Contest Province

[Benjamin]

Originally posted by Osprey@May 11 2004, 04:43 AM
"Destroy every last trace of their blasted civilization! Let not this land know it has been tread upon by the hated heel of humanity! Leave nothing standing. Leave no one alive. We march!"

heheheh...

Sort of sounds like an evil wizard living in a large tower in a country ruled by horsemen from a (somewhat) recent movie....

Back on topic:

I tend to think that raiders slashing/burning/looting a province 1 have a better chance of wiping out everyone and signs of civilization than they would in a province 3. In a province 3, some people are going to have stone buildings, there will be deep wells dugs, fields will be fenced in with stone fences, heavier trod dirt paths/roads will exist, and homes will be more widespread throughout the province. Raiders will have a hard time striking all of them in a short time. Yes, a village or two, but that's about it. Now in a province 1, there is only a village or two, and thus they can be easily targetted. However, in a province 1 you also have a lot of independent minded people living on small homesteads all over, making it harder to wipe them all out in a short time.

But perhaps this is just reality mongering to the nth degree.

[tcharazazel]

I tend to think that raiders slashing/burning/looting a province 1 have a better chance of wiping out everyone and signs of civilization than they would in a province 3. In a province 3, some people are going to have stone buildings, there will be deep wells dugs, fields will be fenced in with stone fences, heavier trod dirt paths/roads will exist, and homes will be more widespread throughout the province. Raiders will have a hard time striking all of them in a short time. Yes, a village or two, but that's about it. Now in a province 1, there is only a village or two, and thus they can be easily targetted. However, in a province 1 you also have a lot of independent minded people living on small homesteads all over, making it harder to wipe them all out in a short time.

Not really following your point there Ben. Are you agreeing, disagreeing or just stating for the record what you think?

[Osprey]

Raiding a province isn't going to be effective in small bands, just hitting a village or two. Check out the numbers from my original post: 2 units per holding or province level.

So a province 1 could be raided down to level 0 by 2 full companies (c.300-400 raiders). A province 4 would take 8 companies to actually drop the level...

Getting the picture? These are rules for large-scale raiding, the kinds of things marauding ARMIES do, not bandits and warbands.

I would just treat the smaller raider groups like a Bandit event: 1d6 GB in damage per province, representing a series of small raids, unless the regent goes and deals with them effectively. But that kind of small-scale damage can generally be recovered once the bandits are driven out or killed, in a season's time. Hence no drop in the province level.

Now if a regent let that sort of thing go on for say 4 seasons in a row, I'd (as a DM) nail the permanent province level and drop it.

[Benjamin]

OK, I went back and reread the actions submitted. Here are my comments on it (you can disregard, if you wish, the previous comments).

Contest Province:
I like this idea. I wonder, though, if you should convert to something like Migrate Population (from the 2E net actions). After all, what you are effectively doing is having a holding tell the people "LEAVE NOW AND DON'T COME BACK", and they listen. Where do they go? They have to relocate somewhere. Clearly, though, a province 2 that is contested will have little effect on a province 5 next to it. But maybe it will provide a bonus to Rule Province if performed the next action?

A few mechanics questions.

Say a province 4/1. I'm the sole monopoly guilder, and I convince a temple to side with me (who has all temples). The law holder only has law 2. I Contest Province successfully, and people move out. My holding drops by 1. Temple drops by 1. What about law? Does it drop or not?

Let's say I do it again, and succeed. Law is now full in the province (law2)? Or does it control half the law in the province as it was before the action (now a law 1)? [ie, maintain initial ratio of holdings as province level drops]

Why would any other regents agree to drop the level of the province? Everyone who can do this loses as they like big provinces. Only wizards want to drop civ levels, and they can't. I don't ever see this being used.

If a regent succeeds, the people move, but civilization remnants stay. Source levels will return every 5 years. Not a good investment for a landed wizard, either.


