switchfoot
Squire
Hah, the campaign is finally starting and I'm just going away for a week! Amazing timing, haha 
EU Online Campaign I – Looking for an Adjudicator!
- Thread starter kingofnoobia
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
Squire
Don't go on holiday, this is more important!
Anyway, I take it that means you are happy to continue with the proposed rules and noobia can get around to setting a dealine for the end of this turn?
Anyway, I take it that means you are happy to continue with the proposed rules and noobia can get around to setting a dealine for the end of this turn?
Boh_Chris
Sergeant
Rules A are out of discussion, defender is almost godly overboosted - I really wonder whats "fair" in them.
We can go with Rules B.
We still prefer our rules - C
8 players
def +1 support
9 round
5:30 mins
We have one more testing with Perkele on Sunday. We will test B and C. I think we should let use both rules. B needs 12 defenders, 10 attackers - and as I remember, some clans had problems to get even 8 ppl in the game. So in this situation, our rules would be better - and its almost the same, as we saw by test with IG.
Btw which and how many fights remain from actual turn?
Project: Your sarcasm needs improvement, your reading skills too - I wrote we will be testing with IG, CoR or Perkele. But lets be gentle and stop instults from both sides. Lets just play.
We can go with Rules B.
We still prefer our rules - C
8 players
def +1 support
9 round
5:30 mins
We have one more testing with Perkele on Sunday. We will test B and C. I think we should let use both rules. B needs 12 defenders, 10 attackers - and as I remember, some clans had problems to get even 8 ppl in the game. So in this situation, our rules would be better - and its almost the same, as we saw by test with IG.
Btw which and how many fights remain from actual turn?
Project: Your sarcasm needs improvement, your reading skills too - I wrote we will be testing with IG, CoR or Perkele. But lets be gentle and stop instults from both sides. Lets just play.
Why didn't your leader mention this when he replied to this topic earlier? In my opinion testing phase is over now and the rules are decided. Luckily they are ones that you agreed you could play with. It is just the Siege left to fight in this turn now and I will be contacting you through a mail shortly to start arranging it. If noobia could post a deadline then that would be appreciated.
As for the sarcasm comment, well what can I say? I'm not quite sure what you are referring to in particular but maybe you should stop taking everything I say as an attack, because not all of it is intended that way.
Finally, you are probably right. My reading skills could do with being brought up to scratch. However, if everything you said wasn't total bollocks then I wouldn't have to skim read through your replies.
As for the sarcasm comment, well what can I say? I'm not quite sure what you are referring to in particular but maybe you should stop taking everything I say as an attack, because not all of it is intended that way.
Finally, you are probably right. My reading skills could do with being brought up to scratch. However, if everything you said wasn't total bollocks then I wouldn't have to skim read through your replies.
switchfoot
Squire
Chill out guys... this game should be mainly about having fun, am I right? Everyone be friendly now Cya in a week, general Switchfoot is going on holiday.
Cya in a week, general Switchfoot is going on holiday.Boh_Chris
Sergeant
Its ok Project. Testing phase is over as rules B are agreed from most clans. My fault - I wrote it bad - I ment we are gonna be testing to the end of the week. But no prob.
We can (and will) go with rules B - we just propose our rules as possible alternative if someone wont have enough players, or both team decide to play in lower numbers.
Btw only our battle remains from this turn or someone else too?
We can (and will) go with rules B - we just propose our rules as possible alternative if someone wont have enough players, or both team decide to play in lower numbers.
Btw only our battle remains from this turn or someone else too?
kingofnoobia
Master Knight
Apologies that I didn't reply earlier. I planned on deciding the ruleset yesterday morning, but I postponed it until the evening, and then I had network connection issues.
It seems that most factions can agree with ruleset B, as proposed by ProjectAngel, and that no one has objected to it, so we can finally get this going again.
[quote author=Siege rules]
These are the final Siege rules
Round timer:
5:00
Number of rounds:
9
Default number of players/team, support not included:
10
Defender bonus support.
+1[/quote]
The Caliphat Bohemius and the United Kingdom can once again sharpen sword and axe, as the Sarranids attempt to strike at the very heart of the Nords of Lyonesse.
New deadline: Friday, 10/09
Note: You may have noticed I have changed my forum name to TheNarrator, so make sure that's where your PM's go.
