just checking for some friends

Moderator: Pocus
Judea accepts. However, by next turn, Jerusalem must be fully restored to its former state.devoncop wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:29 pmThe offer is accepted provided no raiding of any kind occurs on Egyptian,Arabian or Nabatean regions.Yaitz331 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:42 pmSo does Ptolemy approve of this compromise?Yaitz331 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 12:09 pmJudea's compromise suggestion is this: Seeing as how Judea's two reasons for wanting the extra region are to form the province and remove an Arabian region in Judea's rear, taking the region, forming the province, and then abandoning the region will satisfy both of Judea's wishes and be entirely acceptable to Ptolemy. As that will leave Judea with two of the four regions of the province, the province will not be destroyed by this abandonment.
This will satisfy Judea's wishes, and I see no reason why Ptolemy would object.
Yeah, I've got a load of turns built up. I'll set start posting them when we are nearer the end.devoncop wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 2:56 pmIf you are still intending to post a you tube lets play on this game I will be very interested to see how the Saka have been to play, never having chosen them as yet.Greyhunterlp wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:46 pm I should really post in here.
Saka has accepted a peace treaty from the Selucids, as with the death of our allies, there is just to much land to the south to take.
We will seek other, more peaceful, westernly options for expansion.
(sorry Bactria, you were just in the way....)
Good point.loki100 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:33 pm Some issues about the impact of patches on MP games.
From the beta we found it was very easy for people to do their turn using different patches which in turn generated the error message for modified games.
What I'd suggest is that when 1.4 is out Devoncop (don't want to dump responsibility on him but think someone has to set this out) puts something in the thread along the lines 'of make sure you complete T40 using 1.3' or similar. If not, if I recall, teh error message goes away once everyone is using the same scripts but of course its frustrating while it pops up?
Yeah I was thinking about this for our other game. Technically you can revert back to the previous version (usually) in the steam platform options in your library, but that might be a bit too much screwing around and might create even worse problems.
I am sure no one in this game will be using privately modded files.ledo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:34 amYeah I was thinking about this for our other game. Technically you can revert back to the previous version (usually) in the steam platform options in your library, but that might be a bit too much screwing around and might create even worse problems.
You could ask everyone to just turn off auto-patching for the game in anticipation of the new patch release, but again, I'm sure people will forget.
I just had a message that the Saka is decadent and decaying...Greyhunterlp wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:09 pmYeah, I've got a load of turns built up. I'll set start posting them when we are nearer the end.devoncop wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 2:56 pmIf you are still intending to post a you tube lets play on this game I will be very interested to see how the Saka have been to play, never having chosen them as yet.Greyhunterlp wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:46 pm I should really post in here.
Saka has accepted a peace treaty from the Selucids, as with the death of our allies, there is just to much land to the south to take.
We will seek other, more peaceful, westernly options for expansion.
(sorry Bactria, you were just in the way....)
och, I'll send a fleetdevoncop wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 5:35 pmI just had a message that the Saka is decadent and decaying...Greyhunterlp wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:09 pmYeah, I've got a load of turns built up. I'll set start posting them when we are nearer the end.![]()
What sort of wild parties have you got going on up there in the back of beyond ?
Huh, TIL.loki100 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:32 am actually yes ... the Picts sort of did. The place name 'Tarbert' means a portage point between 2 bodies of water (while its actually Norse-Scots Gaelic in origin there is some evidence it was a word adapted from the original Pictish - Irish-Gaelic uses a different word for the same concept), there are (confusingly for many visitors) about 8 small towns with that name across the west of Scotland where 2 bodies of water are close but split by land.