User talk:Marc J./Luz Capital Debate

Thank you very much for putting this discussion here for all to see - this is extremely interesting. TanSerrai

These messages aren't the only ones: I've chronicled more of them on Luz Capital Debate2. ~ Marc J. 16:45, 11 October 2006 (CEST)

As I don't want to be specifically involved in the "Ruler channel discussion" I will ask this here: If LdB is getting hammered in Grehk and in danger of losing the capital, should they choose that time to move the capital back to the previous city it would seem to be of very strategic value and thus worthy of a lightning bolt. So my question is, is moving the capital AWAY from the front when threatened with loss of the city going to get a LB since it's clearly a strategic move - just not an OFFENSIVELY strategic one? (User: jdsiii 11 October 2006)

The fact is that LDB isnt getting hammered in Grekh. Its the fact that Delvin has brought up the argument 4 months after it happend. Plus Grekh is a much better place to have the capitol as it is the most economically best city for keeping the realm together ScottSabin 18:03, 11 October 2006 (CEST)

Delvin did bring up this 4 months after because: Until the recent discussion (during the last week) regarding general movement of capitals he (and all others in Riombara) thought that: 1) the single Lightning bolt hitting Nhoc for moving the capital was all 'punishment' Luz was going to get and Tom did consider the issue closed. 2) Tom's statements during the recent discussion did show that our assumption was wrong and Tom did in fact consider the lightning bolt as a warning that something against the rules did happen /and/ did want this to be reversed. Until now he was simply not aware that the move was not reversed. Tom did expressively ask that the players should deal with this issue OOC.

Regarding Grehk being 'the best city for Luz to keep the realm together': This may be partially even be the case. However, the difference between Grehk and Jidington (or even Eylmon or Eno) are so low that moving the capital /only/ because of this would most probably be a waste of effort and ressources. Plus economically it only makes (a little) sense in regard of an undead invasion (guaranteed to not occur for at least 6 more months).

Moving your capital right up to the front during a time when war with Riombara was already decided upon and going to happen within 2 weeks 'only for economic reasons of keeping the realm under control more easily' is an argument I'd be very carefull to put before Tom. This is close to the 'laywer' speak he really hates.

I can offer a timeline of events to clarify this, using only facts (please correct any fact that is wrong):

April/May: 1) Tensions between Riombara and Luz/Enweil rise.

June: 2) (assumption) Enweil and Luz decide to attack Riombara in the near future. Avalon is informed and agrees to attack Fronen. Riombara is thus isolated (brilliant diplomacy so far).

3) Luz moves its capital to Grehk, right at the only border they expect to have to fight.

4) Luz repairs its regions.

5) 1 week after the movement of Luz capital: Luz and Enweil start a recruiting drive (the spikes can be seen in the military power graph). Riombara monitors this through infiltrators.

6) Enweils army is spotted moving towards Fwuvoghor.

7) 2 weeks after the movement of the capital: Enweil and Luz declare war against Riombara and attack.

8) Avalon declares war against Fronen.

Now my question: How probable is it that Luz movement of their capital was done only because of economic reasons /and/ the decision to go to war did happen to be decided during the two weeks between Luz moving their capital and their attack? How probable is it that Luz did not know that they'd go to war against Luz 2 weeks before attacking? TanSerrai 18:51, 11 October 2006 (CEST)

I can say that the Avalon war against Fronen was coincidental. However, that is aside from the point. I don't remember dates or lengths of time specificly. But, long before the war was declared, when we (Enweil/Luz) knew it would happen, the capital move was a planned pre-requisite to the war. Enweil had to specificly wait until after the capital was moved and the damage of such was repaired for the war to become official and to start to making offensives. I have little doubt that the move was strategical in nature. I will withold my opinions on the matter after-the-fact, because I really don't have time to argue them now. -- Neoro 06:00, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

"Until now he was simply not aware that the move was not reversed" Tom has a char in Luz called Testing Oaths, he has probly been aware of the capital not being moved back but has never raised it.

Also you say that Luz's reason for moving the capital is purely about the war. Wasnt it Riombara that made this war happen by not agreeing to the treaty with Luz? And that Delvin came into our lands even when we asked/told him not to.

You say we should change our capital....how about Eno...it was there before (Eno Chia..Luz Mother Realm) But then you could say that we are doing it for the stategic advantage over Irombro. ScottSabin 20:16, 11 October 2006 (CEST)

Delvin made clear from the end of the invasion that Luz wasn't likely to get Bolkenia and Cagamir back without a fight. Riombara didn't declare war; Luz did. Luz made long and careful preparations with Enweil and Avalon, moved their capital, and declared war.

