Children of the Fatherland: MP conversion game

[FrozenWall]

You took land from an AI'd player nation.

I took the toe, as per the rules allowing me to do so, Rome was as already stated repeatedly a mistake that would have to be returned. Orbitello I took from the Pope.

You also occupied the entire nation.

As already stated, it refused every peace after the first 2 I got. And because of the crusade it re-dowed me 1 month after every peace so even if I had gotten one it wouldn't have mattered.

When a player nation is AI'd, it should be left alone no matter what it does. If it DoWs you, just defend yourself, don't go attacking it and occupying it.

It was annexing and vassalizing my vassals! My vassals were running around getting my mp killed! I will not sit around while the AI screws with my realm. I said we should have edited away the crusades because they made the AI always attack me when we started this game, but was overruled. Should Jakalo return he would have his realm back, the worst thing that has happened is we both have lost half our mp

 

[Sid Meier]

We'll come back to this.

Ike sorta overeacting aside if you are managing to expand into Italy like say the Lombardy and Venetia regions (decent acquisitions if I may say so) I think it would go a long way towards making croatia more viable for eu3 than getting Kiev would, espeially considering the current crisis russia is in.

 

[Foelsgaard]

You took land from an AI'd player nation. That's bad enough. You also occupied the entire nation. That's not good either. When a player nation is AI'd, it should be left alone no matter what it does. If it DoWs you, just defend yourself, don't go attacking it and occupying it. That's borderline despicable.

Oh give it a rest. Having your lands occupied doesn't do anything, in fact it prevents the AI from screwing you over. It's preferable to having it waste all its manpower on pointless wars with Egypt and Frosty is after all trying to peace out as soon as he can.

But he better at least give Rome back.

 

[Foelsgaard]

A little goodie for the peanuts. Income data from the latest (blobified) save!

EDIT: War taxes was screwing the numbers a bit. Uploaded a cleaner version.

 

[fasquardon]

And where are Persias friends in all of this? Why stuck in Italy of course! The AI Toulousian Emperors spend the entire session launching crusades on poor, poor Caliphate!

How are you riding out all the excoms you're taking for your European wars?

fasquardon

 

[von_Rundstedt]

He's been uphappy with the way several people have acted for some time.

I think you might have mistunderstood me there. I disliked decisions made by players in which I saw no reason or logic. Wars for "balance" instead of self-interest, for example. This had nothing to do with my decision, though.

 

[FrozenWall]

much better income data than Frosty posted

Look at Bohemia! And the HRE is richer than me despite rebelling vassals and losing Italian land!

How are you riding out all the excoms you're taking for your European wars?

Excomms? I'm Muslim! I eat Popes for dinner!

HRE to Croatia/France

I would much prefer a new perm. Absent that I say we find a more amicable split.

 

[Emperor Ike]

 

[Sid Meier]

I think you might have mistunderstood me there. I disliked decisions made by players in which I saw no reason or logic. Wars for "balance" instead of self-interest, for example. This had nothing to do with my decision, though.

How is a war for balance different from a war of self interest?

 

[King of Men]

You took land from an AI'd player nation. That's bad enough. You also occupied the entire nation. That's not good either. When a player nation is AI'd, it should be left alone no matter what it does. If it DoWs you, just defend yourself, don't go attacking it and occupying it. That's borderline despicable.

The rule for AId nations calls for restraint in imposing peace treaties upon it, and Frosty has shown restraint. The AI attacked him three times; the first time he took two provinces, which is indeed restraint. The second time he took Rome by misclick, and promised to give it back. The third time the AI refused to peace him out even when he offered it land; I don't believe 'restraint' calls for allowing AI troops to occupy your own lands, so what was he supposed to do? The occupation of Italy certainly looks bad if you load up the save, but Frosty has promised to end that war by giving back Rome; so it is not bad sportsmanship, it is an AI screwup. The HRE will be just as playable next week as it was this week.

As for attacking subs, a sub is there precisely for the purpose of playing the realm so that others can interact with it. He is not a placeholder for avoiding AI damage.

