Page 15 of 25 FirstFirst ... 56789101112131415161718192021222324 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 300 of 496

Thread: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

  1. #281
    Jadli's Avatar The Fallen God
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    8,515

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    Well, ok, but we have been asking if you whether we can trade it for like 2 turns, so its not very fair that we now need to wait another turn, while you should have resolved this two turns ago, when lannister forces were much weaker and farther... So I ask we trade it now

    The new rule seems ok, but you are probably overthinking it... just make it the usual that you cant trade it there are enemy forces nearby...

  2. #282
    Mergor's Avatar T H E | G O R
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    1,881

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    So that ppl will argue about the rule again? Nah, I saw two arguments about this in the past 6 months, both became heated, and one was related to the can't destroy settlements if forces are nearby, a usually stable looking rule.

    My decision regarding the trade will stand, especially that you too agreed that you maybe can't trade last turn

  3. #283

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    Quote Originally Posted by Mergor View Post
    Right, so first of all, I ask all parties that they won't make a big deal out of this. Whether Riverrun can or cannot be traded this turn will not result in anything major, so lets take things as they are and not blow it up, as we, as a community, always have the tendency to do just that

    My decision is, that the rule is faulty and should be reworked. There is no reason why a settlement should not be traded if it is an impossibility to besiege it before the trade and the unit disbanding can happen. To this end, I agree with the interpretation, that something shouldn't be a warzone simply because it borders an enemy province for reasons already said above. This whole warzone word should be taken out anyhow. That said, a rule is a rule, and no one should be punished for anticipating something according to the rules. So here is what I would like to happen: the settlement trade will NOT happen this turn as to not make it unfair for Lannister. The rule will be reworked however, applied for next turn, and if stark / tully meet the conditions next turn, then they can trade the settlement next turn.

    Regarding the settlement trade this turn, that is my decision. Regarding the rule rework, here is my !proposition!

    - Two factions can trade maximally one settlement per turn. Such settlements can only be traded if they are not in danger of being besieged by any number of enemy units, AND the switch, along with the disbanding of units can happen before the settlement could be besieged. If such settlements borders an enemy province, the two players trading the settlement must notify their enemy(s) that the trade will happen. Their enemy(s) may show proof that the settlement can indeed be besieged to prevent the trade.



    + Some interpretations:
    - I have no idea how to define which provinces separated by sea should count as adjacent, but the other parts of the rule apply
    - As to not screw with the possible element of surprise, notifications should only be sent if provinces are adjacent, and you are at war with the faction (one party claims that there is a war)
    happy with that although it might be worth saying that the "any number of enemy units" might be better interpolated as a significant numbers more than the defender?lest you have 2 or 3 companies within range, and one faction saying they could besiege the settlement[which they could] but the settlement might have seven units in it , making a siege worthless as a sally would easy destroy the besiegers...so the armies within range of the siege must be significantly higher than the garrison?
    Last edited by paladinbob123; June 18, 2022 at 01:40 PM.
    "War is the continuation of politics by other means." - Carl von Clausewitz

  4. #284
    Jadli's Avatar The Fallen God
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    8,515

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS


  5. #285
    Mergor's Avatar T H E | G O R
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    1,881

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    I rewrote the princess rule because there was nothing about family members in there. I also added the rule I wrote regarding settlement trading. It is restrictive and complicated, but should help with any future issue so we don't have to argue. Regarding the princess rule, I'd appriciate if we made sure that no rule is missing. It is quite annoying to add rules because "it was forgotten" and I want this to be the first and last time xd

  6. #286

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...OP_Joff_10.sav
    joffrey up
    tully ain't gonna be trading jack this turn, the orcs *khm* the good guys have assembled their hosts once again

  7. #287
    Jadli's Avatar The Fallen God
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    8,515

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    Quote Originally Posted by Mergor View Post
    I rewrote the princess rule because there was nothing about family members in there. I also added the rule I wrote regarding settlement trading. It is restrictive and complicated, but should help with any future issue so we don't have to argue. Regarding the princess rule, I'd appriciate if we made sure that no rule is missing. It is quite annoying to add rules because "it was forgotten" and I want this to be the first and last time xd
    I think you made a mistake.
    We intentionally left out family members, because all generals are family members, except some really rare cases .

  8. #288
    Mergor's Avatar T H E | G O R
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    1,881

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    Well, guess I was wrong then. Changed back, lannister has full time to replay

  9. #289

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen.../t10_pussy.png
    a princess was used, just posting the screenshot coz i forgot to yesterday

  10. #290
    Civis
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Switzerland,Basel
    Posts
    160

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    Grey 10 up
    https://workupload.com/file/B9qx8FK4sXa

    a battle has happende at Sharp Point
    https://imgur.com/a/95ItYwt

  11. #291

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...P_Arryn_10.sav
    Arryns up, subbed Greyjoy according to his instructions

  12. #292

    Default Re: A Storm of Swords - Westeros Online Battle HS

    Need extension! , Agh ! will have finished today in the evening latest!