Raid Province
I think the rules for dropping a province in levels are there for a reason. This action is bypassing that rule. Perhaps the occupation lengths ought to be changed, but I think it should still be harder to reduce a province than this. If it takes an invader/occupier a whole 4 weeks of non-combat to pillage a province, why are we allowing a raiding party to do the same in just 1 week? I don't like this idea. No one will fight wars anymore, unless they intend to invest the provinces. They will just raid their enemies and drive them to bankruptcy.

I like the rules as they pertain to holdings. I think this is actually a great idea on how to Raid Province. You have enough raiders, you raid holdings, they drop, you get gold. Brilliant.

However, when it comes to the province, I recommend one small change: instead of permanently dropping the province level, make it contested. Force the ruler to Rule it back into submission. Otherwise the people are too scared to work the fields, scattered as refugees from the raids, etc. and unable to pay taxes or believe in their liege to pay RP. Allow the raiders to take the GB from the province just as submitted. But dropping the province level permanently is too powerful.

[tcharazazel]

Say a province 4/1. I'm the sole monopoly guilder, and I convince a temple to side with me (who has all temples). The law holder only has law 2. I Contest Province successfully, and people move out. My holding drops by 1. Temple drops by 1. What about law? Does it drop or not?

It won't drop, because its below the province level.

Let's say I do it again, and succeed. Law is now full in the province (law2)? Or does it control half the law in the province as it was before the action (now a law 1)? [ie, maintain initial ratio of holdings as province level drops]

Yes, Law is now full as the province is now level 2. If we were to maintain the initial ratios then the province isnt really dropping in levels.

Why would any other regents agree to drop the level of the province? Everyone who can do this loses as they like big provinces. Only wizards want to drop civ levels, and they can't. I don't ever see this being used.

Heheh, yeah I asked Osprey that also. However, he brought up the good point that enemies of the landed regent would try to contest the province and force it lower to slow the growth of the regent, or out of spite, or because they hate the landed regent ect.

This is also the way to keep the province at a certain level, as the province regent can only raise the province once a season. Taking your example, lets say the province regent rules up his province to level 5 in Month 1, the guild and temple regents both want to keep the province at level 4 (for whatever reason, like they both want to keep the province regent from gaining too much power, have other alliances that require them to ensure this province stays low, or maybe they both just hate the province regent as he did something to offend them.) So together they succesfully contest the province in Month 2 so it drops back down to level 4.

This use of contest province would probably be used by regents who want to keep a vassal in a weaker position.

If a regent succeeds, the people move, but civilization remnants stay. Source levels will return every 5 years. Not a good investment for a landed wizard, either.

Yep, why wizards would choose to summon up some monsters and raid the province, burning and totally destroying the province.

However, when it comes to the province, I recommend one small change: instead of permanently dropping the province level, make it contested. Force the ruler to Rule it back into submission. Otherwise the people are too scared to work the fields, scattered as refugees from the raids, etc. and unable to pay taxes or believe in their liege to pay RP. Allow the raiders to take the GB from the province just as submitted. But dropping the province level permanently is too powerful.

Cool idea, however, maybe have each 2 enemy units in the province = a virtual Law holding for determining the contest province result and if the province regent fails, then the province will permently drop 1 level.

[Osprey]

like this idea. I wonder, though, if you should convert to something like Migrate Population (from the 2E net actions). After all, what you are effectively doing is having a holding tell the people "LEAVE NOW AND DON'T COME BACK", and they listen. Where do they go? They have to relocate somewhere. Clearly, though, a province 2 that is contested will have little effect on a province 5 next to it. But maybe it will provide a bonus to Rule Province if performed the next action?

It's been discussed in other places on the forums that province levels may not necesarilly represent pure population within the area, but rather the landed regent's control of that people. Hence the reason the regent gets taxes and regency from them. So Contesting a province might better be represented by actively working to undermine a portion of the population against the regent. If successful, they stop paying taxes, working the fields, or submitting to the regent's authority. Likewise they no longer muster if called up as militia.

