PBeM question

[Morten Helles]

I know a lot of you out there play in a BR PBeM campaign. I have played
BR PBeM for several weeks now, and I want your opinion on two things:

First, I have noticed that nearly all attack and contest attempts on
foreign lands and holdings seem to fail miserably. This greatly
discourages regents from being offensive. Result: They play highly
defensive, and instead of taking from others they use all resources to
rule up their provinces and ally with one guild and one priest to make
an incredible powerbase impossible to penetrate for outsiders. What is
wrong with that, you ask? Three things:

1) It is NOT very exciting. Most BR settings are set in the anuirean
lands, where battle and conquering is the spirit, not ruling and forging
inbreakble alliances (being friends in the real world doesn't mean you
have to be friends in the BR game, too). Anuire is a place of action! In
Darkstar's campaign, allow me to salute the regents of Alamie, Haelyn's
Aegis and Zikala. They bring action and feed the anuirean newspaper with
exciting news. Thank you! That is what we need! (or am I alone on this?)

2) The rule and ally tactic spreads like a disease because if you do not
rule also, your kingdom will grow relatively weaker. And if your
neighbour is sponsored by that guild and that temple, you'd better have
such sponsors too. "Keeping up with the Jones'", eh? And if everybody
get stronger, who gain anything relatively? No one!

3) It is unrealistic. If everybody rules provinces, population will
soar. In Darkstar's campaign (no offense, Ian, this goes to the players,
and NOT to you) the anuirean population has doubled in 10 DTs, that is
in less than 3 years! (who said the population of India is growing
fast?) Please correct me if I am wrong, Ian.

Comments? What can be done? Do the rules need to be modyfied to
encourage offensive action? Or is everybody happy playing defensively
and build up strong kingdoms?

My second point regards lieutenants. When I order my lieutenant to do
some domain action when does he start and when does he finish? Does it
take one month? Three months?

That's all, folks. Thanks for listening.

Morten.

PS: To be absolutely certain that no misunderstandings occur, let me say
that I *love* to play in Darkstar's campaign. It's HUGE and it's
GREAAAAT! (ups, to much Frosties cornflakes for me :)

+

[Dennis J. Mobley]

Morten Helles wrote:
>
> I know a lot of you out there play in a BR PBeM campaign. I have played
> BR PBeM for several weeks now, and I want your opinion on two things:
>
> First, I have noticed that nearly all attack and contest attempts on
> foreign lands and holdings seem to fail miserably. This greatly
> discourages regents from being offensive. Result: They play highly
> defensive, and instead of taking from others they use all resources to
> rule up their provinces and ally with one guild and one priest to make
> an incredible powerbase impossible to penetrate for outsiders. What is
> wrong with that, you ask? Three things:
>
> 1) It is NOT very exciting. Most BR settings are set in the anuirean
> lands, where battle and conquering is the spirit, not ruling and forging
> inbreakble alliances (being friends in the real world doesn't mean you
> have to be friends in the BR game, too). Anuire is a place of action! In
> Darkstar's campaign, allow me to salute the regents of Alamie, Haelyn's
> Aegis and Zikala. They bring action and feed the anuirean newspaper with
> exciting news. Thank you! That is what we need! (or am I alone on this?)
>
> 2) The rule and ally tactic spreads like a disease because if you do not
> rule also, your kingdom will grow relatively weaker. And if your
> neighbour is sponsored by that guild and that temple, you'd better have
> such sponsors too. "Keeping up with the Jones'", eh? And if everybody
> get stronger, who gain anything relatively? No one!
>
> 3) It is unrealistic. If everybody rules provinces, population will
> soar. In Darkstar's campaign (no offense, Ian, this goes to the players,
> and NOT to you) the anuirean population has doubled in 10 DTs, that is
> in less than 3 years! (who said the population of India is growing
> fast?) Please correct me if I am wrong, Ian.
>
> Comments? What can be done? Do the rules need to be modyfied to
> encourage offensive action? Or is everybody happy playing defensively
> and build up strong kingdoms?
>
> My second point regards lieutenants. When I order my lieutenant to do
> some domain action when does he start and when does he finish? Does it
> take one month? Three months?
>
> That's all, folks. Thanks for listening.
>
> Morten.
>
> PS: To be absolutely certain that no misunderstandings occur, let me say
> that I *love* to play in Darkstar's campaign. It's HUGE and it's
> GREAAAAT! (ups, to much Frosties cornflakes for me :)
>
> +

