Re: Caelum available
 

Arralen, you're an "M", so I can forward it to you. (The M's are emailed together in one file.)

Hmm...the email Panther sent me showed you at gmx.net. Which is right? I'll check the Wyrms wiki. Heh, you didn't put your right domain in your call for help. And...aha...maybe your spam filter? Panther's most recent email had no subject line. I'll stick [Dom-cow] in (I usually use [CoW] personally). It'll be coming out of earthlink.net.

And while we're on the subject...puffyn, did you get your new turn 1? Panther's email showed what I don't think is your email address for Mictlan. It's not puff at gmail. I can forward your turn, too.

Re: Caelum available
 

Djo, I got a turn one with my god in it, if that's what you mean. Panther sent it separately. I think he should add a subject line like "CoW turn x" if it's not too much trouble.

And yes, it's not puff, it's puffyn, of course. Can't have four letter gmail account names anyhow.

Re: Caelum available
 

I suspect Panther was just overbusy before he left on his trip.

I was just being overly obscure with your email address.

Host Labor
 

I figured out a sassy but simple workflow for sending out player turns by email with OS X (Tiger) for Mac, in case anybody wants it. It reduced my work by about 75% (me guessing without really measuring). It creates and addresses all of the emails with the correct attachments. All I need to do is add the date of the turn deadline and the turn number, which is very easy cutting and pasting. (It should be able to enter the date, etc., too, but I have not figured that out yet.)

Pasha

Re: Host Labor
 

Well, I am back.

But of course, there is a turn missing: Caelum, played by Zooko. Why am I not surprised? There is always one...

Anyway, I will wait until tomorrow to host, hoping I get the 17th turn file sent to me.

Panther

late turn
 

Sorry about that folks.

Re: late turn
 

Off with his head, says I!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/stupid.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

Could you post it or email me? I've done one for the player side, and I'm curious what you did for a host.

If I had infinite time, and a lot less RSI, I'd write a cross-platform, GUI Python application to manage PBEM. It'd make billions!

Re: Host Labor
 

Hehe, I've had the thought 'cept I don't know Python. I figured it would be a fun way to learn it though.

Re: Host Labor
 

Turn 2 is out.
Deadline Sunday 8 PM MDT. We are now officially on our Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday schedule.

Also, we had our first wyrm death. Ermor took the big risk of attacking blind on Turn 1.

Re: Host Labor
 

Heh. I noticed that. With the research setting we have, I might have waited a turn to pick a better target, especially with indies 8 and no one else likely to have research for expansion for at least another 2 or 3 turns.

Alas, poor wyrm - he ate something that disagreed with him. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

I thought quantum was playing Ermor... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

Going in on turn 0 was not that huge of a risk, worked in 9/10 test games. Scouting around would not have saved him, actually, he just had the extreme misfortune of getting a chest wound right out of the gate.

EDIT: And an unrest event to boot. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

What'd he go up against though? Xbows, heavy cav/knights, or barbs? Had to get hit pretty hard to take a wound, I would think.

Re: Host Labor
 

Yeah, it was a lance.

Re: Host Labor
 

My people are experimenting with a new educational program; we call it "No Tuatha Left Behind".
Results are expected by year 75.

announcement
 

The Harab Host, having driven out the despicable Arch-Seraphs, are now engaged in a peaceable program of research and development and giving orders to our troops in a timely manner.

Have a nice day!

Re: Host Labor
 

Something must be done about this... an outrage! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rant.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

I think we should make little rubber bracelets and sell em to raise funds and increase public awareness for the plight of the poor, godless souls of Ermor.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

I noticed Ermor got the mercs that month. if my SCs weren't so exxpensive I would have bid on them myself.

in all my trial runs with the settings, I found waiting a turn to scout was more effective than rushing in blindly. at least with inde strength set to 8.

Re: Host Labor
 

That is certainly true... if you don't start with body ethereal. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

Normal research, I'd rush out on turn 1. But with very difficult, not many people can start taking provinces before turn 4 or later with their pretender, so waiting a turn doesn't significantly hurt. Losing your pretender on turn 1 though, with no priests to recall him, because you couldn't go for LI/HI instead of HC/knights? Priceless. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Host Labor
 

An extra province is an extra province, research does not really change the equation.

Re: Host Labor
 

As an aside, where in Alaska?

Re: Host Labor
 

The Matanuska-Susitna Valley.

Turn 2
 

I am missing the following turns:
Caelum
Ermor
Vanheim

Re: Host Labor
 

he can always prophet someone and have them start calling back. what would really suck is losing a pretender and a prophet on the second turn, with no priests to call back.

Re: Host Labor
 

Now if you also lost your temple in an earthquake... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
Quantum, that must be nice... My sister's up in Fairbanks, is why I asked.

Re: Host Labor
 

losing pretender+prophet+temple early on has hjappened to me before, thank god(no pun intended) that you can make another prophet a few turns later (it was as mictain in single player this happened to me where it really hurt because all my mages were priest so i couldnt recruit any during the time)

Proposition 3
 

Fellow Wyrms!

There is a proposition still pending concerning the legality of lances. Only half of the Council has voted!

Lord Pasha of Ulm

Re: Proposition 3
 

which is one nay away from being veto'd

Re: Proposition 3
 

It looks like we will be having 2 stales:

1. The wyrm-less nation of Ermor.
2. The absent wrym of Caelum.

I will be hosting about when game 2 of the world series ends.

Panther

Re: Proposition 3
 

Turn 3 has hosted and all players got their moves done. It turns out that I had Zooko's file all along, but he is using some kind of totally weird mail format which threw me for a loop. Luckily, a simple renaming to caelum.2h worked just fine.

