-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Too bad I'm not at home or I would have been able to sub Venice again. Although... maybe ghosting was a good idea after French and OE threats last week 
.
And what's the story with Burgundy? The french player looks quite big so I can't understand the prob with Burgundy. A counterpart is needed to avoid the BoP.
.And what's the story with Burgundy? The french player looks quite big so I can't understand the prob with Burgundy. A counterpart is needed to avoid the BoP.
What hapened:
Everything was going fine. I had given gold to Poland in order to DoW Burgundy to keep Burgundy from being annexed by Austria. If Burgundy was sucessful at war till 84, the event would never ever fire. As the event states, France and Austria need to exist. And they obviously exist. Burgundy cannot be at war, which it was. Then, after a rehost, Burgundy which was at war, is inherited by Austria via event. Conclusion:
The host MUST had a diferent event, in order to trigger this
After speaking with both Sid and Bodvar:
Bodvar says he did give the trigger to Sid, exactly as i posted in this thread.
Sid tells me the trigger did indeed have atwar=no
Something is deeply wrong in here. I do not give a crap about the BoP. We will not simply hand over cheap stuff or give easy edits to certain nations to keep the BoP in check. Just too stupid.
EDITED: And i am still waiting for an answer, which the GM is being unable to give.
Everything was going fine. I had given gold to Poland in order to DoW Burgundy to keep Burgundy from being annexed by Austria. If Burgundy was sucessful at war till 84, the event would never ever fire. As the event states, France and Austria need to exist. And they obviously exist. Burgundy cannot be at war, which it was. Then, after a rehost, Burgundy which was at war, is inherited by Austria via event. Conclusion:
The host MUST had a diferent event, in order to trigger this
After speaking with both Sid and Bodvar:
Bodvar says he did give the trigger to Sid, exactly as i posted in this thread.
Sid tells me the trigger did indeed have atwar=no
Something is deeply wrong in here. I do not give a crap about the BoP. We will not simply hand over cheap stuff or give easy edits to certain nations to keep the BoP in check. Just too stupid.
EDITED: And i am still waiting for an answer, which the GM is being unable to give.
admiral drake said:-bad connection with host or something
-wrong event file(saw that 1 in a age of randomization game ended up with 0random events the entire session for me
I do not know what was the problem, but we already did this in ORR and we never experienced such. The host did indeed have diferent events compared to everyone else, and perhaps that was what caused BUR to be annexed by austria (together with the wierdo red !!!)
Either way, the most sensible thing to do would be edit Burgundy in, and enact the war with Poland again (along with deleting the cores Austria got).
I need to discuss this with martmol before any action is made.
I have no idea what happened there tbh, I don't believe someone did anything on purpose. It is me or Sid who have done something wrong here, and likely by mistake.
Before people demands anything to be done, I will state what would have been done had the event worked as it should. As stated earlier, Sid would receive an event that forces inheritance to go to Austria, but I would forcefire after session no matter what. So I would have forcefired the event now, and edit out any wars and controlled provs other powers migth have to avoid them getting provs they shouldn't get because of the atwar = no trigger.
Reason for this is rule #2, and that I consider keeping Burgundy at war to inhibit inheritance as an exploit, and the rule about forcefireing has not been altered either. As I see it, Poland has lost some income because of looting and should get some repairs for that. I don't want to punish Austria by taking away things, espescially when I am unable to make a fair estimate of what Austria has gained on this. I feel it to be exploitish to keep Burgundy at war after 1476 anyways, so rule #2 applies here too IMO.
I don't claim to be rigth, but if you have comments, please share them, but keep it civil.
And again, no decision will be made before martmol returns.
Also of note:
Everyone except selim gets on-time cookie (martmol's sub was on time but couldn't join).
What to be done with venice will be decided when martmol returns, but IMO, we won't ghost it next session.
I have no idea what happened there tbh, I don't believe someone did anything on purpose. It is me or Sid who have done something wrong here, and likely by mistake.