[Darkstar]

Morten Helles wrote:

> 1) It is NOT very exciting. Most BR settings are set in the anuirean
> lands, where battle and conquering is the spirit, not ruling and forging
> inbreakble alliances (being friends in the real world doesn't mean you
> have to be friends in the BR game, too). Anuire is a place of action! In
> Darkstar's campaign, allow me to salute the regents of Alamie, Haelyn's
> Aegis and Zikala. They bring action and feed the anuirean newspaper with
> exciting news. Thank you! That is what we need! (or am I alone on this?)

Certainly Anuire in my campaing has been a little quiet with only one
real war happening. The Rjurik lands look like hotting up though as do
the Brecht and Khinasi lands.
I think most players like to build a solid base first then start
conquering other kingdom, and some prefer to just build up alliances and
the like. For some players this is just as exciting as setting out to
conquer other lands, as a lot easier to run in a pbem game to.
I personally prefer to go on the offensive as soon as possible the worry
about building holdings later.
With this weeks turn in my campaign there were 3 minor battles and one
major war to run so not really a lot of fighting going on.
This doesn't mean that I want all the regents in my campaign to go to
war at once as it get difficult to run a campign then (time mainly).


> 2) The rule and ally tactic spreads like a disease because if you do not
> rule also, your kingdom will grow relatively weaker. And if your
> neighbour is sponsored by that guild and that temple, you'd better have
> such sponsors too. "Keeping up with the Jones'", eh? And if everybody
> get stronger, who gain anything relatively? No one!

A kingdom with a allied guild and temple in their lands is much more
secure that one with neutral or enemy guilds and temples in their
kingdom. One thing to note about the campaign newspaper I write is that
I leave out all the contest and rule actions as they don't really make
interesting reading.


> 3) It is unrealistic. If everybody rules provinces, population will
> soar. In Darkstar's campaign (no offense, Ian, this goes to the players,
> and NOT to you) the anuirean population has doubled in 10 DTs, that is
> in less than 3 years! (who said the population of India is growing
> fast?) Please correct me if I am wrong, Ian.

I am not sure about doubled by certainly several realms have been busy
increasing their provinces at a fast rate.


> Comments? What can be done? Do the rules need to be modyfied to
> encourage offensive action? Or is everybody happy playing defensively
> and building up strong kingdoms?

I guess that depends on the regent. Birthright is a game of diplomacy as
much as a wargame so both ways of playing are just as important. You do
need a strong kingdom to carry out a war properly. In my campaign I use
NPC regents to aid or hinder the activities of PC rulers who go to war
depending on the situation and how I think the NPC would act. For
instance if a kingdom is invaded then it is likely that a guild or
temple in that realm would be likely to aid the kingdom's ruler unless
they are an enemy of the ruler.


> My second point regards lieutenants. When I order my lieutenant to do
> some domain action when does he start and when does he finish? Does it
> take one month? Three months?

I assume that Lieutenant have other thing to do during a turn. They may
also serve as a minister of a government or high priest of one of the
temples. This means that unlike the ruler, who rules and does little
else they have other duties in the running of the
government/guild/temple etc. This means that they can only spend part of
the season assisting their lord with a realm action.
That is one suggestion anyway.

- --
Ian Hoskins

e-Mail: hoss@box.net.au
ICQ: 2938300
Home Page: http://www.box.net.au/~hoss/birth.html

From the Darkness we came.
And to the Darkness we will return.

[AMagie666@aol.co]

The population WILL increase during times of peace. Less war means more
resources for disease control and extra food for the masses. Also, it is
impossible
for a mideival country to have an accurate census, some people live in areas
to inaccessable for royal servants to reach easily. As more people come into
a province
and it is more thoroughly explored, these areas and their inhabitants are
integrated into the "civilized" whole.(and thus seem to "magically" spring up
out of nowhere.)
Finally, the "rule" action is just a series of advertisements and land grants
that attract people from elsewhere.

