, I roll a ball of capitals ahead of me.

With this rule, he can, or anyone for that matter, just set every settlement I am about to take the capital so its suffering to take it, then set the next closest one the capital to repeat the process. Also, imagine giving valenwood a border settlement just so he can make it a capital, and now there are two capitals ahead of me. The rule would make sense if there was a limit on how many times you can change your capital, like once every 5 turns, but with this, it gives every faction a chance to make a literally inpenetrable defence wherever they want it. This is a rule that can be abused as hell. What if I just give all my allies a settlement on the war front, and ask them to make it a capital? I can just disband half my armies because no one will be able to succesfully invade me.

**Potatoto** · August 30, 2020, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Mergor

The problem is that, valenwood didn't consciously choose Haven to be his capital. It is just the next settlement in a line of settlements I take. Like, I roll a ball of capitals ahead of me.

With this rule, he can, or anyone for that matter, just set every settlement I am about to take the capital so its suffering to take it, then set the next closest one the capital to repeat the process. Also, imagine giving valenwood a border settlement just so he can make it a capital, and now there are two capitals ahead of me. The rule would make sense if there was a limit on how many times you can change your capital, like once every 5 turns, but with this, it gives every faction a chance to make a literally inpenetrable defence wherever they want it. This is a rule that can be abused as hell. What if I just give all my allies a settlement on the war front, and ask them to make it a capital? I can just disband half my armies because no one will be able to succesfully invade me.

I do not think it makes defense as strong as you claim it to be as each faction has just one settlement he can set as capital and also it still can be taken with well developed spy. Perhaps we could add rule that given settlements can not be put as a capitals or that only one of the starting settlements can be made capital. In the end it also need to be fair to Valenwood player.

**Mergor** · August 30, 2020, 02:56 PM

As per rules, you can put 720 men in capitals and then it doesnt matter how strong your spy is, you are not getting in there without a siege.

**Ramble12** · August 30, 2020, 03:37 PM

This topic is too controversial to me. I would like all the players to vote/share their opinion, please.

http://www.strawpoll.me/20858149

**Jadli** · August 30, 2020, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Potatoto

"If you took it with catapult then its fine"

It is againt a rules. It is not allowed to take capitals with catapults. Rules are clear in that matter. Rules don't say anythink about lore capitals, but about capitals in general. Yes, it can be exploited a bit. It in general allows any faction to set one settlement on higher requirements for the spy infiltration and siege eq.

Yea, I got confused a bi for a second, nevermind

In most of hotseats where I put this rule I meant it to be lore/starting capitals (and actually wrote "lore/starting" to the rules), not sure whether leaving it out for this one was my intent or not now

.

I assume both versions can work, all factions can make one of their settlements "safe" as Potatoto says, though Im going to vote for "starting/lore" capitals, as I suspect thats what I meant it to be when hosting the HS

Originally Posted by Ramble12

This topic is too controversial to me. I would like all the players to vote/share their opinion, please.

http://www.strawpoll.me/20858149

I think you should have made the option only whether we apply it to all capitals or only to starting/lore capitals but oh well.... (and Im not sure what do you mean by the 4th)

Also, another thing I have just figured we could discuss, is whether the capital "bonus" applies only applies to originals owners, or to anyone who owns them? Ie, obviously it would apply for Valenwood's Elden Root, but should it apply also for examlpe for Dominion when holding Elden Root?

**Ramble12** · August 31, 2020, 07:21 AM

I will conclude the vote when 24 hours since I posted it pass.
As of now the option with changing the rules only to starting capitals is winning. In case it does win, Anequina'a time will start then.

Also imo the capital bonus should only apply to it's original holder.

**General Dragon.** · August 31, 2020, 07:54 AM

The original rule, when jadli first made it in his TES hotseats, was about lore/starting capitals and I interpreted the rule in the same way, like that and it should remain, that way. The moving capital location and the bonuses with it, to any settlement you want is just too abusable in my opinion.