News:
1. At least two more wyrms died.
2. Seven nations took a province.
3. Lots of national troops died all over the place.
4. These settings are definitely the hardest I have ever played in an MP game.

Don't forget that you must announce when your wyrm has died and also when he is resurrected for voting purposes.

The next turn is due on Tuesday evening.

Re: Proposition 3
 

The wyrm Suli-Krom has taken a temporary leave of absence. The vanjarl Vile will take over administrative duties until further notice. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Re: Proposition 3
 

Leviatan is temporaly in the pub. He shall be back.

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

I, a lowly spectator, have a question for the Council (thought diminished in number may it not be so in wisdom). The Wiki rules section 16 specify stealthy actions as fair-game. But, if a stealthy intruder is accosted by province defence and is well equipped enough to win, is that considered a hostile (rogue-making) act, or would that takeover be considered like a 'revolt' case and not a cause for action? If it is considered a hostile act, then by whom, the stealthy actor who may just have been passing through, or the defenders who in a sense initiated the conflict?

Sill

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

An excellent question. It would have to be considered a hostile act of the stealth actor since they are the one truly taking "action" in this sense. If it were any other way then you should just make stealth thugs and put them into enemy provinces until they get "caught". As for whether this makes you go rogue I couldnt say... its really a tough call.

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

I'd have to say it'd be a neutral act -- act of god, so to speak. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Otherwise any number of scouting mechanisms are essentially unusable for fear of going rogue : Jotun scouts (which can easily win against low PD without being equipped), black servants, Pan's mages, and all of the stealthy unique demons / devils.

Edit : Hmm. Sneaking units supposedly don't get caught by PD less than 11, and I doubt the Jotun scout could win except against pitiful PD (Machaka perhaps). But the black servant, stealthy mages, and devils still could easily do so.

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

but what if someone tried to passa stealthy army (say villians) through nation A's province to preform an attack on nation:B's province and his army gets discovered while sneaking (but he had gotten a council ruling to attack nation b?)

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

I like to think "accidental" battles happened quite a bit in medieval times. IN any case, aren't spies and such considered to be not affiliated with the government proper? Perhaps they are part of an independent security contract. They are villains after all. However, Vanheim has no official say in this until its wyrm returns from its spiritual journey.

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

If a spectator may offer a sugestion?

If you don't want to riak taking a province with a stealthy unit, simply set him to retreat.

Sure you'll lose him if discovered, unless on your own borders, but you can scout to your heart's content without fear of going rogue.

Actually reading the rules, any stealthy attack without permission is considered a violation. Taking the province is not necessary. Since the game considers catching a scout to be an attack on the province by the scout, the rules would have to be amended to allow non-attacking stealth units to be caught without consequences. Orders to retreat should be enough to signify non-hostile intent.

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

Being a wimpy little scout with no equipment ought to be another clue as to non-invasion intent.

However - assassination is explicitly allowed. An assassin can't very well be scripted to retreat, and might be equipped. If caught, and if strong enough to defeat the residents, that "legal" assassin could trigger a rouge declaration.

Perhaps a better solution: no one would be declared rogue after inadvertantly taking a province (by virtue of getting caught by patrols) IF they immediately allow the province to be retaken and repay any gold and gem income they obtained. Profuse apologies by fawning diplomats may also be required, at the discretion of the offended party.

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

I had thought about this issue when I first wrote the game rules. Moving a stealthy army into enemy territory is not against any explicit rule as long as they do not actually attack a controlled province. Keep in mind that discovering a stealthy army is really an attack by the party which owns the province, not the stealthy party.

If a sleathy army gets caught and a battle ensues, that I believe it would fall on the involved parties to resolve it as best they can. Most likely, there would be a Council proposal (or even 2 proposals!) on how to handle the situation if the stealthy army were to win the battle. Surely a group of intelligent wyrms could decide such a wee issue, right?

With the right bribe to Ronan the Mighty Centaur-ruling Wyrm of Pangaea, I think ANY issue could be easily resolved in Council http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

I agree with panther here. not hostile to be attacked by local defenses when minding your own business in a stealthy way. Should you win, I guess the wyrm losing the province should make a case why he deserves the province after his forces attacked the scout, who was not breaking any council rules by simply being stealthy.

my vote is certainly buyable as well.

Although I survived my turn two assault, I was not one of the lucky 7 :/

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

Be sure and check out Proposition 4 on the subject of stealth.

Re: Proposition 5
 

Prop 5 is open for voting as well.

Re: Proposition 5
 

prop 5 has already earned enough nays to be rejected

Re: Proposition 5
 

I am missing turns from Ermor and Mictlan. Hosting will be in a couple of hours.

Re: Proposition 5
 

Turn 4 has been sent out. No wryms showed up dead in the HoF this time. Several nations took a province. Man has 2 VPs. Lots more troops died.

Deadline is Thursday 8 PM MDT.

Re: Proposed Rules V2
 

The presumption in many of these posts is that the stealth actor is not being malicious. Consider the situation where nation A has a very valuable province which for one reason or another has not been castled. Nation B realizes this and *decks out* an assassin and just sits it in the valuable province until such time as it is eventually "accidentally" caught by nation A's PD. Nation A objects and nation B simply says that it was accidental, the assassin's target was elsewhere. Since no one can gainsay that claim, given the sentiment of the above posts, nation B would now have legitmate control of that province. Clearly an exploit but there is no game-enforcable way of detecting it.