Before people demands anything to be done, I will state what would have been done had the event worked as it should. As stated earlier, Sid would receive an event that forces inheritance to go to Austria, but I would forcefire after session no matter what. So I would have forcefired the event now, and edit out any wars and controlled provs other powers migth have to avoid them getting provs they shouldn't get because of the atwar = no trigger.
Reason for this is rule #2, and that I consider keeping Burgundy at war to inhibit inheritance as an exploit, and the rule about forcefireing has not been altered either. As I see it, Poland has lost some income because of looting and should get some repairs for that. I don't want to punish Austria by taking away things, espescially when I am unable to make a fair estimate of what Austria has gained on this. I feel it to be exploitish to keep Burgundy at war after 1476 anyways, so rule #2 applies here too IMO.
I don't claim to be rigth, but if you have comments, please share them, but keep it civil.
And again, no decision will be made before martmol returns.
Also of note:
Everyone except selim gets on-time cookie (martmol's sub was on time but couldn't join).
What to be done with venice will be decided when martmol returns, but IMO, we won't ghost it next session.
Heh, don't worry about the loot. Poland doesn't need any repairations for loss of that.
Van Engel said:Heh, don't worry about the loot. Poland doesn't need any repairations for loss of that.
won't get any then
I already paid 600d for a war that lasted nothing more then 1 year...
Well, the thing is:
If Burgundy Inheritance event would be forced fired to austria post session, i would be sure i ocupied all Burgundy provinces so i would inherit it myself. If the event would fire normally, i would keep Burgundy at war no matter what. And no, i do not see this as an exploit. Actually, giving Burgundy cheaply like this is kinda stupid imo.
And please LJ, spare me. Do not say that i am just saying this is stupid because i am Austria's enemy. Not only that is absurd, but ridiculous as well.
Well, the thing is:
If Burgundy Inheritance event would be forced fired to austria post session, i would be sure i ocupied all Burgundy provinces so i would inherit it myself. If the event would fire normally, i would keep Burgundy at war no matter what. And no, i do not see this as an exploit. Actually, giving Burgundy cheaply like this is kinda stupid imo.
And please LJ, spare me. Do not say that i am just saying this is stupid because i am Austria's enemy. Not only that is absurd, but ridiculous as well.
Yeah what ever dude, but leaving the game just like that when things didnt go your way, shows just how much you care for this game, as if we hadnt had enough slowdowns and rehosts. That crap could have been solved edits after session, if needed.
And rules clearly state it is forcefired to Austria, preventing that ingame with war, or by occupying the provinces to prevent Austria from getting anything is just gamey.
You had plenty of time to grab rest of Burgundy had you wished so, trying to sneak around the rules and triggers like this is just lame.
And rules clearly state it is forcefired to Austria, preventing that ingame with war, or by occupying the provinces to prevent Austria from getting anything is just gamey.
You had plenty of time to grab rest of Burgundy had you wished so, trying to sneak around the rules and triggers like this is just lame.
I asked the GM in the game about this thing. Then it came to my mind he was using hamachi and couldnt hear me so i spoke with him in ICQ. I did not get any response. I screamed in the game and had 2 fools saying that i was wrong, that the event would be triggered even if Burgundy was at war. And now you can see that i am correct.
Conclusion: IF i say something is correct, it is because it mostly is. I wouldnt say such and leave in the game if i wasnt correct.
And lastly:
There is nothing in the rules that state that when we end a session closest to 1476 i will be forced to WP Burgundy if i own all their provinces and there is nothing that states that i cannot keep Burgundy at war to avoid their anexation by Austria.
Anyone with common sense can see that i am absolutely right. You cannot force me for something that wasnt in the rules.
Conclusion: IF i say something is correct, it is because it mostly is. I wouldnt say such and leave in the game if i wasnt correct.
And lastly:
There is nothing in the rules that state that when we end a session closest to 1476 i will be forced to WP Burgundy if i own all their provinces and there is nothing that states that i cannot keep Burgundy at war to avoid their anexation by Austria.