How are you riding out all the excomms you're taking for your European wars?

Nobody has complained of any breach of treaty; consequently no excomms have been imposed. Do you know of a treaty that Frosty has broken?

 

[OrangeYoshi]

The rule for AId nations calls for restraint in imposing peace treaties upon it, and Frosty has shown restraint. The AI attacked him three times; the first time he took two provinces, which is indeed restraint. The second time he took Rome by misclick, and promised to give it back. The third time the AI refused to peace him out even when he offered it land; I don't believe 'restraint' calls for allowing AI troops to occupy your own lands, so what was he supposed to do? The occupation of Italy certainly looks bad if you load up the save, but Frosty has promised to end that war by giving back Rome; so it is not bad sportsmanship, it is an AI screwup. The HRE will be just as playable next week as it was this week.

The rules are irrelevant in terms of sportsmanship. You shouldn't have to have a rule to tell you that you to not take advantage of a player not being able to be there.

What he should've done was simply defend his provinces and leave it at that.

 

[Sid Meier]

The rule for AId nations calls for restraint in imposing peace treaties upon it, and Frosty has shown restraint. The AI attacked him three times; the first time he took two provinces, which is indeed restraint. The second time he took Rome by misclick, and promised to give it back. The third time the AI refused to peace him out even when he offered it land; I don't believe 'restraint' calls for allowing AI troops to occupy your own lands, so what was he supposed to do? The occupation of Italy certainly looks bad if you load up the save, but Frosty has promised to end that war by giving back Rome; so it is not bad sportsmanship, it is an AI screwup. The HRE will be just as playable next week as it was this week.

As for attacking subs, a sub is there precisely for the purpose of playing the realm so that others can interact with it. He is not a placeholder for avoiding AI damage.



Nobody has complained of any breach of treaty; consequently no excomms have been imposed. Do you know of a treaty that Frosty has broken?

The problem with attacking subs is that its happened basically day one with no time to get acquainted with the territory or to figure out treaties, etc, sportsmanship requires at least like 30minutes to an hour.

 

[BlitzMartinDK]

The rules are irrelevant in terms of sportsmanship. You shouldn't have to have a rule to tell you that you to not take advantage of a player not being able to be there.

What he should've done was simply defend his provinces and leave it at that.

...being away : was he AWOL or on planned leave?

Simply defending doesn't work in this case because of extended coastlines...Either invaders would be sunk at sea (buuhh he is being mean to the AI..) or they would have landed somewhere on his coast, quite possibly where no defenders were present..

And I understand some of vR's argument. I myself would only start a "war of balance" if it would mean me getting a better chance of winning. -that said, a better chance of winning can both be reached by "downing" the leading players (if they are not me ), but also by building "friendships", or misdirecting ppl. as to my intensions.
But vR -just because I do not see the logic in somebodys actions, doesn't mean there IS no logic there...

 

[King of Men]

The rules are irrelevant in terms of sportsmanship. You shouldn't have to have a rule to tell you that you to not take advantage of a player not being able to be there.

What advantage has Frosty taken? Occupying Italy will do the HRE no harm, and he has promised to give back Rome. I think you're being rather unreasonable, here. Requiring a player to just allow the AI to invade him is not sportsmanship. Again I ask: What harm has Frosty done to Italy while Italy was AI?

The problem with attacking me is that I tend to lose the ensuing war, and that's just not fair.

There, fixed that for you. The war would have gone the same in 1302 as it did in 1300.

 

[Sid Meier]

What advantage has Frosty taken? Occupying Italy will do the HRE no harm, and he has promised to give back Rome. I think you're being rather unreasonable, here. Requiring a player to just allow the AI to invade him is not sportsmanship. Again I ask: What harm has Frosty done to Italy while Italy was AI?



There, fixed that for you. The war would have gone the same in 1302 as it did in 1300.

Except thats a lie? A little more time and I could have confirmed where the troops locations were, the state of the realm, that the inheritance is safe and who allies were and their level of commitment to an all out war; I've no such time to confirm any of this in either time I've subbed and been immediately dowed, and this had huge ramifications in the Italy war when I didn't even realize Denmark was actually helping.