How do you figure Riombara "made this war happen"? --Anaris 03:58, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

My main problem with the cap being in Eno OR Grehk is utter lack of RP basis. What LUNATIC puts there capitol in a city that, about 2 years earlier (game terms) was the center of a civil war? Well, NOBODY does in real life... but in BM they do. Why? Because BM game mechanics favor that sort of behavior. THATS why its abuse. Because in real life, no such thing would happen, and the only reason it happens in BM is for strategic advantage. Grehk is NOT economically more advantageous. It leaves your RICHEST REGION, Eno, farther away. It makes regions like Cagamir more prone to rebellion. Of course, the Bolkenia barrier has something to do with that too. Now, about Eno, that doesnt make any RP sense either. You just got it from the Undead... what.... 9 game months ago? A game year ago? Yeah, um, nobody puts there capitol in a city that was the second biggest hotbed of evil in the continent (Rines being the largest hotbed, according to the research I've done, of Undead sproutings). Now, that said, Tom's testing chars never pay attention to their surroundings. He doesnt even read most of the messages, I believe. Just tests new features. He had one in Norland when I had a char there, never sent a single message, and I doubt if Tom takes the time to read through all the messages in a realm, or even pays attention to them. Also, I dont see the problem with waiting four months. In US law, you have something like SIX YEARS to raise a case. Why is four months such a problem? Plus, new evidence has surfaced, and a previously inconclusive case is simply being reopened. Also, Timothy didnt say just to change capitols. He said to change capitols back to how they were, which means Jiddington. Of course go to Eno if you want... Rio will take the entire north of LdB, and you still wont succeeed in TOing Irombro city, lol. Behold the power of priests. Vellos 00:23, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

I take it then that Kalmar should not exist on the EC then? I belive that Kalmar was bourne out of the lands inhibited by monsters there. Its is actually good RP to move your capital to one that was fought over in a civil war. It is saying the the rebels (who lost) "Ha Ha...look what we got! We are goign to stop here and make it our capital" The french did this after WW1 the railway car that Germany Signed peace in was put on display...then 11 years later Hitler made the French Government sign thier Peace treaty in the same car. It is perfect RP at rubbing salt into the wounds of your enemy.

And if Luz wants to move it to a city that can starve at any moment then fine, move it to Eno. And we will TO Irombro City, Priest dont last forever you do know. ScottSabin 13:05, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

Hitler and WWI are not at all medieval. Kalmar could exist, because they have no other OPTIONS. But not maniac will give PREFERANCE to a monster-ridden city. And, also, find me a historical example, preferably before... 1600 I guess (and after 0 AD) where a nation's capitol was moved to a city they just fought a civil war with. You wont find any. Why? Because its a VERY bad idea in RL terms. There will still be rebels hanging around for years. It makes fine RP sense to wave a mark of humiliation before rebels or enemies or something, but not to make your capitol that mark by putting it in one of their former cities. That makes a great mockery in BM... and would result in complete collapse of a realm in RL terms. After Alexander the Great put his capitol in... either Babylon or Susa or Persepolis... his empire quickly degraded. Border areas began to stage rebellions, ESPECIALLY in Greece. Compare to Rome's capitol change from Rome to Constantinople.... we see little RL effects from that. Heck, Alexander's shift even gave him a much more central capitol. Plus, priests do last almost forever. Especially when you have 3 of them. Irombrozia has one, but two TLs who used to be priests who could switch at a moments notice, lol. Vellos 14:07, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

During the English Civil war (just after 1600) King Charles had his capital in Oxford. After the war was over his son had his capital in London when he was invited back in less than 10 years after the be-heading of his father (cant remember the exact time). London was a parlementarian city. As soon as they had finsihed the war they had King charles II and they did not rebel again or do anything of the sort.

Russia is another example (agian not in the 1600's) But their origional capital was Novogrod on the banks of Lake Ladoga (or there abouts) After the Revolution they had it changed to Moscow, a much more centralised city better for the ever expandign empire.

And im sure Germany changed its capital, becasue it was not always Berlin if my memory serves me right.

There are lots of examples of countries changing their capitols btu not all of them are well documented, especially the ones of the medieval age.