Edit: wrong deadline
It seems that most factions can agree with ruleset B, as proposed by ProjectAngel, and that no one has objected to it, so we can finally get this going again.
[quote author=Siege rules]
These are the final Siege rules
Round timer:
5:00
Number of rounds:
9
Default number of players/team, support not included:
10
Defender bonus support.
+1[/quote]
The Caliphat Bohemius and the United Kingdom can once again sharpen sword and axe, as the Sarranids attempt to strike at the very heart of the Nords of Lyonesse.
New deadline: Friday, 10/09
Note: You may have noticed I have changed my forum name to TheNarrator, so make sure that's where your PM's go
.Edit: wrong deadline
Disparate
Knight at Arms
having just watched the video's i had these thoughts:
There were a number of occasions in the match where the defenders were just hanging on by the skin of their teeth (which is good)
The tower took between 1:18 and 1:33 to get to the wall (one round i didnt see the bridge go down, but i spotted a saranid almost on the wall so used that time)
The Walls were then held for between 1min and 1:30 before they were overwhelmed (where new spawns generally head to the courtyard rather then the walls)
and then the defenders were being pushed back onto the flag for the remaining time
I feel that this is a generally fair timetable for the defense of a seige map (3 minutes at most to break over the walls) with 3second spawntimes and 15- 20 seconds to actually make it into the castle on foot (10ish seconds when using cavalry which is pretty specific to brunwud castle) you looking at a conservative estimate of 5 waves of attacks onto the flag itself (using the worst times for getting into the castle with footsoldiers)
There were a number of occasions in the match where the defenders were just hanging on by the skin of their teeth (which is good)
The tower took between 1:18 and 1:33 to get to the wall (one round i didnt see the bridge go down, but i spotted a saranid almost on the wall so used that time)
The Walls were then held for between 1min and 1:30 before they were overwhelmed (where new spawns generally head to the courtyard rather then the walls)
and then the defenders were being pushed back onto the flag for the remaining time
I feel that this is a generally fair timetable for the defense of a seige map (3 minutes at most to break over the walls) with 3second spawntimes and 15- 20 seconds to actually make it into the castle on foot (10ish seconds when using cavalry which is pretty specific to brunwud castle) you looking at a conservative estimate of 5 waves of attacks onto the flag itself (using the worst times for getting into the castle with footsoldiers)
kingofnoobia
Master Knight
Before I publish the battle outcomes & start of retreat phase, I'd like to check whether the way I remember the battle outcomes is correct. Being too lazy to write them down somewhere, I usually just try to remember them, but with the campaign being on hold for so long, it's possible that I'm mistaken somewhere. So, please inform me whether there are any mistakes in the following list:
Province 11: EoI defeats KoP
Province 17: EoI defeats IFoR
Province 32: IFoR defeats 22nd
Province 34: 22nd defeats KoP
Province 37: UK defeats IFoR
Province 42: UK defeats CB
Province 11: EoI defeats KoP
Province 17: EoI defeats IFoR
Province 32: IFoR defeats 22nd
Province 34: 22nd defeats KoP
Province 37: UK defeats IFoR
Province 42: UK defeats CB
Disparate
Knight at Arms
i can confirm the UK results
Province 42: UK defeats CB
Province 37: UK defeats IFoR
oh and i've spotted the confimation of province 17 being captured by the EoI
edit2:
Province 34: 22nd defeats KoP
Province 11: EoI defeats KoP
Province 32: IFoR defeats 22nd
Province 42: UK defeats CB
Disparate said:
Battle complete; UK defends
Province 37: UK defeats IFoR
edit:Disparate said:Ok thats the COR match complete and province 37 is defended:
Seige testing is in COR battlegrounds server
oh and i've spotted the confimation of province 17 being captured by the EoI
SCGavin said:The Empire of Istiniar has the pleasure to announce the liberation of Province Seventien (17 for those who prefer the numbers!)!
edit2:
Province 34: 22nd defeats KoP
Plazek said:
Khergit victory! With a foothold onto the Perkele heartlands we are a few steps closer to ridding Lyonesse of the IfoR menace and its former allies.
Province 11: EoI defeats KoP
mynameoverhere said:Perkele lost match 0-5, so IG won.
Here is screenshot.