I don't think you thought this through very far.


Also, as for your initial question the harm is this: Suppose he peaces, demobs, waits a month and then redows or someone else dows the moment the war is over giving no time for recovery in a war that the AI started?

 

[BlitzMartinDK]

What advantage has Frosty taken? Occupying Italy will do the HRE no harm, and he has promised to give back Rome. I think you're being rather unreasonable, here. Requiring a player to just allow the AI to invade him is not sportsmanship. Again I ask: What harm has Frosty done to Italy while Italy was AI?



There, fixed that for you. The war would have gone the same in 1302 as it did in 1300.

LOL's!
btw..did he loot the provinces or something? -like ike did before loosing in poland?

 

[OrangeYoshi]

What advantage has Frosty taken? Occupying Italy will do the HRE no harm, and he has promised to give back Rome. I think you're being rather unreasonable, here. Requiring a player to just allow the AI to invade him is not sportsmanship. Again I ask: What harm has Frosty done to Italy while Italy was AI?

Let's see... Is Frosty taking any money from the war members? He has indeed stolen 2 or 3 provinces off of Italy. Assuming we keep this line of thinking into EU3, Italy would be bankrupt after this amount of time.

He should defend himself, but he shouldn't go and fully occupy the AI.

 

[FrozenWall]

He should defend himself, but he shouldn't go and fully occupy the AI.

But the first war the AI was annexing my vassals! Annexing my vassals! It screws my DG up, and forces me to go on the offensive to regain them as I cannot move troops fast enought to stop them from finishing sieges on my weak desert vassals. 1st war I suddenly realized it had occupied Acre and I had 80.000 Italians ravaging through my Syrian vassals. My army strength has been cut to the level that Croatia is a threat and my treasury muchly depleted despite calling the estates.

Jakalo was AWOL, and his AI insisted on repeatedly invading me. Now since it refused peace this last war (AI logic seemed to have got hung up..) one of our realms was going to get occupied, and it aint mine. My realm should not suffer for other players not showing up for sessions, yet it has done so to quite an extent.

Is Frosty taking any money from the war members?

I gave the AI gold for peace the 2 first wars. As you can see I have not peaced with his vassals, most of whom gave their gold away in our last war anyways. The king of HRE seems to have squandered the Imperial treasury, but not to my benefit.

I have indeed taken 2 provs in the toe, they are worth 2 and 3 basetax respectively. At a rate of 1,5 basetax lost per war started I doubt the HRE will be done for by EU3. I did not even demand to keep Rome, which I could have gotten away with. As you can see from Foels EU3 screen the HRE is still noticeably richer than I. So I really fail to see where my overreach lies.

 

[OrangeYoshi]

My main point is that while in CK you are not wrecking the nation, merely being annoying by treating the AI like that. No one in the EU3 community would ever treat an AI'd nation like that. If this kind of treatment of an AI nation is continued into the EU3 phase, the nation will be broken and would need major edits just to become playable again.

Frosty should be forced to return all provinces he took from the AI if a Italy perm is found. He didn't take them from a player, he took them from a half-brained replacement of a player who unfortunatly couldn't make the session.

 

[OrangeYoshi]

But the first war the AI was annexing my vassals! Annexing my vassals! It screws my DG up, and forces me to go on the offensive to regain them as I cannot move troops fast enought to stop them from finishing sieges on my weak desert vassals. 1st war I suddenly realized it had occupied Acre and I had 80.000 Italians ravaging through my Syrian vassals.

Retaking your own land is one thing. That is fine. Occupying his entire nation is another.

Jakalo was AWOL, and his AI insisted on repeatedly invading me. Now since it refused peace this last war (AI logic seemed to have got hung up..) one of our realms is going to get occupied, and it aint mine. My realm should not suffer for other players not showing up for sessions.

Your realm didn't suffer. You had some border skirmishes you could easily win. His realm is suffering. Unless his troops somehow regain manpower while occupied, what is the nation going to do when you do actually peace?