Plus if Tom did not want us to change our capital...why did he ever put the feature into it? ScottSabin 14:26, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

Scott, at the time Luz did move its capital, it was common knowledge that Tom had clearly stated that to do so 'for tactical reasons' is abuse. Thus the Lightning bolt. As we now know, Tom did mean his LB as 'move the capital back or be considered a cheater'. End of story. TanSerrai 14:51, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

To be honest then shouldnt Tom in his own words say what he wants? Ie with the LB send a message saying to move the capital back? It would solve a whole lot of trouble. ScottSabin 17:46, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

Scott, Tom _has_ said what he wants - the following are his own words, an answer to someone pointing out (among other things) that Luz had moved its capital, been lightning bolted, but did not react after the lightning bolt):

(start quote) You're not wrong there. Except that I don't want to start down the slippery slope of manual intervention.

I see this as something to solve on the player level: You now know that these PLAYERS have no honour in them. If they had, they'd have moved the capital back after receiving the bolts. They didn't. So they're disgusting scum. If I were on the receiving end of this, I'd start an OOC discussion on the ruler channel in order to get other realms on my side for the express purpose of making it clear that we all don't want to play with dishonourable scum. (end quote)

TanSerrai 18:01, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

Wouldnt moving the capital back though give Riombara a Stategic Advatage over Luz, there for Double standrads. The advantage would be that Luz would be in a weakend state (althought the cease-fire would go into effect) Cagmir would revolt as soon as we moved it leaveing it free for Irombro to Grab. To me that dosent seem like playing fair. As more than one realm would benefit from it IC. Irombro wouldnt be around if it wasnt for the war against Luz.

Also why isnt Tom making those on the EC moce their capital back? I know for fact that OR and Fontan moved their capitals for stategic reasons. He should not just make an example of one...but all of them. Im sure if you got every realm to move back their capital that has moved it, even for the slightest advantage then we will. ScottSabin 18:18, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

Scott, EC is different. First of all OR apparently didn;t move it for strategic reasons (RP, although I similarly doubt it you know how these things go), and secondly, it's only recent that it's become clear that these things are against the rules. BT Tom has EXPLICITLY said that he wants them to move it back. Your arguing now is like schoolkids; "they did it so why are you telling me off?" The answer is of course that you have to start somewhere. The arcgument that your regions will revolt is frankly rubbish; I'm sure both Tim and Marc have the honour to hand back any regions they will gain from this, and they offered enough time to ensure there is no ill effect suffered. there is NO strategic avantage to either side for moving things back to how they were/should have been. --The1exile 19:27, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

Regarding the disadvantage of having to move the capital back: I'd even go so far as to say that Luz did enjoy a clear tactical advantage for 4 months by doing something that was against the stated rules. If they now suffer a disadvantage through it, then that might be considered as a price they pay for their previous advantage. But as that is only my personal opinion, the most probable outcome is a ceasefire during the time Luz moves its capital back.TanSerrai 10:38, 13 October 2006 (CEST)

Well, no. Tom did not explicity state that the capital should be moved back. He heavily implied a couple times that he thought the players involved should have moved it back, but that he personally would do nothing about it. His words were something like: "They're disgusting scum with no honor since they didn't move it back." If you have a message where Tom says "I want them to move the capital back" then by all means post it. If Tom really wanted them to do it, he could accomplish it easily by sending an IG message to the current ruler telling them to move the capital. They would have little choice but to do so.

And even though the EC is a different island than BT, the rules still need to apply uniformly. If a strategic capital move is not allowed on BT, then it should not be allowed on EC, either. But as we both know from our IRC discussion on this topic, none of these capital move cases are clear cut. There are a lot of people on both sides of the OR capital move debate, and both sides have a lot of evidence to support their claim. The OR people could probably state a lot of RP reasons, and those oppose4d to them can probably cite a lot of timelines showing obvious strategic gain from the moves along with messages from OR people gloating over the reduced refit times. Just about any capital move I have ever seen or examined has strategic implications. I can't say that I have ever seen a realm move a capital to a worse strategic location based on RP. (Not that it hasn't happened, just that I haven't seen one.)

This topic could be debated forever, and it would never get anywhere. It would probably better for everyone if this whole topic just died. Things like this are one great reason for Tom's proposed "If it's not exploiting a bug or a violation of the inalienable rights, it's legal." policy. --Indirik 21:55, 13 October 2006 (CEST)

Plus, Amekal would make sure Cagamir didnt revolt. He's a good enough priest he could keep it fairly well under control. And the cease fire would last as long as was needed for LdB to recover to where they were BEFORE the capitol was moved back. I can personally garuntee Irombrozia would do that. All TLs and troops in Irombro (besides the COuntess of Bolkenia, who would be in Bolkenia maintaining it and, if LdB wanted it, Amekal, who would maintain Cagamir)Vellos 02:44, 13 October 2006 (CEST)