Anyone with common sense can see that i am absolutely right. You cannot force me for something that wasnt in the rules.
Again, not only you are being wrong but absurd. Check the rules again and you might see who is in-fact correct.
IF i owned all Burgundian provinces, even if Burgundy choosed the event where austria inherits Burgundy, i would be the one getting it.
And to answer you: i did not get Burgundy sooner because i did not want such massive BB. Getting provinces via inheritance costs only 0.25 BB.
just to a little something to add:
I consider gaining provs by controlling them while an inheritance spawns a bug, if martmol agrees with me it's end of discussion
And as I am fairly sure that you know that it was my intension all the time that Austria was supposed to get whatever was left of Burgundy when we approached the time when the event would fire. Giving lowlands to France badboy-free is something I never would do.
I consider gaining provs by controlling them while an inheritance spawns a bug, if martmol agrees with me it's end of discussion
And as I am fairly sure that you know that it was my intension all the time that Austria was supposed to get whatever was left of Burgundy when we approached the time when the event would fire. Giving lowlands to France badboy-free is something I never would do.
This is absurd. I honestly ask you to check the Bug Thread. Getting provinces easily that will be inherited by someone else, via war, is NOT a bug.
And no, i wasnt fairly sure of that. The rules DO NOT state anything regarding that, nor did you say it. You DID NOT say anything and i am not a witch to read what goes through your mind.
And no, i wasnt fairly sure of that. The rules DO NOT state anything regarding that, nor did you say it. You DID NOT say anything and i am not a witch to read what goes through your mind.
The GM has stated clearly several times beforehand that he intended to fire the inheritance in favour of austria no matter what. Trying to blatanty disregard him in such a matter and way should be reason to exclude you from the game alone, not to mention the way you departed or the fact that you are constantly crashing.
Waldzwerg said:
I support ego's rigth to complain, though I reserve my rigth to disagree, and tbh I don't really care what words people use. I don't take offense to anything ego has said so far, so I don't see any reason to exclude ego, that matter will not be up for discussion.
Waldzwerg said:
Austria crashed one less time then i. Bodvar crashed twice and even our dear LJ crashed once. Yes, i am the only one crashing indeed.
He may complain as much as he likes, and it is certainly your prerogative as GM to decide what tolerable and what is not. But frankly, the level of stability exhibited by certain players during the last two sessions is simply unacceptable for me in the long term. If there is not a fundamental improvement on this front during the next few sessions i will reserve the right to leave. On aggregate we spent almost as much time in the lobby as playing.Bodvar Jarl said:
Waldz never claimed your the only one crashing EGO, and indeed Austria crashed numerous times aswell, but often after(caused by?) your crash EGO.
And I never said your breaking the rules directly, i said that you were being gamey and preventing the sole purpose of the inheritance rule, as in Austria getting left-overs of Burgundy, by war or occupying the provinces is just that.
Indeed, I agree with waldz, EGO is a major cause for destability in this game, yet kicking a player because of hardware issues is hardly a nice thing to do.
But he has already whined about two rules, about the slept bankrupcies, and now he intentionally prevented the purpose of the inheritance rule to happen. And disobeyed an GM order about the inheritance not to mention showed his lack of patience and sense by just leaving like that in the middle of the game.
Funny though, he wanted the bankrupcies being forcefired, as long as Spain owns at least some areas at aztecs/incas, taking away the chance for Spain to get around the triggers of bankrupcy, and now he is using the triggers to his own advantage to prevent the inheritance unfairly.
If you think its stupid to give away lowlands to Austria, why should we give it to France instead?
And BB is hardly relevant, you could have diplo-annexed it ages ago, if you had been less agressive elsewhere, yet you chose not to, so that you could unrightfully snatch it with minimal BB.
And I never said your breaking the rules directly, i said that you were being gamey and preventing the sole purpose of the inheritance rule, as in Austria getting left-overs of Burgundy, by war or occupying the provinces is just that.
