The Lost World Campaign

[batesmotel]

Please note it is now the Summer Seasonal Phase

1. Diplomacy - chance to make a formal alliance which will last for one year & prevents two countries from attacking each other. You can also make any informal agreements which you see fit.

2. I've done the army maintenance to an extent. Please PM me if you want to increase an existing army to 650 points - army must not be in battle. I will not action this until we have agreement over any change to max army size. You should also PM me if you want to re-train your military & hence use a different list. Again this does not involve armies already in battle and I will not action until we have agreement on the way forward with which army books may be used. Longer term I'll be amending the army maintenance method to remove the 'there's no point my raising an army now as it's nearly summer' bugbear. Not worked as I planned it

3. For this summer only we have the Found / Improve City phase we missed in Spring. PM me any new city which you wish to found and the area it will be in. Also if you want to improve your one currently existing city. These will take effect immediately so that we can start having some fun with sieges.

4. Public PR - PM me any of these you want to build - you need to name the PR event and the area it is built in. Remember the point of these is to raise national morale but beware if you loss the area the benefit is passed to the new owner. I maintain a list of PR buildings / events linked to each area.

5. After all the above I'll draw & inform you of the random event card.

Peter,

Performing any Summer actions for the campaign is probably premature. There are currently more Spring challenge battles that remain to be resolved so probably it is premature to start performing Summer actions at least for those involved in the battles. (At a minimum myself, pantherboy and Amaz_Ed.)

I assume an army in battle is one where there is an outstanding challenge or game in progress. Not one where a campaign/invasion is on going but no challenge is outstanding or battle is in progress.

Chris

[TheGrayMouser]

Hey Peter, culd you please expand on this statement:

". I've done the army maintenance to an extent. Please PM me if you want to increase an existing army to 650 points - army must not be in battle. "

This confuses me for as I undertsand , an army does not even really exist unless it is in battle and the other player wants to resume the fight into the next season, then both sides can top off, your statement contradicts this....

[petergarnett]

[/quote]Performing any Summer actions for the campaign is probably premature. There are currently more Spring challenge battles that remain to be resolved so probably it is premature to start performing Summer actions at least for those involved in the battles. (At a minimum myself, pantherboy and Amaz_Ed.)

I assume an army in battle is one where there is an outstanding challenge or game in progress. Not one where a campaign/invasion is on going but no challenge is outstanding or battle is in progress.

Chris[/quote]


Those battles are not effected by the seasonal stuff & should just remain in place. If they do finish I just hold the results until the Summer phases are over. The other side to this is that an area with an on-going battle is not eligable for improvements.

Or have I misunderstood you Chris?

[petergarnett]

Hey Peter, culd you please expand on this statement:

". I've done the army maintenance to an extent. Please PM me if you want to increase an existing army to 650 points - army must not be in battle. "

This confuses me for as I undertsand , an army does not even really exist unless it is in battle and the other player wants to resume the fight into the next season, then both sides can top off, your statement contradicts this....

There are a couple where this applies but I've told those players.

[batesmotel]

Performing any Summer actions for the campaign is probably premature. There are currently more Spring challenge battles that remain to be resolved so probably it is premature to start performing Summer actions at least for those involved in the battles. (At a minimum myself, pantherboy and Amaz_Ed.)

I assume an army in battle is one where there is an outstanding challenge or game in progress. Not one where a campaign/invasion is on going but no challenge is outstanding or battle is in progress.

Chris

Those battles are not effected by the seasonal stuff & should just remain in place. If they do finish I just hold the results until the Summer phases are over. The other side to this is that an area with an on-going battle is not eligable for improvements.

Or have I misunderstood you Chris?

So when are these last battles occurring? I thought they were still within the Spring season and that normal summer stuff could be done in that area where they are occurring after these battles have completed. I can understand that an area where there is an on going campaign cannot be improved for this summer but I don't understand how there can be an on-going battle in an area as Summer is starting. I thought the campaign would continue in the area during the summer after army maintenance is done. e.g. existing armies in the field are bought back to 650 points if desired during maintenance. That is why I thought that Summer actions in general are premature, or at least those for the players with what I thought were end of Spring season battles.

Chris

[petergarnett]

Existing battles (started or challenge issued) carry on in the summer turns. I never intended for all battles to be completed between seasonal phases - otherwise we'd be waiting forever.

Apologies for any confusion. However everyone has plenty in the treasury so any mixed up will have minimal effect.

[batesmotel]

Existing battles (started or challenge issued) carry on in the summer turns. I never intended for all battles to be completed between seasonal phases - otherwise we'd be waiting forever.

Apologies for any confusion. However everyone has plenty in the treasury so any mixed up will have minimal effect.

Earlier you said that armies can be rebuilt to 650 points during the maintenance phase and that I would be able to do this after fighting the final battle of Spring. If I have to complete my summer actions before the battle is finished, how do I know how much I need to add to the army to get back upto 650 points? Or is maintaining armies not an action and it occurs after summer actions are completed?

The way to avoid having battles delay the start of the new season would have been to have any challenges being issued after you determined the end of the Spring turn just occur in the Summer. At this point I seem to be getting more confused rather than less.

Chris

[batesmotel]

Should I just build a new 650 point army in the Summer maintenance phase that will take over the continued defense of my invaded area after the carry over battle is done? Then during the campaign phase I would replace the existing army with the new one and could then disband the existing one to get my points back that are left after the battle?

I'm really trying to make sense of how this works.

Chris

[Blathergut]

> Having two armies on tap would be fine with me. Maybe default to RoR if one player wants that since that's what we began with.

