[Discuss] Moving the Capital

[Anthony Cerqueira]

On 10/6/06, Jason Sweeney <jasonsweeney79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wouldn't this be easier to circumvent?
>
> Remove someone from power for a day,let the nobles all swear to the
> Duchy nearest the border... then poof.
>
> On 10/6/06, Anthony Cerqueira <zol.tanzet at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Shina <shina at gmx.at> wrote:
> > > [This followup was posted to alt.games.battlemaster.discuss and a copy
> > > was sent to the cited author.]
> > >
> > > Please stop that bickering over the intentions of OR. It is really
> > > senseless.
> > > Because you all are right, the capital move in Old Rancagua from Oroya
> > > to Kazakh was because of all the mentioned reasons, and even more.
> > >
> > > In no specific order:
> > > · strategicaly for the war against Oligarch
> > > · RP about the end of the bloody civil war and the churches
> > > · and we kept loosing Poitiers (often), so we had to deal with that
> > > somehow too
> > >
> > > I was on the council when both moves happend, so I should know. For me
> > > it is funny, that I don't remember the strategical part of our reasons
> > > very well, but it was there. Go and check the OR newspaper in the wiki
> > > and you will find some answers.
> > >
> > > Like Gloria said, the orignial plan was to move the capital to
> Ashforth
> > > as soon as it was ours. Only because of region maintenance problems.
> It
> > > sucked for our RP, because we had never a tie to Ashforth. So we
> decided
> > > to move the capital to Kazakh first, and RP it (have a look at
> Gloria's
> > > message about the RP that happend). This first move was done by
> > > Thalanteus.
> > > Of course, the council knew that it will be moved again to Ashforth,
> as
> > > it is the most centralized location of a OR city. And it happend
> later,
> > > under the reign of King Dekion.
> > >
> > >
> > > To get back now to the original topic, at this time, no one (I know)
> was
> > > aware that we should not move a capital for strategic reasons. So we
> > > talked freely about it (in Sint too), and estimated the benefits and
> > > possible problems.
> > >
> > > The point is, it was never an issue before some people complained
> about
> > > the two moves on Beluaterra. I am not sure if it was the first time of
> > > such a complaint, but I know that I have never heard before that it
> > > would be concidered abuse. Which is ridiculous in my opinion, because
> > > the option is there and can be used freely without a word of warning!
> (I
> > > think there is a hint ingame, telling you that moving the capital is a
> > > serious issue. Maybe a ruler can post it, so we all know about the
> exact
> > > wording?)
> > >
> > > And like Tom said not only once, he does not want the rules to be
> > > interpreted. But this is demanded from the common player now. We
> should
> > > interpret the following rule, taken from the FAQ on the Wiki (it is
> the
> > > only thing I found there about this all):
> > >
> > > "Why can we only recruit in the capital? It's not realistic, I'd like
> to
> > > propose changing it to...
> > >    Thanks for the proposal, but we have had this about 35 times. Per
> > > month. For the past four years. The answer has been the same every
> time,
> > > and it will be the same again: Recruitment happens in capitals only
> and
> > > that's it. This is a very serious gameplay issue that has been very
> > > carefully considered the first five times or so people brought it up.
> > > It's not going to change."
> > >
> > > Furthermore the very first line on the starting page of BM informs me
> > > that I am playing a strategy game, merged with roleplay.
> > >
> > > For me it's really astonishing. I am playing a strategy game, but I am
> > > abusing it if I move my capital out of strategic reasons.
> > > I honestly don't understand the sense behind this abuse thing. If I am
> > > just too stuipd, please explain it to me.
> > >
> > >
> > > There are three solutions to this:
> > > - allow capital moves without restrictions, optional the penalties can
> > > be increased
> > > - allow it, but add written rules about it somewhere
> > > - remove the option completely
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Unsubscribing and other list options:
> > >
> > http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > >
> >
> > "Why can we only recruit in the capital? It's not realistic, I'd like to
> > propose changing it to...
> >    Thanks for the proposal, but we have had this about 35 times. Per
> > month. For the past four years. The answer has been the same every time,
> > and it will be the same again: Recruitment happens in capitals only and
> > that's it. This is a very serious gameplay issue that has been very
> > carefully considered the first five times or so people brought it up.
> > It's not going to change."
> >
> >
> > Total aside but there was one time that alternate recruitment was given
> a
> > serious consideration: Duchy centered recruitment, where you could only
> > recruit in your duchy from RC in your duchy. That idea was accepted but
> > Tom's been busy with other cool things.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Unsubscribing and other list options:
> > http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribing and other list options:
> http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>


Well technically that would be obvious exploitation of the game mechanics,
but since the idea was never expanded upon I can't comment on what
safeguards there would be to stop such a thing.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://news.battlemaster.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20061006/4657f304/attachment.htm