The Lost World Campaign

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:34 am

**Tosses a pm to CharlesR to see if we're still waging!**

iandavidsmith · Post by **iandavidsmith** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:49 am

I would prefer to keep it as an ancient game using the armies of RoR , is someone wants to change his army
because he's loosing all the battles , i don't mind them doing so as long as its not in the middle of a campaign.
As long as we don't end up with 20 armies of Illyrians

If most of you don't want this to happen now is the time to say so.

Xiccarph · Post by **Xiccarph** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:52 am

I would prefer to use ROR and IF only.

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:10 am

iandavidsmith wrote:I would prefer to keep it as an ancient game using the armies of RoR , is someone wants to change his army
because he's loosing all the battles , i don't mind them doing so as long as its not in the middle of a campaign.
As long as we don't end up with 20 armies of Illyrians

If most of you don't want this to happen now is the time to say so.

I concur with the above (or Immortal fire armies once that comes out)

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:03 am

I say stick to ancients

petergarnett · Post by **petergarnett** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:09 am

Siege info now posted on the player guidance thread.

Tonight (Monday) will be the final chance to issue challenges before the season ends and we do the Summer phase which will start with diplomacy.
For this Summer only we will also include city build phase.

Xiccarph · Post by **Xiccarph** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:00 am

petergarnett wrote:Max of one per area - so you can't gang up on a little fellow and will need an awful lot of co-operation to try to overwhelm the pantherites!

We don't want to overwhelm, we just want someone to have a win against him! Perhaps we should start a pool? Say 100 gold, first to have a win takes all. With all the income his lands will have we don't have to worry about him throwing a battle for a payoff, not that he would mind you.

Cheers!

Xiccarph · Post by **Xiccarph** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:27 am

Eupatoria is concerned over the state of affairs in the Empire of Texas and is sending in a piecekeeping (slaps scribe) peace keeping force to protect our vital interests in that region.

That sounded so good we will do the same to the uncivillized Navi..er Nervii, as well. Aren't they blue too? Shrugs.

Current campaigns will continue.

So let it be written, etc, etc.

X

ianiow · Post by **ianiow** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:54 am

The victorious soldiers of Canaan relax, party and get drunk after their hard fought victory over the godless men of Rhodes at Pirate Harbour. But still there is unease in the camp. The dark brooding statue of the colossus stands above them, watching their revelry with silent menace. They recall the almost feral savagery of the enemy, how they discarded their pike and lance and fought like animals with tooth and nail, heedless for their own safety.

Meanwhile, the leaders of Texas, Morbius and Rhome hear from eyewitnesses of dark tales of the battles fought with Rhodes. Of how a dark hooded figure prowled the battlefields after the fighting, summoning his men to not only recover the armour, loot and weapons from the battlefield, but also the corpses. The field was so stripped clean there was little left for even the crows.

..to be continued.

hidde · Post by **hidde** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:12 am

Is the state of affairs in the Empire of Texas any concern to the Eupatorians? No, I say! This smells of treachery and foul play

I've neither heard or seen any sign of an alliance between the two. We the proud Canaans on the other hand have been allies to the...EoT
for as long as there is recorded time.
Now hear this!
Eupatoria, keep your filty paws off Texas. Or we will slapp your behind with a big, fat T-bone steak!

Baal-Hidde
Melek of Canaan

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:16 am

How many battles are raging at the moment with panthers? Maybe we could set up a 'sign-up for pantherland campaign'??? Next...

Blathergut · Post by **Blathergut** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:18 am

petergarnett wrote:Siege info now posted on the player guidance thread.

Tonight (Monday) will be the final chance to issue challenges before the season ends and we do the Summer phase which will start with diplomacy.
For this Summer only we will also include city build phase.

Am unclear on something:

Why would I issue a challenge now? I would immediately have to pay for upkeep, wouldn't I? Why not just wait until it is actually summer? Is there some advantage/reason for declaring now?

(And you mean tonight (Monday)(but it's 6am Monday right now!)

Maybe we should go by standard PG time??

petergarnett · Post by **petergarnett** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:39 am

Due to my being away a few players wanted the chance, upon getting their new army sizes, to decide whether to carry on a campaign or not.

