Agema Publications

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Agema Publications

A forum for the disscussion of the Play by Mail games from Agema Publications


+17
Papa Clement
one grain of grain
Ardagor
WhiteRose
The Revenant
Kingmaker
count-de-monet
Hapsburg
Rozwi_Game10
revvaughan
Basileus
Stuart Bailey
Marshal Bombast
J Flower
Mike
Deacon
tkolter
21 posters

    Game 10

    Papa Clement
    Papa Clement
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 706
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2019-02-10

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Papa Clement Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:54 am

    Kerensky wrote:I think the term I would use is ‘admirable diplomatic flexibility’, for the Genoese position.

    I think Italian nations like Genoa and Venice are always in a tricky position.  They survive through trade and sensing how the wind is blowing in Italian politics, 'admiral diplomatic flexibility' is probably spot on.  Venice probably gets more attention because of its proximity to the Ottomans and regular wars with them, but people forget how important a trading power Genoa was.  Add in increasing influence in Italy and I'm not surprised you are finding it interesting.

    Kerensky wrote: & now the Pope has joined, and I am learning a whole new aspect of the game.

    Glad I am contributing to your enjoyment. Very Happy
    Papa Clement
    Papa Clement
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 706
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2019-02-10

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Papa Clement Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:46 am

    Stuart Bailey wrote:Quickness of communication has always been a issue for historic games - In theory two or three characters meeting in the Divan in Constantinople should be able to communicate quickly but then its going to take their messengers week/months to pass on the information to their followers scattered across the Empire.  While having to wait say 9 months for a reply from India or China is going to make for a very slow game.

    So from a game point of view I think the current method of sending letters via the GM and it taking a turn to arrive is a good average and works fairly well as a game system (plus allows for the chance of some letters being stolen, copied by agents etc).  So even if I may have said or read something on the forum I play on the basis that unless its been said in game either in the paper or by letter it has not been said at all.

    I like some other players do get niggled when people do not reply to my letters, but I suspect that lack of communication and misunderstanding were fairly common in the 18th century.  And if I then unfairly assume the worst that seems a fair risk

    Clearly the game is set up with some positions having power over other positions or are just much larger than others.  So in theory the Holy Roman Emperor has power over his Electors, The Ottoman Sultan and the King of Poland have power over their vassals and if Louis XIV wants he can lock my G10 Character's in the Bastille and throw away the key.

    But I would argue that for all their claims to absolute power both C18 rulers and players with "leading" roles in the game need to work hard to keep their vassals/subjects on side and provide reasons why their followers should indeed follow and support them.  And their success or failure in this role can have a major influence on their position.


    I am broadly in agreement with this.  If it took months for letters to reach Africa from Europe then it would discourage players from picking up those positions as they would have a rather lonely game.  I know it is slightly out of period, but in the 1800s the Cutty Sark made it from England to Australia in 72 days.  I think there were faster times than this, but that's the one that sticks in the mind.  Any game rule has to be a compromise between history and keeping the game playable.  To bridge the gap Viceroys were appointed who were granted varying degrees of independence, a strategy you used yourself, Stuart, as Spain.  I guess if we were being historically accurate players would have to send in letters to their own Viceroys each turn to keep them informed, but I suspect that is reflected in the game with delayed movement orders and the newspaper which seems to work quite well.  Difficult to be a good judge of character of Viceroys when they are effectively inactive game characters controlled by you, but with their own hidden personalities; easier (theoretically) to manage a Viceroy played by a real person who can demonstrate his loyalty and build trust through letters.  I suppose the further away a Viceroy is the more freedom he has, but also the more loyalty he needs to demonstrate in case he is attacked and needs to call upon the forces of the mother country to come to his aid.

    I can also accept that "lack of communication and misunderstanding" happened as it does today.  But when "lack of communication and misunderstanding" is the deliberate policy of a major player over a long period, it is damaging to everyone, stops positive diplomacy happening and wastes the time and money of other players who are trying to get on with the game.  It comes to something when I have far more positive, regular and interesting correspondence with inactive positions than I do with some active ones.  And from my postbag I know that many others feel the same.

