[Discuss] "last seen" troopleader list feature removed?

[LilWolf]

Loren Schmidt wrote:
> The logic is this.  You're punishing people for 'refusing' to follow 
> orders, not disobeying them.  

Why shouldn't people be punished for 'refusing' to follow orders? If 
your lord or king ordered you to do something, you bloody well didn't 
say "No, I'd rather do this" and expect to get away without any punishment.

> He made it quite explicit.  For instance, 
> lets say I'm in the capital chilling, training my troops.  I'm ordered to 
> take my men and go fight some battle.  I'd much prefer to train my men, or 
> my personal favorite is when I'm ordered to recruit and I'll just sit 
> there and say I don't have golds.  

So what you're saying is everyone should be free to do what the hell 
they want and completely disregard any orders given?

> It's also a pretty tall assumption that 
> someone reads all of their letters. 

It's not a tall assumption to expect everyone to read what the council 
members/liege/marshal of the realm order.

>  I read maybe half, and normally only 
> personally addressed letters.  I occasionally even skip orders b/c I know 
> I'd be left out in the middle of no-where if I'm not logging in for a few 
> turns afterwards.  In essence, people are fining too much.
>   

I really have never, ever witnessed this excessive fining/banning some 
of you are on about. Reading the comments on this list, neither have 
many others.

> Everyone forgets that these are nobles, not soldiers.  They are in command 
> of their units, not the general.  Think Braveheart when the nobles ride 
> from the field, rather than fight with Wallace.
>   

That's a poor example. Wallace was a peasant/petty lord, not a 
general/king or what ever.

-- 
Join the Last.fm group for Battlemaster
http://www.last.fm/group/Battlemaster