Province 32: IFoR defeats 22nd
captain lust said:Territory 32: Illustrious Functionality of Reveran 5-2 22nd Imperium
Good game.
kingofnoobia
Master Knight
Battle phase - Fall, 1258
Province 11
Empire of Istiniar's forces have attacked and defeated Kingdom of Perkele's armies in Province 11
Kingdom of Perkele's army is allowed to retreat to 12, 20 or 21
Province 17
Empire of Istiniar's forces have attacked and defeated The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's armies in Province 17
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's army is allowed to retreat to 18, 19 or 31
Province 32
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's forces have defeated The 22nd Imperium's invading fleet in Province 32
The 22nd Imperium's fleet is disbanded, as its retreat route is cut off by The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's army in 39
Province 34
The 22nd Imperium's forces have attacked and defeated Kingdom of Perkele's armies in Province 34
Kingdom of Perkele's army is allowed to retreat to 21 or 33
Province 37
The United Kingdom's forces have defeated The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's invading army in Province 37
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's army retreats to 27
Province 42
The United Kingdom's forces have defeated Caliphat Bohemius' invading army in Province 42
Caliphat Bohemius' army retreats to 41
Retreat phase for Fall, 1258 starts now! Deadline: Wednesday, 15/09
Announcements
- New feature! Faction leaders are now allowed to give provinces in their possession a name. Provinces may still be referenced to by their number at any time. When sending through orders, you still use province numbers. You may use province names on any other occasion. I will use province names in the narrative as well. If you capture a named province, you must have it in your possession for at least 2 turns before you are allowed to rename it.
- Standardised adjudicator posts! For those who found my rather random lay-out irritating, I've busied myself with making sure that will no longer happen. My posts will now have a uniform lay-out. Also, narrative will from now on only be added on end of turn reports.
- New rule discussion: Right of way! The idea is to reduce the influence of randomness in determining which of two or more conflicting moves are made. Picture this situation: Province A and Province B both have an army in them, and they are hostile towards eachother. A attacks B and B attacks A in the same turn, with equal support. I flip a coin, A is allowed to attack, B defends. B wins the battle, and A retreats to Province A again. The next turn, both factions make exactly the same move, and normally, the randomness rule comes into play again. This is where I suggest to introduce right of way. If an army B succesfully defended against another army A in the preceding turn, AND if army B also gave an attack order on province A in that same turn, which was cancelled by the randomness rule, army B's attack order on province A will override army A's attack order on Province B. Right of way only lasts for 1 turn. The support rule overrides the right of way rule. It is important that the situation remains unchanged: any changes to support (even if both get equal support) nullify the right of way rule. This rule is not yet in place! It remains a suggestion for now, so please give your opinions on this.
edit1: added right of way, pluralised armies in battle reports when support was included.
note: IFoR will have to settle with a sunglasses-emoticon in the summary in stead of the number of provinces. I ticked on 'Don't use smileys', but my post is ignoring me D:. Eh, a space in between should do fine as well.
Province 11
Empire of Istiniar's forces have attacked and defeated Kingdom of Perkele's armies in Province 11
Kingdom of Perkele's army is allowed to retreat to 12, 20 or 21
Province 17
Empire of Istiniar's forces have attacked and defeated The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's armies in Province 17
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's army is allowed to retreat to 18, 19 or 31
Province 32
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's forces have defeated The 22nd Imperium's invading fleet in Province 32
The 22nd Imperium's fleet is disbanded, as its retreat route is cut off by The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's army in 39
Province 34
The 22nd Imperium's forces have attacked and defeated Kingdom of Perkele's armies in Province 34
Kingdom of Perkele's army is allowed to retreat to 21 or 33
Province 37
The United Kingdom's forces have defeated The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's invading army in Province 37
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran's army retreats to 27
Province 42
The United Kingdom's forces have defeated Caliphat Bohemius' invading army in Province 42
Caliphat Bohemius' army retreats to 41
Retreat phase for Fall, 1258 starts now! Deadline: Wednesday, 15/09
Armies in red either need to be retreated during the retreat phase or will be auto-retreated (when there is only 1 possibility). Armies in maroon will be disbanded.