Indeed, I agree with waldz, EGO is a major cause for destability in this game, yet kicking a player because of hardware issues is hardly a nice thing to do.
But he has already whined about two rules, about the slept bankrupcies, and now he intentionally prevented the purpose of the inheritance rule to happen. And disobeyed an GM order about the inheritance not to mention showed his lack of patience and sense by just leaving like that in the middle of the game.
Funny though, he wanted the bankrupcies being forcefired, as long as Spain owns at least some areas at aztecs/incas, taking away the chance for Spain to get around the triggers of bankrupcy, and now he is using the triggers to his own advantage to prevent the inheritance unfairly.
If you think its stupid to give away lowlands to Austria, why should we give it to France instead?
And BB is hardly relevant, you could have diplo-annexed it ages ago, if you had been less agressive elsewhere, yet you chose not to, so that you could unrightfully snatch it with minimal BB.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: and more :rofl:
This is completely absurd. Can someone tell this people that my crash doesnt affect anyone else? I mean, Austria did NOT crash because of me. I was NOT the host. He also crashed right at the start if you remember. Every time you open your mouth you are being completely absurd. And to top it all, we even had red !!! for the first time in this game. So, go ahead and put all the CTDing faults on me. We had, what about 9-8 CTDs sunday. 4 were mine. 1 was your, 2 were thanks to bodvar and another 3 thanks to austria. Yes, you CTDed right at the loading screen because of me LJ. I just hacked into your computer. :rofl:
First saying that i am just "whining" because Austria or Spain are my enemies. Well, IF i would be such a smart mind like you, i would say "The GM, LJ and Waldz do not want this Burgundy stuff to be fixed because they are my enemies as well". How does that sound?
Game starts in 1453. If you could DA such a massive vassal as Burgundy with Crap Monarchs that France had, you would be my hero. Just to remember you, i tried to DA Koln when i had aristocracy nearly maxed, 90k men and they refused and broke the vassalization. And when such hapened, Koln had a very bad diplomatic monarch.
Another stupid thing to say. Honestly LJ, do you ever think before writing all this crap? I will stop even discussing with you because whatever you write is just to piss me off. I fought for it. Austria did not even move a goddamn finger.
Says the little man who asked for the ToT to be active, granting him and Spain all of the colonial sphere till 1650. If there is anything more unfair on this, is to have the ToT active. As i said, you can just walk over my provinces, take them without declaring war and without even demanding them in a peace treaty. If you think that using the triggers like i used them is unfair, then what do you do when, Russia has the time of troubles, the OE has the Bey events or Denmark has the Count Feud? All these events grant all nations massive RR. I would use them to my benefit if i was their enemy, and attack them. Or let us take the French revolutions as an example. If USA does not exist, Napoleon itself will not be a monarch iirc. I do not consider this unfair. It is part of the game. What i consider unfair is: a bug happens in the game, and the GMs refuse to fix it, together with my enemies (har har har, how does that sound?).
Ahem... I remember someone who crashed at the loading screen right at the start of the game... Who was it? I cannot remember...
Well, I was the one who kept hearing you whining that i was wrong. And i in-fact, WAS RIGHT. I am just simply fed to see your face LJ. Whenever i open my mouth you complain about it. Since the very first day we met. I couldnt expect anything less from someone who keeps calling Mother Fuckers to everyone when he is nearly annexed. As i said, i left in the game because i spammed Bodvar's ICQ and he did not answer me (Bodvar, please confirm this, i am sure you saw it after you left the game). I could not speak with him because of hamachi, and instead of translating what i was saying to Bodvar, you and Sid kept saying i was wrong, and i knew i wasnt. Even Austria knew that the inheritance of Burgundy would NOT fire if Burgundy was at war. He complained about it, asking why Poland dowed Burgundy in the game lobby if memory serves.
I did NOT disobey anyone. There is NOTHING in the rules stating that i broke any rule. Bodvar NEVER told me to do anything either. Stop inventing things that exist only in your little mind, LJ.
Last edited: