has anyone looked at the save? the chatlog seems to be gone. This is a pretty major issue imho.
-
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.
Ack, I lost a long post setting out my thinking about this. Dang.
CK doesn't save the chat log. Check any of the TWBW saves: No chat logs to be seen anywhere. A 'feature' inherited from Snowball, I think.
Let me just note the following: Ego needs to DOW Sterk for the three-year rule to come into effect. Unless Leon is at war with Poland, Sterk may do whatever he likes to its vassals. This should not be a problem; Ego did intend to DOW Poland, and was only prevented by technical issues.
Next: The three-year rule should operate from the date of the first DOW, not the last. In this case, from the date of Muscovy's DOW against Poland. Otherwise it would be possible to DOW a stronger nation, fight for a year or two and lose, then scuttle in under another kingdom's protection and just sit about for three years. That would be an exploit, and exploits are bad. So, I believe Sterk should be able to force-peace Sid three years after the Muscovite, not the Leonese, DOW.
Third, let's note that the rule, strictly speaking, applies to force-peacing by occupying all demesne provinces. Since I wrote it with AI vassals in mind, this is not explicit in the text of the rule, because who gets any other kind of peace against the AI? But humans can be treated a bit differently here. I think that if Sterk and Sid are able to come to a peace agreement, before three years are up, they should be able to make peace even without Ego's permission. (In this case, I guess they would probably get Ego's permission, since Ego is just in the war to protect Sid. But that's beside the point I'm making.) So, peace agreements are ok before three years are up; peace forcings are not.
CK doesn't save the chat log. Check any of the TWBW saves: No chat logs to be seen anywhere. A 'feature' inherited from Snowball, I think.
Let me just note the following: Ego needs to DOW Sterk for the three-year rule to come into effect. Unless Leon is at war with Poland, Sterk may do whatever he likes to its vassals. This should not be a problem; Ego did intend to DOW Poland, and was only prevented by technical issues.
Next: The three-year rule should operate from the date of the first DOW, not the last. In this case, from the date of Muscovy's DOW against Poland. Otherwise it would be possible to DOW a stronger nation, fight for a year or two and lose, then scuttle in under another kingdom's protection and just sit about for three years. That would be an exploit, and exploits are bad. So, I believe Sterk should be able to force-peace Sid three years after the Muscovite, not the Leonese, DOW.
Third, let's note that the rule, strictly speaking, applies to force-peacing by occupying all demesne provinces. Since I wrote it with AI vassals in mind, this is not explicit in the text of the rule, because who gets any other kind of peace against the AI? But humans can be treated a bit differently here. I think that if Sterk and Sid are able to come to a peace agreement, before three years are up, they should be able to make peace even without Ego's permission. (In this case, I guess they would probably get Ego's permission, since Ego is just in the war to protect Sid. But that's beside the point I'm making.) So, peace agreements are ok before three years are up; peace forcings are not.
Lets read the rules before saying anything, yes?
If you have read it, properly, you cannot annex or vassalize another player's vassal, unless the following points are met:
1º - The player that owns the vassal allows you to peace it - and this condition is not met, since i do not allow Sterk to peace Sid.
2º - I havent been at war for 3 years - so this condition, is not met either.
I would have DOWed Sterk the moment Sid became my vassal (actually i would automatically have DOWed Sterk when Sid accepted my vassalization proposal but i didnt because the vassalization was edited, and not normally done). And Since i am virtually at war vs Sterk, the rule applies.
Acordingly to rules, Sterk can only peace Muscowy from 3 years onwards. If rules do not suit him, well too bad he should have thought before refusing Sid's WP proposal when he got attacked by pagans. You think i had fun waiting 3 years to annex Georgia's vassals as well?
But Rules are Rules, like em or not.
As Jorian points very well, lets see the entire crap about Aleppo and Antioch.
Aleppo's case
Georgia DOWed Aleppo. Crete DOWed Aleppo. Georgia vassalizes Aleppo. Georgia DOWs Crete. Crete is forced to wait 3 years if he wants to peace the vassal.
When Crete DOWed Aleppo, Aleppo wasnt Georgia's vassal. But that was not relevant.
When Poland DOWed Muscowy, Muscowy was not Leon's vassal. So that is not relevant either.
Antioch's case
Crete DOWed Antioch. Georgia DOWed Antioch. Antioch becomes a vassal of Crete. Crete DOWed Georgia to protect its vassal. Georgia would have been forced to wait 3 years in order to peace the vassal (it did not because we came to an agreement).
When Georgia DOWed Antioch, Antioch wasnt Crete's vassal. But that was not relevant.
When Poland DOWed Muscowy, Muscowy was not Leon's vassal. So that is not relevant either.