Xiccarph · Post by **Xiccarph** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:40 am

hidde wrote: Eupatoria...we will slapp your behind with a big, fat T-bone steak!

Baal-Hidde
Melek of Canaan

I always thought you straight-laced types had a hidden wild side.

As for our humanitariam missions, please do not interfere, we only seek to pacify the banidts and brigands in the region which the Texas Empire seems unable to do consistantly. Plus my astrologers tell me there are WMD's hidden there, whatever they are.

X

petergarnett · Post by **petergarnett** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:49 am

WMD - his warriors can mount or dismount - a new feature?

hidde · Post by **hidde** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:34 pm

Baal persona off

Is Texas invaded? It doesn't show on the map.
And you, X is an ally to Scar?

Want to be clear on this so I can pick someone else to invade

hidde

pantherboy · Post by **pantherboy** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:52 pm

Please can we change the war system to a state of war and do away with invasions? I think it is needless to conduct two concurrent battles to achieve a result. It also seems strange that two armies walk past each other to invade the others territory. What about declaring war with the declarer nominating which of his and their opponents provinces are to be used. Then conduct battles and if one side is losing they can still withdraw inside a city if they possess one. This then provides a slight advantage for those who want to declare war as they can nominate an enemy province without a city and commit from one they do have a city in thus granting more staying power if they are being defeated. I'm finding it rather tedious and time consuming to have to donduct offensive and defensive battles versus they same opponent.

Cheers,

Steve

PS: Please restrict army choices to ROR as from my limited perusal the SOA can field some awesome armies that will overmatch ROR. They have totally different compositions and extra weapon choices e.g. Longbow.

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:03 pm

pantherboy wrote:Please can we change the war system to a state of war and do away with invasions? I think it is needless to conduct two concurrent battles to achieve a result. It also seems strange that two armies walk past each other to invade the others territory. What about declaring war with the declarer nominating which of his and their opponents provinces are to be used. Then conduct battles and if one side is losing they can still withdraw inside a city if they possess one. This then provides a slight advantage for those who want to declare war as they can nominate an enemy province without a city and commit from one they do have a city in thus granting more staying power if they are being defeated. I'm finding it rather tedious and time consuming to have to donduct offensive and defensive battles versus they same opponent.

Cheers,

Steve

PS: Please restrict army choices to ROR as from my limited perusal the SOA can field some awesome armies that will overmatch ROR. They have totally different compositions and extra weapon choices e.g. Longbow.

I like this idea, never undertsood why the defender gets to choose which province to defend... it really didnt matter much before but now once we start building cities will make even more sense for the attacker to choose
the target
? though, would the declarer of war be able to declare two (or more) attacks from his territoires into the declaree's two (or more) territories??
I would welcome a change as it seams if you are attacked, just counter attack with the results washing out... Also there is no incentive to just defend for after winning you opponent just walks away... i like the idea of a war being two territories being the "base of operations", where if one side loses, he can retreat into his city and the defnder , if he choses can "follow in" to siege..... More like the battles are being fought on the frontier rather than in someones province. This makes eevn more sense now that it has been solified that armies can top off when the season changes, Cheers

hidde · Post by **hidde** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:24 pm

What about declaring war with the declarer nominating which of his and their opponents provinces are to be used. Then conduct battles and if one side is losing they can still withdraw inside a city if they possess one.

That's a much better way of doing it, I think. Combine that with an automatic loss after two defeats and the loser of the first battle can have an interesting decision to make:
retreat to a city and ensuing a siege or fight it out and risk losing the area.
When it comes to sieges..is the only hope for the besieged to wait for an ally to show or can he himself do something? Like if he holds out till end of season get a chance to replenish the besieged army?

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:37 pm

I wouldnt think that a besieged army would be able to get supplies, if anything it should slowly deteriorate from disease privations etc...
You make a good point though about being able to "do something".... If you are a powerful nation and are only at war with 1 enemy who is besiging a city (but you have no allies), it doesnt make sense that you cant raise an army to relieve your city...
I think Peter had this as an idea to make alliances more meaningful (that only an ally can raise a siege)