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran (Swadia)
Provinces (8 ): 16, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 39
Armies (4): 17, 37, 39, 16
Fleets (2): W7, 32
Supply Centers (6): 29, 30, 32, 28, 31, 27
The Republic of Istiniar (Rhodok)
Provinces (9): 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 17
Armies (3): 11, 7, 17
Fleets (1): 1
Supply Centers (7): 1, 2, 6, 3, 5, 11, 17
The 22nd Imperium (Khergit)
Provinces (6): Y1, Y2, Y3, Y4, 34, 35
Armies (1): Y2
Fleets (3/2):32, 35, 34
Supply Centers (5): Y1, Y3, Y4, 34, 35
The United Kingdom (Nord)
Provinces (5): 37, 38, 42, 43, 44
Armies (3): 37, 42, 43
Fleets (1): 44
Supply Centers (4): 42, 43, 44, 37
The Kingdom of Perkele (Vaegir)
Provinces (5): 10, 20, 21, 22, 33,
Armies (3): 11, 34, 10
Fleets (2): W9, W8
Supply Centers (2): 20, 21,
Caliphat Bohemius (Sarranid)
Provinces (5): 13, 24, 25, 36, 40, 41
Armies (3): 36, 40, 42
Fleets (1): 24
Supply Centers (5): 24, 25, 36, 13, 41
The Illustrious Functionality of Reveran (Swadia)
Provinces (8 ): 16, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 39
Armies (4): 17, 37, 39, 16
Fleets (2): W7, 32
Supply Centers (6): 29, 30, 32, 28, 31, 27
The Republic of Istiniar (Rhodok)
Provinces (9): 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 17
Armies (3): 11, 7, 17
Fleets (1): 1
Supply Centers (7): 1, 2, 6, 3, 5, 11, 17
The 22nd Imperium (Khergit)
Provinces (6): Y1, Y2, Y3, Y4, 34, 35
Armies (1): Y2
Fleets (3/2):
Supply Centers (5): Y1, Y3, Y4, 34, 35
The United Kingdom (Nord)
Provinces (5): 37, 38, 42, 43, 44
Armies (3): 37, 42, 43
Fleets (1): 44
Supply Centers (4): 42, 43, 44, 37
The Kingdom of Perkele (Vaegir)
Provinces (5): 10, 20, 21, 22, 33,
Armies (3): 11, 34, 10
Fleets (2): W9, W8
Supply Centers (2): 20, 21,
Caliphat Bohemius (Sarranid)
Provinces (5): 13, 24, 25, 36, 40, 41
Armies (3): 36, 40, 42
Fleets (1): 24
Supply Centers (5): 24, 25, 36, 13, 41
Announcements
- New feature! Faction leaders are now allowed to give provinces in their possession a name. Provinces may still be referenced to by their number at any time. When sending through orders, you still use province numbers. You may use province names on any other occasion. I will use province names in the narrative as well. If you capture a named province, you must have it in your possession for at least 2 turns before you are allowed to rename it.
- Standardised adjudicator posts! For those who found my rather random lay-out irritating, I've busied myself with making sure that will no longer happen. My posts will now have a uniform lay-out. Also, narrative will from now on only be added on end of turn reports.
- New rule discussion: Right of way! The idea is to reduce the influence of randomness in determining which of two or more conflicting moves are made. Picture this situation: Province A and Province B both have an army in them, and they are hostile towards eachother. A attacks B and B attacks A in the same turn, with equal support. I flip a coin, A is allowed to attack, B defends. B wins the battle, and A retreats to Province A again. The next turn, both factions make exactly the same move, and normally, the randomness rule comes into play again. This is where I suggest to introduce right of way. If an army B succesfully defended against another army A in the preceding turn, AND if army B also gave an attack order on province A in that same turn, which was cancelled by the randomness rule, army B's attack order on province A will override army A's attack order on Province B. Right of way only lasts for 1 turn. The support rule overrides the right of way rule. It is important that the situation remains unchanged: any changes to support (even if both get equal support) nullify the right of way rule. This rule is not yet in place! It remains a suggestion for now, so please give your opinions on this.
edit1: added right of way, pluralised armies in battle reports when support was included.
note: IFoR will have to settle with a sunglasses-emoticon in the summary in stead of the number of provinces. I ticked on 'Don't use smileys', but my post is ignoring me D:. Eh, a space in between should do fine as well.
- Status