    It is curious how Poland has sought to centralise whilst France has tried to decentralise.  Centralising should increase loyalty and allow for more rapid change.  Decentralising should increase the risk of disloyalty and misunderstanding.  Either approach fails if the principal leader simply sits there like a dumpling, neither communicating positively or recognising that his decision to act in that way has consequences for everyone.  In real history when that happened the result was either:
    1. nobles sensed weakness and mounted a coup "for the sake of the nation".
    2. nobles ignored the king and did things behind his back, knowing they would get away with it.
    3. nobles pressed for the appointment of a regent, claiming the king was unfit/incapable of ruling.

    For nobles read also Parliaments or other assemblies as per the nation in question.

    I have a great deal of sympathy for any vassal or subordinate player who is trapped in this situation, including you, Stuart, and Savoy - if that does not always come across in game, then it should and I will attempt to make it clearer.  Smile

    .
    Mike
    Mike
    Lord
    Lord


    Number of posts : 83
    Reputation : 6
    Registration date : 2018-09-08

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Mike Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:44 pm

    whistles … sooo .. can I raise palace guard units without an army camp ?
    Marshal Bombast
    Marshal Bombast
    Duke
    Duke


    Number of posts : 386
    Age : 52
    Location : Essex, UK
    Reputation : 8
    Registration date : 2009-01-23

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Marshal Bombast Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:50 pm

    Mike wrote:whistles … sooo .. can I raise palace guard units without an army camp ?

    As it does not say specifically in the Palace Guard entry that an army camp is not required I would assume that you need one. I tend, if not sure, to order a unit raised and say to open a facility if this is required (assuming I have the funds).
    Basileus
    Basileus
    Prince
    Prince


    Number of posts : 458
    Age : 63
    Location : Wales/Cornwall
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2011-07-01

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Basileus Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:39 pm

    Papa Clement- whilst it might be amusing to refer to my game style as sitting there like a dumpling, the borders of France have expanded immensely. Please don’t reply as to how that is not the case because in practical terms France now has Flanders and Savoy has Milan. I don’t see anyone taking Sicily off France any day soon. As I said before, you might not like my style of play but please behave nicely in the forum and don’t criticise me as a player. We all have our strengths and weaknesses in game style. I won’t insult you and in return it is reasonable that you don’t insult me.
    Papa Clement
    Papa Clement
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 706
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2019-02-10

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Papa Clement Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:16 pm

    Basileus wrote:Papa Clement- whilst it might be amusing to refer to my game style as sitting there like a dumpling, the borders of France have expanded immensely. Please don’t reply as to how that is not the case because in practical terms France now has Flanders and Savoy has Milan. I don’t see anyone taking Sicily off France any day soon. As I said before, you might not like my style of play but please behave nicely in the forum and don’t criticise me as a player. We all have our strengths and weaknesses in game style. I won’t insult you and in return it is reasonable that you don’t insult me.

    Basileus, I have made my view of your approach known.

    If you believe I have misunderstood that approach then you have the choice to prove me wrong within the game by changing your approach and addressing those concerns.

    You have cited lack of time as justification, but if you have time to post on the forum you have time to engage more fully in the game.

    As players we do not pay to be on the forum, but we do pay to play in the game. I am insulted by those players who put so much of their energy into the forum that they have little if any left over to put into the game, behaviour which is discourteous and reduces the enjoyment of all players.

    Yorkshire folk tend to speak as they find, so if you find my language a little blunt and not to your taste, rest assured my comments here would be considered so mild as to be almost unnoticed in my part of the world.

    Observation is not necessarily criticism, but if you take it as such then you must recognise it has some validity. If it has no validity then you are choosing to be offended when there is nothing to be offended by, and I don't see there is anything I can do about that.


    .
    Mike
    Mike
    Lord
    Lord


    Number of posts : 83
    Reputation : 6
    Registration date : 2018-09-08

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Mike Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:44 pm

    Ha ha , well the Pope will be getting a message from the King of France soon , I suspect , more than He would like.I suspect a few thousand messengers shouting "Vive le Roi "

    The difficult thing is trying to separate the Pope from the Player . Remember the Pope hasn't actually said any of this .
    Marshal Bombast
    Marshal Bombast
    Duke
    Duke


    Number of posts : 386
    Age : 52
    Location : Essex, UK
    Reputation : 8
    Registration date : 2009-01-23

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Marshal Bombast Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:45 pm

    Right this reads like the conversation is turning personal which I suspect no one meant or wants it to. We all have our backgrounds, viewpoints and ways of playing and we are not telling people on here what to do or think.

    If Richard allows something in game then that's fine. Unless pointing out information sources or discussing game mechanics then I suggest, for the moment at least, that politics, religion and related issues can stay in the game newspaper, actions and letters between each other.

    Now it's time to move onto different more enjoyable topics before anyone goes too much further and causes anything regrettable to happen.

    Has anyone got any recommended reading for C18th economics please?
    Mike
    Mike
    Lord
    Lord


    Number of posts : 83
    Reputation : 6
    Registration date : 2018-09-08

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Mike Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:46 pm

    Do I need an army camp to raise Palace guards ?
    Marshal Bombast
    Marshal Bombast
    Duke
    Duke


    Number of posts : 386
    Age : 52
    Location : Essex, UK
    Reputation : 8
    Registration date : 2009-01-23

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Marshal Bombast Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:54 pm

    There's another thread that thinks you don't so now I'm confused as I thought you did and usually Richard says in a supplement entry whether you can raise without an army camp. Would like to know for future but will likely ask my advisors at some point.
    Deacon
    Deacon
    Emperor
    Emperor


    Number of posts : 1859
    Age : 61
    Location : Portland OR, USA
    Reputation : 44
    Registration date : 2010-04-13

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Deacon Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:18 pm


    I don't really want to get into it, but I will say my enjoyment of the game was diminished by France's ignoring my correspondence.

    I put effort and real world money (increased turn fees) into my turn trying to do a peace conference. Getting nothing at all from France meant it was a waste of my time and my money. I do get that it was not likely to result in peace, but if one of the key players won't even answer your letters, why did I bother? I had hoped for some lively engagement and instead got zilch.

    France could have just simply refused to attend and shut me down and I would have stop wasting my time. I didn't even get that.

    Such choices have their natural consequences, of course and no doubt they'll play out in game. I think it far too early for anybody to be taking victory laps.
    avatar
    Stuart Bailey
    Emperor of Europe
    Emperor of Europe


    Number of posts : 2606
    Age : 61
    Location : Somewhere East of Bristol & West of Bath
    Reputation : 61
    Registration date : 2012-01-29

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Stuart Bailey Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:03 pm

    Deacon wrote:
    I don't really want to get into it, but I will say my enjoyment of the game was diminished by France's ignoring my correspondence.

    I put effort and real world money (increased turn fees) into my turn trying to do a peace conference. Getting nothing at all from France meant it was a waste of my time and my money. I do get that it was not likely to result in peace, but if one of the key players won't even answer your letters, why did I bother? I had hoped for some lively engagement and instead got zilch.

    France could have just simply refused to attend and shut me down and I would have stop wasting my time. I didn't even get that.

    Such choices have their natural consequences, of course and no doubt they'll play out in game. I think it far too early for anybody to be taking victory laps.


    Think to be fair on the French.......we had sent a very fair (my opinion......but the Anglo-Dutch agreed) treaty proposal to Austria and attended the peace conference expecting to rubber stamp a peace treaty and gain lots of honour points. Instead it turns into a diplomatic trap and a French bashing exercise.

    Which resulted in France taking view that what is the point of carrying on a carade of talking to Austria if the answer to every option you propose is no?

    At that point France also decided that the Austrian game objective was to re-fight the war of Spanish Succession and to be fair this seemed a reasonable ambition for a player commanding Prince Eugine and the best Light Troops/Artillery in what is after all a wargame and one with a shocking lack of player character Ottomans to fight.

    What is odd about G10 is that ages after everyone decided a political settlement was not going to happen and the sides lined up the WSS or whatever its going to be called.......perhaps the War of the Milanese succession would be more correct. It has still not kicked off even with all my best efforts inc the "Pressing" of over 100 merchant ships and the sinking/capture of over a dozen warships.

    My advise to his most Christian Majesty was to respond to the diplomatic trap by digging out the campaign plans of the Great Conde and Turanne, ripping the Bavarian Corp in Flanders to bits and fighting a war on the East Bank/Bavaria. But sadly his Most Christian Majesty applied the Royal Veto to plans to respond to diplomatic traps with with bit of the "Rapine, loot, plunder and return to the good old days of the 1670's."Sad

    So in case anyone is thinking it would be really nice if "Louis XIV current government was overthrown in later day Fronde and the French Noblity started to dictate the policy of France"............there are various ways of sending a positive reply to a diplomatic message. If the head of a Messenger with an Imperial Ban stuck in his mouth gets nailed to the gates of Genoa.........your wish may have happened.

    Wonder if that would get things going?lol!

    Deacon
    Deacon
    Emperor
    Emperor


    Number of posts : 1859
    Age : 61
    Location : Portland OR, USA
    Reputation : 44
    Registration date : 2010-04-13

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Deacon Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:25 am

    Stuart Bailey wrote:

    Wonder if that would get things going?:lol!:  

     

    Well, if your goal was to personally insult me, you succeeded.

    Poland called the peace conference, Not Austria. It was stated repeatedly that it had no binding force and was a venue to discuss positions. I wasn't the least bit interested in trying to create a binding forum even if anybody had wanted that.

    So for that to be a 'trap', the french position has to be so idiotic that to publicly enunciate it would be humiliating. Somehow I don't think France would characterize their own position that way. It may well have been a venue to earn honour, had France shown up and actually engaged. They didn't. Perhaps if they had, France's name would appear somewhere on the honour rolls.

    Further, this statement says that Poland was acting dishonestly in its efforts, or perhaps worse that I'm some kind of dupe to have attempted to create a venue for such discussions.

    I wouldn't know what peace proposals France put to Austria because despite asking over and over and over and over again in both letters and the paper, France never bothered to respond to me. As I am not Austria, surprisingly, I don't receive their mail. I have no knowledge of what was put directly to them. I said as much in one of the ignored letters. I gave France a venue to state their position and to make their case. They couldn't be bothered.

    The only position that ever got stated at the conference was Austria's because, surprise, Austria was the only one who responded to my letters and gave me the courtesy of a reply.

    And this flippant post is exactly why my enjoyment of the game was diminished by France's failure to even do me the courtesy of telling me to sod off and stop wasting my time and money.
    revvaughan
    revvaughan
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 778
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2008-07-15

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by revvaughan Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:09 am

    Basileus wrote:Papa Clement- whilst it might be amusing to refer to my game style as sitting there like a dumpling, the borders of France have expanded immensely. Please don’t reply as to how that is not the case because in practical terms France now has Flanders and Savoy has Milan. I don’t see anyone taking Sicily off France any day soon. As I said before, you might not like my style of play but please behave nicely in the forum and don’t criticise me as a player. We all have our strengths and weaknesses in game style. I won’t insult you and in return it is reasonable that you don’t insult me.

    You have the most interesting profile picture as well my dear fellow!
    tkolter
    tkolter
    Viscount
    Viscount


    Number of posts : 160
    Age : 57
    Reputation : 1
    Registration date : 2018-06-15

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by tkolter Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:20 am

    Papa Clement wrote:
    Deacon wrote:That is an interesting perspective. If they predate the catholic church by centuries, then they were established BEFORE the birth of Christ? That is impressive! Very Happy

    In this I'm with Deacon.

    You can claim perhaps that the Queen of Sheba was a significant influence on religion in Abyssinia, as the Jews would date the building of the Temple to be a significant point in the development of their faith.  But I don't think you can claim that the Temple was a Church since there could be no physical church before Christ's resurrection.

    tkolter - I'm glad you posted anyway.  I am trying to write a letter to you, but can't find out what the correct title/address is for you.  Perhaps you could post it on here to help?  Thanks.

    But the Abyssinian Church jumped on the Christian bandwagon after a holy saint brought the new teachings to her so as a continuous religion tradition overall it predates the Vatican and the holy Ark of the Covenant is under the protection of Abyssinia (or better the nation is under God's protection because the Ark is present).

    So there. Razz

    And Rowzi has the right address for the Emperor of Abyssinia and will likely not oppose some contact.
    Papa Clement
    Papa Clement
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 706
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2019-02-10

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Papa Clement Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:05 am

    Deacon wrote:
    Stuart Bailey wrote:

    Wonder if that would get things going?lol!  

     

    Well, if your goal was to personally insult me, you succeeded.

    I have to admire Stuart's intellectual dexterity, trying to defend the indefensible. I joined as Pope only a few months ago, and appeared on the forum only a few weeks ago. I deliberately did not join the forum during the period I was making my judgement because I was determined not to be influenced by anything outside the game and the submissions made to me. Looking back over this thread between those dates I read so many contradictory, misleading, and at times offensive posts, designed to undermine one position or another, insult one player or another. Not all of these would have been intended, others clearly were. It is the role of the forum moderator to examine such posts and make a decision, calling time on a discussion if he feels it has overstepped the mark.

    If we have the right to post in agreement with something then we also have the right to post our disagreement with something. As I recall someone did point out a few days ago that a game where there is only one point of view would be rather boring.

    If there is some surprise that in posting on the forum I am restoring some balance by questioning posts I consider misleading or unsupportable, then perhaps that indicates just how far the forum 'bubble' has influenced those who read it.

    Deacon wrote:

    Poland called the peace conference, Not Austria. It was stated repeatedly that it had no binding force and was a venue to discuss positions. I wasn't the least bit interested in trying to create a binding forum even if anybody had wanted that.

    So for that to be a 'trap', the french position has to be so idiotic that to publicly enunciate it would be humiliating. Somehow I don't think France would characterize their own position that way. It may well have been a venue to earn honour, had France shown up and actually engaged. They didn't. Perhaps if they had, France's name would appear somewhere on the honour rolls.

    Further, this statement says that Poland was acting dishonestly in its efforts, or perhaps worse that I'm some kind of dupe to have attempted to create a venue for such discussions.

    I wouldn't know what peace proposals France put to Austria because despite asking over and over and over and over again in both letters and the paper, France never bothered to respond to me. As I am not Austria, surprisingly, I don't receive their mail. I have no knowledge of what was put directly to them. I said as much in one of the ignored letters. I gave France a venue to state their position and to make their case. They couldn't be bothered.

    The only position that ever got stated at the conference was Austria's because, surprise, Austria was the only one who responded to my letters and gave me the courtesy of a reply.

    And this flippant post is exactly why my enjoyment of the game was diminished by France's failure to even do me the courtesy of telling me to sod off and stop wasting my time and money.

    It has been recognised in earlier posts just how much work Deacon put into the peace conference. I can certainly testify to that for in my startup turn I was swamped with paperwork and letters covering almost the entire history of the game. It was the one time I have been glad that the game was running so slowly!

    So I understood the diplomatic background and could see what had not worked. I cannot be 100% sure that I have all the paperwork so cannot comment on whether Stuart's assertion that France did come close to an agreement with Austria which was supported by England/UDP. However there were broadly 3 problems which came through from the files:
    1. Nations were very keen to divide up Spanish assets between themselves without even bothering to consult with or listen to Spain. As I pointed out in the judgement and subsequently, had such an agreement been made it could not have been implemented without the consent of Spain. Or more succinctly, you can't give away what is not yours to give away. I had guidance, which I believe was from the GM, on the views of Spain which along with other details were not necessarily available to Deacon as he was attempting to organise his conference.
    2. Nations had different purposes/objectives in participating and those purposes changed over time. By objectives I refer to their territorial or other material hopes. By purposes I refer to their reasons for participating - whilst some were clearly approaching the issue with goodwill and in a sincere attempt to avoid war, others were not. This may have been the result of changes in player, I can't tell, but it was not so in all cases.
    3. The occupation of various lands without declarations of war clearly impacted the positions of some participants. But there was no sense of agreement what to do about it. Various ideas were floated, but none could guarantee that those who had occupied certain lands would relinquish them or that Spain would agree to those ideas. There was also some doubt that there was a peace to be had given that the signs were that the world was at war even if no declaration had been made.

    The immediate decision I had to make, considering these 3 factors, was whether to simply take the responses to Deacon's conference and give it the Papal blessing with Papal authority behind it, or to start again.

    Starting again gave everyone the opportunity to reflect on what they had tried previously, withdraw elements they had subsequently found were not going to be acceptable to others and then simply summarize what they thought would be agreeable with the legal reasons behind it. By making this a legal, not a political, judgement it ensured that it was robust, not simply a political exercise in buying off competing demands. That I received so many responses was no doubt in part due to the work Deacon had done in the months before I joined. Based on those submissions, claims which did not stand up were rejected and the judgement gave the GM a choice of routes to move forward, routes which as it turned out had already been hinted at in the newspapers or in the papers supplied to me. There would have been no point in putting the effort in to reach a judgement if I had not been scrupulously fair or had allowed myself to be influenced by intimidation, bribes or promises of support from other players. Recent accusations in the newspaper that I have been so influenced are false and insult not only me, but those who made their submissions and trust the fairness of the GM. Had this been the case then the GM would rightly have ripped up the judgement or refused to publish it. I genuinely did not know which of the routes he was going to choose and I still don't know with certainty how it will ultimately play out.

    But I do know that those who hoped for a diplomatic solution now have one. Stuart would appear to be incorrect in stating that "everyone decided a political settlement was not going to happen". If they don't like it and war results then, as happened in history, my character tried and failed. That so many players have appreciated what I have done means I count it as a personal achievement anyway. Nations may declare war on each other for many different reasons (including personal insults) and the judgement does not prevent them doing so. Nations may even declare war on each other for no reason at all or out of fear that their neighbour is growing so powerful that if they don't declare war, they will be the next target. The judgement does not prevent war, so if war breaks out it will not be taken as a personal failing. What the judgement does is discredit attempts to use the Spanish Succession as a reason for starting a war.

    There could be many reasons why the war he has tried so hard to start has not "kicked off". France may not yet be ready to declare war, or see the need to given she is effectively at war already by proxy, hiding behind characters or 'allies', trying to avoid responsibility for what is being done in her name. If it looks like a dumpling, acts like a dumpling, smells like a dumpling, it may not be necessary to risk indigestion by eating it to prove it is a dumpling. Her opponents may still be hoping that the diplomatic solution is accepted, thus avoiding the need for them to respond; they may be waiting until France is so overextended that she is an easier target; they may still be gathering allies or they may still be deciding on a strategy and discussing it with each other. It is curious that whilst France is keeping the world guessing diplomatically, her opponents are keeping France guessing militarily, which is surely a much higher price to pay for silence.

    But I certainly concur that it is a little early for France or her allies to claim any kind of victory or to underestimate the tenacity, determination and resilience of her opponents to stand up to repeated attempts to intimidate them.


    .
    Papa Clement
    Papa Clement
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 706
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2019-02-10

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Papa Clement Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:07 am

    Thanks for the confirmation of the correct form of address, Tkolter. Very Happy

    .
    avatar
    WhiteRose
    Squire
    Squire


    Number of posts : 17
    Reputation : 2
    Registration date : 2019-01-11

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by WhiteRose Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:45 am

    As someone, who knows no one that well at all in here, to the point I barely know who runs which nation/ position(a point I go out of my way to maintain so the only time I can learn people's opinions of deep subjects is through the game mechanics).... this has all become abit of a d*ck swinging contest really!?

    I think in an effort to display how knowledgeable each of us are on any given subject the forum is sailing very close to (and in my own humble opinion slightly crossing) the line when it comes to in game opinions and views... inside knowledge on who's sent what to who and why! The beauty of this game and its mechanics are that you're never quite in the know. Whoops speaking to who? Whoa getting along privately? What little works in the newspaper mean? Why is that person visiting there?

    Like I say, I'm not very experienced, not very good, and basically come onto the forum to read the turn newspaper reviews and little comments that get posted by folks so feel free to give this view little gravitas.
    avatar
    WhiteRose
    Squire
    Squire


    Number of posts : 17
    Reputation : 2
    Registration date : 2019-01-11

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by WhiteRose Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:46 am

    Excuse typos


    Papa Clement
    Papa Clement
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 706
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2019-02-10

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Papa Clement Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:45 pm

    WhiteRose wrote:Like I say,  I'm not very experienced,  not very good,  and basically come onto the forum to read the turn newspaper reviews and little comments that get posted by folks so feel free to give this view little gravitas.

    I'm sure you're doing yourself a disservice, WhiteRose.  Have you thought about writing your own turn newspaper review for us to enjoy?  

    Please don't feel put off by the length of some of my comments - I prefer to answer questions fully.  Any newspaper review is inevitably influenced by the player who writes it, which is not necessarily a bad thing unless it consistently pushes a viewpoint favourable to the author, excluding or ridiculing others and shutting down debate by suggesting a consensus which does not necessarily exist.  I don't get upset by them, but correct what I feel is bias with the reasons why.  Others may disagree and post accordingly.  That generates debate. I learn from others and hopefully they learn from me.  Discussing what has happened in the game, i.e. its history, seems fair, even helpful in terms of adding background which for reasons of brevity may not have appeared in the newspapers.  Most of what I post has appeared there or in game letters, which often contain background.  I also think it fair to include a certain amount of speculation.  All this is in public, not private, so nobody should feel disadvantaged and it is not breaking any rules.  I am certainly not discussing treaties or seeking allies over the forum, and to make doubly sure I am keeping within the terms of forum use have disabled private messages.  Perhaps my discussion of philosophy/religion with Deacon should have been in private, so if you found it boring, sorry.  I don't mind a bit of background on the interesting people who visit here, but each to his own.

    Look forward to reading your newspaper review. Smile
    avatar
    WhiteRose
    Squire
    Squire


    Number of posts : 17
    Reputation : 2
    Registration date : 2019-01-11

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by WhiteRose Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:32 pm

    Think the points been missed 🙄

    Sent from Topic'it App
    Deacon
    Deacon
    Emperor
    Emperor


    Number of posts : 1859
    Age : 61
    Location : Portland OR, USA
    Reputation : 44
    Registration date : 2010-04-13

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Deacon Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:19 pm

    tkolter wrote:

    But the Abyssinian Church jumped on the Christian bandwagon after a holy saint brought the new teachings to her so as a continuous religion tradition overall it predates the Vatican and the holy Ark of the Covenant is under the protection of Abyssinia (or better the nation is under God's protection because the Ark is present).

    The traditional Orthodox Churches and the Roman Church go back the apostles. They all have a continuous religious tradition that goes back to the foundation of Christianity as a faith. It isn't possible to pre-date them because they were all there at the very beginning of Christianity. It may well be that the Abyssinian Church shares these same roots, given there are reports of the Apostle Matthew preaching there, but the Abyssinian Church can't pre-date the beginning of Christianity. It is a logical impossibility.

    In game, you can, of course, assert whatever you wish, but historical facts do matter Laughing And Ethiopia was the second country to convert to Christianity behind Armenia and establish the faith as a state religion (according to the wikipedia entry). Maybe you meant to say that Ethiopia established its state religion of christianity before Rome? That appears to be a true statement, though I'm not sure that really means much when examining the religious tradition itself.

    (I don't know enough about all the various churches to speak to all of their roots, but there may well be others that can legitimately trace a lineage back to the apostles.)
    tkolter
    tkolter
    Viscount
    Viscount


    Number of posts : 160
    Age : 57
    Reputation : 1
    Registration date : 2018-06-15

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by tkolter Thu Mar 07, 2019 8:32 am

    Lets see the Queen of Sheba brings the faith in the one God to Sheba with the Ark after a divine act to do so a miracle founding the early faith then after an Apostle brings the faith of Christ which was added to the teachings of the Church this means from several centuries before Christ the one God was worshipped and the new teachings added with a new Bible so Abyssinia and her ancestors wre worshipping the One God when the Popes ancestors worshipped rocks and pagan demons. Nuff' said.
    Deacon
    Deacon
    Emperor
    Emperor


    Number of posts : 1859
    Age : 61
    Location : Portland OR, USA
    Reputation : 44
    Registration date : 2010-04-13

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Deacon Thu Mar 07, 2019 8:23 pm


    That Abyssinia was Christian first because they were Jewish before becoming Christian is certainly a unique perspective.

    Papa Clement
    Papa Clement
    King
    King


    Number of posts : 706
    Reputation : 13
    Registration date : 2019-02-10

    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Papa Clement Thu Mar 07, 2019 9:47 pm

    Deacon wrote:
    That Abyssinia was Christian first because they were Jewish before becoming Christian is certainly a unique perspective.

    Certainly is.  I always understood that the Ark had been lost, carried off by the Babylonians with other plunder.  If so then it didn't seem to do them much good in terms of protecting their armies.  So there is an easy way to sort this out: tkolter should produce the ark.  The proof that it is real and belongs to him will be when 1F, protected by the Ark, is able to hold off an army.  Seems to be a rather expensive way to be humiliated, but as others have observed, I don't really do subtlety.  Smile

    .

    Sponsored content


    Game 10 - Page 21 Empty Re: Game 10

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Nov 22, 2024 2:26 pm