A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

**Arya210** · January 17, 2022, 05:13 PM

I would agree to this, but i believe it should be a weaker Army upkeep than in TeS. Especially moving through allied territory is something i would like to be removed. But i believe that doesnt work, so i would propose increasing the Sieging cost, but reduce the territorial cost a lot if general with right traits. That would allow better movement, but make it costly to really attack someone

**youneuoy** · January 18, 2022, 03:18 AM

Originally Posted by Jadli

Well, the factions have much better starting economy, positions, and basically dont have to upgrade buildings/settlements, dont need to take any rebel settlements, compared to Aow so even with similar ways to limit economy as in AoW, the factions would still be able to field many more armies than in AoW likely .... Also keep in mind that this mod has insane amount of generals

, hence their upkeep was lowered to basically nothing (to avoid them all going bankrupt), so all factions can field about a stack or two of generals, who are basically for free

(though on other hand the regular units are pretty expensive...)

... so army upkeep + partial/full removal of army upkeep would likely be the best way ... (plus we shall ofc keep the financila rules)

This thing uses m2tweop 2.x. This means it can be limited by a Lua script, rather than 100,000 lines of a regular m2tw script. In general: write what should be limited in the script and how, then I will do it myself.

**youneuoy** · January 18, 2022, 03:20 AM

Originally Posted by Arya210

I would agree to this, but i believe it should be a weaker Army upkeep than in TeS. Especially moving through allied territory is something i would like to be removed. But i believe that doesnt work, so i would propose increasing the Sieging cost, but reduce the territorial cost a lot if general with right traits. That would allow better movement, but make it costly to really attack someone

with m2tweop 2.x it's possible, but I'm not sure it makes sense. It should be carefully considered.

**Dr Mac** · January 18, 2022, 12:32 PM

OK guys, a few questions for you all to answer too

1) Forts: Shall we forbid forts or allow their use, maximum 2 per province with 5 non-GB units present in each fort
2) RP rules: Either we can stick to the lore of Westeros and have certain rules (there shouldn't be more than 3/4) such as no Lannister/Stark alliance until significant deaths, no Tully/Stark betrayal until there are significant deaths etc. or we have a FFA without consideration of the lore

My personal choices for these two would be: forts allowed and stick to RP

**Isenbard** · January 18, 2022, 12:44 PM

Forts with those limitations sounds ok. I'm also in favor of lore rules such as mentioned in the OP.

**Alertoverlord** · January 18, 2022, 06:29 PM

I could always join the HS with the possibility of someone representing myself on the field of battle

if a slot were to open. However, I can wholeheartedly recommend that RP rules would make this thoroughly more enjoyable.

**Arya210** · January 19, 2022, 03:59 PM

1) i would say it doesnt matter that much for me im fine with both.
2) for RP i would propose the starting Lore like in the story, but make it a new story, so just the most basic characters would be forced into something. As Example lannister would not betray baratheon of kings landing as long as a "lannister" is sitting on the throne. Stannis would attack everyone in kings landing that does not give him his throne, but if stannis dies ur free to go. So i would make a few characters that have different conditions. Stannis will not make peace with anyone who holds kings landing, As long as tully and stark familiy members are alive they are bound, as long as lanny and kings landing have same famuily members they wont go to war, and stannis and renly can freely decide on weather stannis takes throne or they fight, but as long as 1 of them lives, they have to stay at this decision.
(just a few examples)

**youneuoy** · January 20, 2022, 06:21 AM

1) maximum 2 per player per province with 5 non-GB units present in each fort is ok i think
2) I would not become attached to the lore, at least without some opportunity to break with this lore. If we stick to the lore, then we should not keep it for the characters, as they can simply be intentionally killed

**Jadli** · January 23, 2022, 07:18 AM

1) After some thought on this, I suspect this might increase the amount of battles a lot? (which will already be high, as factions can field several armies) Because with 5 units or so in, it will always be worth to defend it in an online battle... So for example instead of one major battle that would decide everything, there would be 3 small battles, and then finally the major one.... So I think Im against it.... Or maybe lets make it more restricted... such as only two forts per the whole faction?

Would be interesting to see how players use that anyways...

2) Sure, I always prefer to use some "lore" elements of the world that we play in... though I hope it doesnt lead to drama, as it often does, when some players try to bypass it, or interpret the RP in their own way...

Anyway, Im also considering, that perhaps we should add some lower threshold for when the battle can be ARed (though ofc, admin would still have a final word), in regards to odds (lets say 1:3 or higher?) to speed up to process a bit?

Aand, so we play with both agents and siege eq, right?

**Dr Mac** · January 23, 2022, 12:14 PM

1) Maybe we should increase it to 10 units per fort, maximum 3 forts per faction (including max 2 per region). That way the fort battles will be significant and cannot be placed willy nilly? Also would make forts truly into forts that way haha

2) I'd like to see more votes on this as I'm biased on the matter towards RP, but I understand there will be a few peeps who have no love, nor knowledge of the lore

3) I agree but would have a low threshold like 1:4 (where it is truly overwhelming) as I've seen some battles in AoW where heavy casualties can be inflicted on an attacker in a siege, even with 1:3 odds

4) I think we play spies and siege eq as per the rules (copied from AoW). Will add another interesting element to the game.

**Ural** · January 23, 2022, 03:59 PM

Maybe we shall consider decreasing number of generals on campaign map. I feel that in current state battles will be all about hunting on generals.

**Mergor** · January 24, 2022, 03:12 AM

Just a quick opinion, I'd restrist forts as much as possible, or else every battle will be a fort battle, which is not very good. (Defending in a small fort is much better than a huge city) And increasing the amount of units you have to put in a fort makes things worse. Just strictly limit how many you can put down, if any. I understand westeros hotseats has been about fort tactics traditionally, but I don't think its going to be very fun in this format.

**youneuoy** · January 24, 2022, 10:36 AM

OK. In that case, I could make maintenance of the forts (if they have an army), say 750 coins per fort per turn. Or you can take another price, I don't know how good everything is with the economy in this mod.