------------------------------------------------------------------
We have 2 cases, in which KOM had always to speak about, and he always said that if you wanted to peace someone's vassal, which was not a vassal of that someone by the time you DOWed, you had to wait 3 years in case that someone (the liege) DOWed you in defense of its vassal.
So, tbh, if the rule was already applied in the past, i wonder why it cant be applied to Sterk. Is he special? Or is the fact that he is a deputy that makes him special?
Aleppo's case
Georgia DOWed Aleppo. Crete DOWed Aleppo. Georgia vassalizes Aleppo. Georgia DOWs Crete. Crete is forced to wait 3 years if he wants to peace the vassal.
When Crete DOWed Aleppo, Aleppo wasnt Georgia's vassal. But that was not relevant.
When Poland DOWed Muscowy, Muscowy was not Leon's vassal. So that is not relevant either.
Antioch's case
Crete DOWed Antioch. Georgia DOWed Antioch. Antioch becomes a vassal of Crete. Crete DOWed Georgia to protect its vassal. Georgia would have been forced to wait 3 years in order to peace the vassal (it did not because we came to an agreement).
When Georgia DOWed Antioch, Antioch wasnt Crete's vassal. But that was not relevant.
When Poland DOWed Muscowy, Muscowy was not Leon's vassal. So that is not relevant either.
------------------------------------------------------------------
We have 2 cases, in which KOM had always to speak about, and he always said that if you wanted to peace someone's vassal, which was not a vassal of that someone by the time you DOWed, you had to wait 3 years in case that someone (the liege) DOWed you in defense of its vassal.
So, tbh, if the rule was already applied in the past, i wonder why it cant be applied to Sterk. Is he special? Or is the fact that he is a deputy that makes him special?
Yes. However in this freaky scenario that happened, Sterk has been at war with Muscowy for a time (for me unknown). Yes?BurningEGO said:
Let us stipulate a case.
All realms that follows are assumed to be player realms.
Duchy A is at war with Kingdom B. Duchy A is losing, but refuses to peace. Almost three years go by, and then Duchy pledges to Kingdom C. What happens? The exploitish situation arises where Kingdom B, must wait another three years before he can peace the vassals at favourable terms, AND it can become much worse, Kingdom B might be forced to combat Kingdom C also and still lose the progress he had.
A even worse outcome is that after almost three years, Duchy A who had bad loyalty to Kingdom C, pledges to Kingdom D, and Kingdom B must once more wait three years, and so on.
This is a very exploitish possibility. Exploits are bad. However all exploits are difficult to find and think about when you first create a set of rules, exploits must be found while playing. Look at EU2MP rules, they have evolved over the years to what they are today, because they found exploits and took care of the exploits. It is the same situation here, imho.
Sterk is nowhere special, and as you might observe KoM hasn't posted in orange and thus what he said isn't final. We are having a discussion.BurningEGO said:
I think it should be fairly obvious in this case that such a situation as you describe while it would be an exploit if done, however our current situation is not an exploit, basically what I am trying to say that simply outline the case above as "this set of actions can be construed as an exploit and if found to be deliberately an exploit bad things will happen."
Our current situation as such is not an exploit because I am genuinely pledging to Ego to protect me from the evil poles.
I am not aware ofit being possible to pledge to different kingdoms unless you have the rebellious trait and have less then 60% loyalty though, if so then I think the whole discussion is moot.
Our current situation as such is not an exploit because I am genuinely pledging to Ego to protect me from the evil poles.
I am not aware ofit being possible to pledge to different kingdoms unless you have the rebellious trait and have less then 60% loyalty though, if so then I think the whole discussion is moot.
In the Antioch and Aleppo cases, the vassals were AI, and there was therefore no question of the vassal doing any exploits. It is hardly inconsistent to treat humans and AIs differently. You should also note that, since agreements were reached in both the cases you mention, the issue of when the three-year period began running never came up.
With that said, I don't see that there is much cause for disagreement in this case, since the difference between the Muscovite DOW and the Leonese DOW is only a few months. Are you lot really going to make a lot of flames over three months or so? Especially since Leon has been threatening to grant Muscovy a demesne province in Iberia, thereby making it basically impossible for Sterk to force-peace Blayne, short of winning an offensive war against Leon, which is a bit unlikely. Honestly this feels a little exploitish to me, but I don't think there should be a rule against it; it's just a natural artifact of playing a game where Russian principalities can become vassals of Iberian kingdoms, which would never happen in real life, and which has a force-peace system depending on occupation of provinces, which isn't very realistic either.
In short, I guess I'm advising you to pipe down and not make a lot of noise over what is really a very minor issue. Nobody is saying that Sterk can force-peace the minute he has Muscovy on the ropes, and anyway Leon can move the rope. I strongly advise that nobody do any more long-winded arguing for three months which are not going to be relevant anyway.
