A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

[Isenbard]

Like paladinbob, I've played a lot of siege battles (though not nearly as much as him), so I would like the defender to have total freedom to defend as they please, as this rarely results in people just camping in the town square, because it is most often better to atleast try to hold the walls for those free tower kills/better positions for archers.

In any case, I'm quite interested in the idea of introducing a percentage rule, which would essentially force atleast part of the battle to happen on the walls/streets. 75 % however is too high in my opinion. In many cases I believe that it would make no difference if you retreated to the town square after losing so much units already.

I emphasize that even if the defender is going to lose, dealing as much casualties as possible is ideal in a hotseat. If that calls for retreating earlier to the square then so be it. The battle ground is chosen by the defender, and the attacker should oblige I think

[Mergor]

Well youneuoy, my rule proposal makes it so the defenders cannot just walk into the centre, they need to lose circa 3/4 of their forces to make a last stand there.

[keldo52]

Entire point of the middle is to be another defensive point, if you get outflanked at the wall or start losing the wall, then you fall back to the point,

I get that the rules to prevent unroutable armies but if you have that many troops in there archers are gonna have a field day,

Give us the freedom to defend how we want to defend, I’m sure there’s a counter for nearly everything

[sluzavyblin]

Even though I'm a relative noob compared to most of you, I'd like to throw my two cents in. Imo the rule should stay, albeit in an altered form. What would make the most sense for me is that an attempt to hold the walls must be made, hence the square can be defended only if it occurs as a natural retreat once the wall perimeter has been lost. The exception to that would be villages and possibly mottes because they don't have walls at all or they aren't walls in the proper sense of the word.

[Mergor]

Unfortunately I do not think you can make a rule up about "having to defend walls" that is not hopelessly vague and ambigious. And adding a rule like that is the same as removing it completely. Hence my own proposal

[Dr Mac]

personally as a thing as a firm siege player i feel that the defender should be able to defend the walls or the central square as he pleases..if he wishes to defend just the square you are going to lose that wall firepower advantage....and if the attacker does'nt have enough forces to break a defence of the square defence, then perhaps he should'nt be attacking that settlement? would be my ten pennyworth

Agree

Will play this evening.

[Dr Mac]

Renly up. Stannis challenges Joffrey to meet him on the field at Duskendale.

[Fubuky]

personally as a thing as a firm siege player i feel that the defender should be able to defend the walls or the central square as he pleases..if he wishes to defend just the square you are going to lose that wall firepower advantage....and if the attacker does'nt have enough forces to break a defence of the square defence, then perhaps he should'nt be attacking that settlement? would be my ten pennyworth

I like it.
When I defend my own castle, I want to defend it the way I want.
So in my opinion it would be nice, if we can delete or reject this rule.

[Fubuky]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14us...ew?usp=sharing
Tyrell 5

[Arya210]

I would like to throw something in as well
I believe the town square has his benefits and drawbacks, but one unit especially shines in the centre. The Pikemen. They shred infantry in any mod, and are just vulnerable to fire or outflanking.
Outflanking gets totally denied in the town centre, and 4 units of pikes and 4 units of archers can make the centre if played well invincible, (thanks to buildings shielding the units before the enemy units arrive, and when infantry is fighting, there is no shooting the pikes anymore, or you make 50% friendly fire)

[Isenbard]

I would like to throw something in as well
I believe the town square has his benefits and drawbacks, but one unit especially shines in the centre. The Pikemen. They shred infantry in any mod, and are just vulnerable to fire or outflanking.
Outflanking gets totally denied in the town centre, and 4 units of pikes and 4 units of archers can make the centre if played well invincible, (thanks to buildings shielding the units before the enemy units arrive, and when infantry is fighting, there is no shooting the pikes anymore, or you make 50% friendly fire)

Strenghts and weaknesses. All factions have them. A great solution to a pike walls on a street is javelins. If you can't recruit them then that's too bad. How about just shoot the pikes with archers as well rather than rushing in with infantry? Sure the defending archers are there but that's just it. They are defending, they have the advantage if the player builds the correct army for thst situation. Nothing wrong with this

[Fubuky]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...18105424_1.jpg
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...18115821_1.jpg

[Reaktorkern]

Renly up. Stannis challenges Joffrey to meet him on the field at Duskendale.

as joffrey's commander recive this chalenge they are confused didn't they offer this to the imposter king althoug it was in privat?

[youneuoy]

Well, you all argue from a position of selfish interest, which destroys most of the meaning in such a game. Since you are so stubborn, I can only get rid of this dispute(and I'll leave hs after the first of you bunches the troops in a heap in the center of the settlement in battle).

[youneuoy]

House Tyrell of Highgarden

Turn №6



These are hard times - Renly treacherously attacked us. We sent Loras Tyrrel to him for negotiations, we hope that they will meet in a few turns in the capital and agree on eternal peace.
Until agreements are established, we invite all surrounding lords to join our liberation war. We are especially interested in the decision of the Martells in this situation.

Foreign policy:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

We offer all neighbors peace and trade. Our diplomats are already coming to you with this proposal.
We invite all surrounding lords to join us in the liberation war.
Our princesses are on their way - but where should they go in these dark times?

We are not currently interested in choosing any side in the war for the throne. We demand more solid evidence of the rights to the throne from each side before making a decision.

Domestic policy:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Easing tax oppression
Rebuilding settlements, engaged in peaceful development.

Turn to one of our future allies (House Martell of Sunspear):
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...op_martell.sav

[Mergor]

Well, you all argue from a position of selfish interest, which destroys most of the meaning in such a game. Since you are so stubborn, I can only get rid of this dispute(and I'll leave hs after the first of you bunches the troops in a heap in the center of the settlement in battle).

youneuoy, you do have to learn that communities are different and like different rulesets. If (from your perspective, I do personally think the rule has issues) the majority of players in a hotseat want to delete an obviously needed rule and make their own time worse, they have every right to do so. In turn, if you don't want to play with a certain ruleset, you have the right to leave. But please don't call everyone selfish here, just because you think something, it doesn't make it objectively right and it would never warrant calling them names anyhow.

To everyone else here: I do take issue with the fact that this rule has been here from the start, yet no one took issue with it so far. The rule will change or be deleted, there will be a vote on that soon considering the vast majority seems to support change. That said make sure you read the rules carefully now, and if you have any, make more suggestions now, because in the future, for the stability of the ruleset, I won't be going around changing things on a whim.

[keldo52]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...op_Stark_6.sav

stark up

and on the rule's thing, i believe there's a precedent to changing this rule already?

and more so than that i think we should remember this is still a relatively new form of Hotseating, so we can't expect the same tried and true OG rules to completely stick, so changes should be expected.

[KerryG]

personally as a thing as a firm siege player i feel that the defender should be able to defend the walls or the central square as he pleases..if he wishes to defend just the square you are going to lose that wall firepower advantage....and if the attacker does'nt have enough forces to break a defence of the square defence, then perhaps he should'nt be attacking that settlement? would be my ten pennyworth

A pretty perfect analysis. But I think he had to attack the colony well.

[Isenbard]

A pretty perfect analysis. But I think he had to attack the colony well.

Wait who are you?

[Mergor]

Rule removed based on the result of the vote