> 500pts sounds much better than 650...battles can take forever with all the dancing about that often happens (hopefully less now!!)(have been running 400pt SoA battles and enjoying them)

>Just to confirm: the map is up-to-date for me: (1 army invading Carthage...round 2 of that just commencing)(1 army defending against the scummy Caananites)(1 army invading said scummies)

[Blathergut]

Likewise from above:

Can armies in battle now be "topped up" with recruits? What about situations where a battle ended, and both sides have agreed to continue but the actual DAG game hasn't been started yet? (I have my new AP for the battle...can I pay to top it up?) Or will we restrict all new battles to 500pts?

[Morbio]

I'm struggling to keep up with all the posts on this and am losing the will to live

I'm sure there are lots of good suggestions from lots of people, but can we keep it simple and let Peter have a chance to run the game without a massive overhead. I'm sure he'd like to play some games too

Peter: Could you post the latest seasonal information in a separate thread (that only you update) so that we don't have to trawl through all the taunting, boasting, pleading and suggestions to find out what happened the previous phase, what's happening this phase, what you want us to do, etc..

[petergarnett]

Sorry if I'm as clear as mud so far on this. Too many topics on the go.

In the army maintenance phase I calc how many armies are in the field & deduct as required from your treasury. Is the army exists at the time of this phase I have assumed you didn't want to disband it. You don't need to do anything for this part of the phase.

You can top up any army by sending reinforcements - you just PM me to say you want to do this (but see end of this post). My point about an army in an existing battle was that you cannot top it up if it's in the middle of a battle - we had posts about not accepting challenges close to the seasonal phase and I was merely trying to explain that you had to accept a challenge issued & not avoid it in the hope of more troops arriving.

Any reinforcements sent would arrive after the battle - I know the remaining strength then & amend your treasury accordingly. That's the point when the topup takes effect. Again no need for you to calc how much is needed especially at the moment when the treasuries at still fairly full.

Regarding Morbio's point about having to follow so many posts to see a key one requesting info I'll PM each player (it's just copy & paste) separately to help avoid this. That's also how I'll get a vote in on max army size and will remind all of the decisions you need to make such as topups.

[TheGrayMouser]

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

Lord Xiccarph, please keep your blue helmeted renta cops out of the lands of the Nervii... The "unrest" you see is merely the Roman and Nervii citizens celebrating the alliance which binds both our nations...

[Xiccarph]

Lord Xiccarph, please keep your blue helmeted renta cops out of the lands of the Nervii... The "unrest" you see is merely the Roman and Nervii citizens celebrating the alliance which binds both our nations...

(Sigh It seems you can't throw a rock these days without someone claiming to be someone's ally.) I urge you to continue your celebrations unabated, drink and be merry. We will see to it that the area is safe for such activities and keep you safe from the depredations of would-be Empire builders. Neve fear, Xiccarph is here.

[TheGrayMouser]

Dispatch to the Lord Hidde of Caanan:

Rome requests you withdraw your armies from New Blathergutria and make terms. We will await your response until our daily chores in the salt mines are complete, for then our armies will march. As they say in Rome, business before pleasure.
SPQR

[Ironclad]

The absence of a map with boundaries is proving critical for me. Without it strategy and developing alliances seems very abstract especially with such a large number of other players (soon to be 22 and increasing probably in the future) any of whom could be potential allies or enemies in our brave new world. In fairness the siege rules will help to put meat on defensive alliances, but even there I suspect it won't have the same impact that alliances based on territorial proximity of allies to one's own lands or to those of enemy territories would have.

Of course its easy for me to ask for a map, as I haven't the computer skills to set one up or maintain it myself.

Maybe its just me – how do others rate the importance of this issue?

[pantherboy]

The absence of a map with boundaries is proving critical for me. Without it strategy and developing alliances seems very abstract especially with such a large number of other players (soon to be 22 and increasing probably in the future) any of whom could be potential allies or enemies in our brave new world. In fairness the siege rules will help to put meat on defensive alliances, but even there I suspect it won't have the same impact that alliances based on territorial proximity of allies to one's own lands or to those of enemy territories would have.

Of course its easy for me to ask for a map, as I haven't the computer skills to set one up or maintain it myself.

Maybe its just me – how do others rate the importance of this issue?

I agree. I think there should exist some kind of map limiting players movement. Then securing a couple of borders would allow you to conduct war aggressively versus a single opponent without fear of a sudden invasion from one of many players.

[hidde]

Answer to Consul GrayMouser,

We will do no such thing. King Blathergut might try to continue his defence or he can beg the high and mighty Rome for help.
It bother us not. We have been victorious and will defend what's now rightfully ours.
By the way,we have friends too...

Baal-hidde, Lord of Canaan

[petergarnett]

The absence of a map with boundaries is proving critical for me. Without it strategy and developing alliances seems very abstract especially with such a large number of other players (soon to be 22 and increasing probably in the future) any of whom could be potential allies or enemies in our brave new world. In fairness the siege rules will help to put meat on defensive alliances, but even there I suspect it won't have the same impact that alliances based on territorial proximity of allies to one's own lands or to those of enemy territories would have.

Of course its easy for me to ask for a map, as I haven't the computer skills to set one up or maintain it myself.

Maybe its just me – how do others rate the importance of this issue?

I agree. I think there should exist some kind of map limiting players movement. Then securing a couple of borders would allow you to conduct war aggressively versus a single opponent without fear of a sudden invasion from one of many players.

OK hold this thought and any diplomacy whilst I check with the royal cartographer - think I may have a simple solution

[Xiccarph]

Kappadokia and Eupatoria announce a treaty of peace.