With that said, I don't see that there is much cause for disagreement in this case, since the difference between the Muscovite DOW and the Leonese DOW is only a few months. Are you lot really going to make a lot of flames over three months or so? Especially since Leon has been threatening to grant Muscovy a demesne province in Iberia, thereby making it basically impossible for Sterk to force-peace Blayne, short of winning an offensive war against Leon, which is a bit unlikely. Honestly this feels a little exploitish to me, but I don't think there should be a rule against it; it's just a natural artifact of playing a game where Russian principalities can become vassals of Iberian kingdoms, which would never happen in real life, and which has a force-peace system depending on occupation of provinces, which isn't very realistic either.
In short, I guess I'm advising you to pipe down and not make a lot of noise over what is really a very minor issue. Nobody is saying that Sterk can force-peace the minute he has Muscovy on the ropes, and anyway Leon can move the rope. I strongly advise that nobody do any more long-winded arguing for three months which are not going to be relevant anyway.
I cannot but continue to stress the utter importance that teamspeak plays in maintaining stability, lessening confusion, and allowing for more open lanes of communication between the players and the players and the client.
Thus everyone who has a microphone please post, so that we can work on getting you setup with teamspeak. Teamspeak is of utter importance if you have a microphone, although even if you dont have a microphone you can still install the program.
There is not a single valid argument as to why teamspeak should not be actively encouraged for this game, games have a marked higher success rate when teamspeak is readily availiable for use. It allows for a clearer understanding of the moods of your fellow players, a more comprehensive means to talk to people and communicate.
Since it is all in real time and not reliant on long and drawn out chat messages that are only half seen and disperse within 10 seconds of being typed communicating with teamspeak makes everyones lives so much easier.
Me, Ander's and carrilon use teamspeak and so far it has made our CK gaming experience much more enjoyable and convenient. (especially at the Splash screen as you cant type messages that people can see there).
Also requests for rehosts using teamspeak are resolved alot faster.
Say as is the case of hearts of iron when you disconnect from the game and no one notices as theres no immediate message sometimes ts allows the player to quickly inform the host of the drop. Also if there's anything important happening that a rehost may be needed for ts serves this purpose equally well.
In short get a mic, get teamspeak, Get Your Game On!
Thus everyone who has a microphone please post, so that we can work on getting you setup with teamspeak. Teamspeak is of utter importance if you have a microphone, although even if you dont have a microphone you can still install the program.
There is not a single valid argument as to why teamspeak should not be actively encouraged for this game, games have a marked higher success rate when teamspeak is readily availiable for use. It allows for a clearer understanding of the moods of your fellow players, a more comprehensive means to talk to people and communicate.
Since it is all in real time and not reliant on long and drawn out chat messages that are only half seen and disperse within 10 seconds of being typed communicating with teamspeak makes everyones lives so much easier.
Me, Ander's and carrilon use teamspeak and so far it has made our CK gaming experience much more enjoyable and convenient. (especially at the Splash screen as you cant type messages that people can see there).
Also requests for rehosts using teamspeak are resolved alot faster.
Say as is the case of hearts of iron when you disconnect from the game and no one notices as theres no immediate message sometimes ts allows the player to quickly inform the host of the drop. Also if there's anything important happening that a rehost may be needed for ts serves this purpose equally well.
In short get a mic, get teamspeak, Get Your Game On!
If you and everyone understands portuguese, then sure, i will speak on the micro as soon as game starts.
also if you pay for the micro, make sure using that program doesnt make me crash more, and promish you all will talk and roleplay like people of the 11st century so the atmosphere isnt ruined
if all these conditions are met, i will use it
if all these conditions are met, i will use it
Jorian please state your computer's system specifications, you can go to "run" under start menu and run "dxdiag" and save to file the resulting information and post it here.
Teamspeak SHOULD NOT on any half decent quarter functioning machine be the cause of a CTD but I will look into it.
On teamspeak we don't do that much talking per se, alot of it is technical in nature example:
"Ander's I'm here! rehost"
"Anders: Hmm i seem to have crashed."
"Me: Ander's i crashed"
with some conversations about Albania in between, alot of what we talk about is technical and crash related not that much is ingame, but I have no problems with us enforcing on ourselves a more of a 11th century roleplay altitude with our metacommentary.
Ego, didn't you know? I am fluent in portugese so it wont be a problem
Also no matter how bad you think your english is it is not as nearly as bad as Ander's
Besides with practice makes perfect and being Iberian yourself itll add to the role playign atmosphere for you to be online.
Teamspeak SHOULD NOT on any half decent quarter functioning machine be the cause of a CTD but I will look into it.