This sort of more fluid view of province levels goes a long way toward explaining why a regent could rule the same province 1 level per season, concievably from level 0 to 10 even, in about 2-1/2 years. Because if province levels are a measure of absolute population, this is simply impossible, no matter the power of divine blood.

Holding levels would only drop if forced to. Any other mechanic would be too messy.

T'Char gave some good reasons for why others would contest a province. It's apurely offensive action, obviously, and as such ask yourself this: though it requires some investment to create and rule up a holding to level 2, is it really more expensive than creating an army, marching in, holding it until it has defeated all comers and managed to occupy the province for 4 weeks runnning, and only then start pillaging it? For those with a fair amount of RP but no GB, I wanted to open up a more political option for attacking a landed enemy's power base.

Only wizards want to drop civ levels, and they can't. I don't ever see this being used.

If you use the virtual guilds idea from BRCS (and I'm a huge fan of it), then a level 6+ source could be used to contest its province. Granted, a rare occurence, but not inconciievable. And the 5 year regeneration thing is, as far as I know, not necesarilly an official rule, at least for the revision project. Not everything from the BoM and BoP is being adopted. Maybe Raesene or Ideggman can answer that one, tho I certainly don't recall it being included in the BRCS.

Raid Province
I think the rules for dropping a province in levels are there for a reason. This action is bypassing that rule. Perhaps the occupation lengths ought to be changed, but I think it should still be harder to reduce a province than this. If it takes an invader/occupier a whole 4 weeks of non-combat to pillage a province, why are we allowing a raiding party to do the same in just 1 week? I don't like this idea. No one will fight wars anymore, unless they intend to invest the provinces. They will just raid their enemies and drive them to bankruptcy.

I like the rules as they pertain to holdings. I think this is actually a great idea on how to Raid Province. You have enough raiders, you raid holdings, they drop, you get gold. Brilliant.

However, when it comes to the province, I recommend one small change: instead of permanently dropping the province level, make it contested. Force the ruler to Rule it back into submission. Otherwise the people are too scared to work the fields, scattered as refugees from the raids, etc. and unable to pay taxes or believe in their liege to pay RP. Allow the raiders to take the GB from the province just as submitted. But dropping the province level permanently is too powerful.

The rules for Pillaging Provinces are problematically slow, in my opinion. You say the rules are theere for a reason? My reason for introducing this was specifically to make it easier to lower province levels by armies that don't have the strength to sit around and Occupy a place long-term. Goblins, for example, have really crappy armies but large numbers - they're ideal raiders, but poor conquerors.

The need for lowering provinces exists in part because Ruling Provinces is now easier (with BRCS/3.5 revision) rules than ever before. Which means most long-running games are going to have a problem where there's an ever-increasing number of high-level provinces, and only major wars by very powerful military forces are going to reduce those levels. And that sort of thing is going to be a major exception: if a war is so large and overwhelmingly effective that an invader can attack, fight, and remain uncontested in occupation for months at a time, why would he not simply Invest the province(s) for himself, and thus expand his domain? Maybe in a few cases this would happen, but for the most part it is far more efficient and effective to absorb a conquered land than it is to simply occupy or pillage it. The amount of money that can be gotten from pillaging is a pittance compared to the amount to be had from investing it and holding it for at least a year. Not to mention the regency gain...

The real difference with raiding is that it only works once in a province in a given season - whereas pillaging can be done month after month after month, until a province is pillaged into oblivion. So Pillaging can earn more loot and and do more damage ultimately - which means it's far from obsolete as an option for invasion and occupation. Raiding is "the easy money."

Osprey

[Osprey]

There are two amendments I should make to raiding:

-Any GB gained from raiding is subtracted from the province or holding regent's treasury.

-Only a province raided to its limit will permanently lose a level. Partial amounts of raiding (such as 3 GB looted from a level 4 province) only reduce the province regent's treasury by an equal amount.

Simple oversights, but important, especially in cases where the raiders are present only in smaller numbers or when high level provinces are raided for less than they could be.

Osprey