Defining a microstate-Small State tactics in a Big-Empire world.

[Cannonshop]

Coventry had issues all over the damn place, but it was almost entirely a big-state show.

[chaosxtreme]

Actually DK no one who played at Coventry agree's with that point of view.

One of the GM's at the time of Coventry doesn't agree with that point of view.

Now I could comment on how often such "mistake's" seemed to be made by a "certain person".

Or I could bring up the written board rule that says that if your combat thread's are not completed you don't get to do a special set of instructions on how it should be finished, The GM just completes it in the simplest manner possible.

I could point out how the other side of Coventry did not get to do special orders even when they had been sent in either time. and our covert operations that would have effected combat did not take place.

I could do all that and more but I don't have to because none of the "a certain person" play this game any more. So pointing out that they cheated is irrelevant. Naming them is irrelevant.

You may continue to espouse your position its America you have the Constitution given right to be heard even when wrong. :-)

But the body of evidence, and perception of those who were focused in on it do not agree with you. A independent third person arbiter does not agree with you.

Thus whenever it comes up I will not hesitate to make it clear that "a certain person" cheated and got away with it.

I am also proud to say that the FWL made this palatable by making things right for its allies out of its own pocket. Giving them first shot to replace losses out of salvage AND first crack at the warships that were salvaged.

[Fatebringer]

I am also proud to say that the FWL made this palatable by making things right for its allies out of its own pocket. Giving them first shot to replace losses out of salvage AND first crack at the warships that were salvaged.

That's how you buy loyalty

[Dave Baughman]

Actually DK no one who played at Coventry agree's with that point of view.

One of the GM's at the time of Coventry doesn't agree with that point of view.

Now I could comment on how often such "mistake's" seemed to be made by a "certain person".

Or I could bring up the written board rule that says that if your combat thread's are not completed you don't get to do a special set of instructions on how it should be finished, The GM just completes it in the simplest manner possible.

I could point out how the other side of Coventry did not get to do special orders even when they had been sent in either time. and our covert operations that would have effected combat did not take place.

I could do all that and more but I don't have to because none of the "a certain person" play this game any more. So pointing out that they cheated is irrelevant. Naming them is irrelevant.

You may continue to espouse your position its America you have the Constitution given right to be heard even when wrong. :-)

But the body of evidence, and perception of those who were focused in on it do not agree with you. A independent third person arbiter does not agree with you.

Thus whenever it comes up I will not hesitate to make it clear that "a certain person" cheated and got away with it.

I am also proud to say that the FWL made this palatable by making things right for its allies out of its own pocket. Giving them first shot to replace losses out of salvage AND first crack at the warships that were salvaged.

This response confuses me, perhaps because I think the phrase "a certain person" is being used to refer to different people in different parts of the post.

For the record: the results for Coventry had to be re-done because the first time around the rules were not followed. To the best of my knowledge, this was not deliberate (i.e. it was an issue of misunderstanding the written rules, not of cheating) but it still required re-review because of the rather extreme effect the error had on the outcome.

[Holt]

Problem was that The redo was even more off and this time their was no redo or questions we could ask, we just had to take it.

[GI Journalist]

At the risk of wresting this topic back from the threadjackers who have run away with it, I find being a smaller state caught between the politics of larger powers a challenge. 

I too made some mistakes with a fleet of mine. However, rather than try and go back and retcon everything, I preferred to make it a plot point. The Lost Legion fleet will be seen as the tipping point that forced the Marian Hegemony into some hard decisions. Since the Free Worlds League never recognized the legitimacy of the Marian Hegemony, a marriage into the Steiner family seemed the only way to retain their cultural identity, even if they are losing their political independence.

The alternative to joining the Lyran Alliance was to be ripped to shreds by its enemies. I suppose its possible they could have survived as a Star League protectorate, but that had very little appeal. As it is, most of my remaining Legio are under Star League control. It's a better fate than some other smaller states in so much as I'm saving it from complete cultural annihilation.


---

[chaosxtreme]

That is reminds me wanted to discuss some plot points with you. I will send you an PM.