On teamspeak we don't do that much talking per se, alot of it is technical in nature example:
"Ander's I'm here! rehost"
"Anders: Hmm i seem to have crashed."
"Me: Ander's i crashed"
with some conversations about Albania in between, alot of what we talk about is technical and crash related not that much is ingame, but I have no problems with us enforcing on ourselves a more of a 11th century roleplay altitude with our metacommentary.
Ego, didn't you know? I am fluent in portugese so it wont be a problem
Also no matter how bad you think your english is it is not as nearly as bad as Ander's
Besides with practice makes perfect and being Iberian yourself itll add to the role playign atmosphere for you to be online.
Lurken said:
No, here's what happened:
1) Sid DOWs my vassal
2) I DOW Sid in response
3) Sid invades, I fight back, he loses
4) Sid retreats to Moskva
5) My troops begin to march on Moskva
6) Ego vassalizes Sid and Sid becomes Byz's vassal
7) Bug is fixed and Sid is now Ego's vassal
Of note is the fact that less than a month in-game passed between steps 6 and 7. Ego DOWed me long after I had been at war with Sid.
Also, I was under the impression that the rule was meant to be applied to AI vassals of human overlords, not human vassals of human overlords (because the latter situation would allow for exploity things such as the situation we have here).
By the way, can my war with Byz be edited out? It was started (by Byz) because I was at war with its vassal (Muscowy).
It seems to me that, overall, this game is far, far too much about rules. I won't name names, but there are some people who insist on following every rule down to the letter of the rule rather than the spirit. The rules are responsible for nearly every conflict. Now, of course games need rules, but I've rarely seen EU2 or EU3 games (or even most CK games) devolve into the rule-debating legal debacle that this has become. I must say, it is turning this game into far more of a chore than it is worth.
Oh and Sid... I'm not using teamspeak. Ever. Ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever. Ever.
then you'll be left out of the experience, it is unfortunate but its you ultimately who has to deal with the consequences/inconveniences of not using it.
Sterkarm said:
Oh yes, so if we didnt follow rules anyone could just tear apart realms of people that couldnt play for a week and had to be AIed... Oh, like you are doing? Yes, sounds reasonable to me!
Or peace counties/duchies that are vassals of some human, before the human can arive with his troops to help them. Like you want to do with Sid. Sounds very reasonable. Very.
Sorry Sterk, but i am afraid this isnt a wild west. Rules are required. Else i would have to hear certain nice guys calling me an "***hole" in every session. And that is just one example.
--------------------------------------------------------
As for AI or not AI, KOM, you had stated already that the rules applied to humans as well. Going back with your word, eh? You said that humans needed time to send troops to help their vassals, and that this aplied to humans, or to AIs - after all my troops arent going to march faster just because Muscowy is controlled by a human or by an AI.
So? Such is life. Although this case is totaly out of topic because Muscowy wanted a WP (thus Sid was open to suggestions and wasnt openly refusing to peace), Sterk refused, and that was what made me go into war against Sterk. Now he is crying for a WP... Oh noes.
He should have thought twice, before wanting to eat more then his stomach allowed him to. If he wanted to annex Muscowy, then, he should have conducted some diplomacy. He did nothing. So these kind of situations happen. Dont come and say that this is an exploit. This is entirely Sterk's fault and inability to speak instead of resorting to agression and insults.
To me, what is an exploit, is peacing my vassals before i can arive in the scene to protect them. Instead of trying to protect Sterk, you should see it from my side. How am i going to protect Muscowy if Sterk is closer to it, and can conquer its provinces before i arive to protect Muscowy, or to attack Sterk's provinces?
kinda a moot point though youll be able to get there in time, and worst case scenario you can just give me a demense in spain for the duraction of the war.
hmm...
be aware that i have been warned about people joining against me, killing my heirs and invading my vassals
I didn't assassinate any human dynasty members yet, i find that a personal attack against the player, but i think those people who jumped dynasties don't care about my thoughts, however, i still think the game is about dynasties and not nations. If i find out that someone wants to kick me out of the game this evil way, i will do use any possible means to do the same to that person
and i can assure you, i will watch my family VERY carefully from now on...
and i think León won't like attacks on his subjects neither
be aware that i have been warned about people joining against me, killing my heirs and invading my vassals
I didn't assassinate any human dynasty members yet, i find that a personal attack against the player, but i think those people who jumped dynasties don't care about my thoughts, however, i still think the game is about dynasties and not nations. If i find out that someone wants to kick me out of the game this evil way, i will do use any possible means to do the same to that person
and i can assure you, i will watch my family VERY carefully from now on...
and i think León won't like attacks on his subjects neither
BurningEGO said:
i have my internet back so i am good to go for sat. so what is new?