So, a province can quickly acquire a larger population. Still, there is a
limit to this. IMC, I like to impose special conditions. A ruler of an island
nation had to buy some ships and assign them to the sole task of ferrying
people across the straits of Aerele AND he had to throw in additional
GB's(sweetening the pot) to attract people. Plus, it can be a good
adventure. I had the ruler of Roesone travel to the Rjurik highlands, where
he persuaded a refugee Rjurik tribe (cast out of the Northern wastes by the
White Witch) to colonize his newly conquered Albiele island.

[Ken Minchin]

> I know a lot of you out there play in a BR PBeM campaign. I have played
> BR PBeM for several weeks now, and I want your opinion on two things:

You asked, now you shall recieve

> First, I have noticed that nearly all attack and contest attempts on foreign
> lands and holdings seem to fail miserably. This greatly discourages regents
> from being offensive. Result: They play highly defensive, and instead of
> taking from others they use all resources to rule up their provinces and ally
> with one guild and one priest to make an incredible powerbase impossible to
> penetrate for outsiders. What is wrong with that, you ask? Three things

> 1) It is NOT very exciting. Most BR settings are set in the anuirean lands,
> where battle and conquering is the spirit, not ruling and forging inbreakble
> alliances (being friends in the real world doesn't mean you have to be
> friends in the BR game, too). Anuire is a place of action! In Darkstar's
> campaign, allow me to salute the regents of Alamie, Haelyn's Aegis and
> Zikala. They bring action and feed the anuirean newspaper with exciting news.
> Thank you! That is what we need! (or am I alone on this?)

It is exciting, you just don't seem to know how to get into it, let me give you
two examples.

1) In Blood DM's campaign, I am playing Miss. Caroline Alam of Alamie. At
present, I am embroiled in a conflict with Endier. Edric of Endier, soon to be
it's former ruler had an increadible power base as you so mentioned, I just
took a few slight percautions to make sure it was open to failiure.

2) In Darkstar's game, I am playing The Siren. I'll armit it's different
playing an Awnshegh and it's really different playing one of the most neutral
there are. The traitorous Bannier Andien my former ally, did not inform me he
had ammassed the support of four countries in order to destroy me, and I had
only ruled my provinces for two turns, with no reason for them to attack me. I
pity them as Bannier, along with 2 nations, will be crippled by tomorrow, if my
plans go through well. (And the ruling and diplomacy had nothing to do with my
power, in fact, had I done anything else I would be more powerful as my ally,
betrayed me, the twirp) Alliances are not written in stone.

> 2) The rule and ally tactic spreads like a disease because if you do not rule
> also, your kingdom will grow relatively weaker. And if your neighbour is
> sponsored by that guild and that temple, you'd better have such sponsors too.
> "Keeping up with the Jones'", eh? And if everybody get stronger, who gain
> anything relatively? No one!

In Blood's as I formentioned, I have not yet ruled a province, and nor have too
many people.

> 3) It is unrealistic. If everybody rules provinces, population will soar. In
> Darkstar's campaign (no offense, Ian, this goes to the players, and NOT to
> you) the anuirean population has doubled in 10 DTs, that is in less than 3
> years! (who said the population of India is growing fast?) Please correct me
> if I am wrong, Ian.

I think you are a little off there, but it's not too far from the truth, though
notice, there are huge amount of people that don't have a home, they just
choose to make a home there, it's not all that hard and in fact, the population
isn't growing that much, it's just concentrating.

> Comments? What can be done? Do the rules need to be modyfied to encourage
> offensive action? Or is everybody happy playing defensively and build up
> strong kingdoms?

Get creative to get involved. That's all.

> My second point regards lieutenants. When I order my lieutenant to do some
> domain action when does he start and when does he finish? Does it take one
> month? Three months?

One lieutenant action/domain turn, mention it whenever you want.

> That's all, folks. Thanks for listening.

You're welcome

> Morten.
>
> PS: To be absolutely certain that no misunderstandings occur, let me say that
> I *love* to play in Darkstar's campaign. It's HUGE and it's GREAAAAT! (ups,
> to much Frosties cornflakes for me :)

Just adding my two dollars worth here (I give too much, or I tip big, you
choose) I agree, Darkstar's PBEM is great, as are Blood's and the other's I
wager are great too. But in Darkstar's watch that infernal guilder that puts a
knife in your back when you have the chance. Lucky his kids were nice enough
to warn me about his treachery. :) :) :)

With pleasure, Ken Minchin