Of Bear And Of Horse

[calculusdesola 1658]

Background
The feudal war between the House of Vladov and the House de Sola continues, accelerating to a bitter openness.

Having taken a fall from the walls of Dour Watch during a Vladovian foray, the young Clement de Sola, still but a boy only finishing his squiring days, and Baron Titus' heir, has been captured.  His present fate remains unknown, but artefacts of his torture - a fingernail pried from the flesh coupled with the threat of flaying - have already been received.
--
Though many a coward and profligate may sit tidy in their beds for such barbarism, the Men of Dour Watch will not.  We will ride out in force for the east for our own vengeance.

The time has come to destroy these mad brutes, disloyal to their God, disloyal passionately to their King and their Country, most blatantly, and holding no respect for proper Orenian ways -- for us.

The Lancers of Dour Watch will fight through the lungs of hell to liberate yet another captured kinsman, to end his torment.
--
Logistics
In order to make a move for the Vladov's well fortified castle of Barrowyk, de Sola must capture appropriate flatland on the west bank of the northern Adrian riverlands on which to mount siege engines.

The land in question would equal the edge of one of the river's several tributaries flowing from the southwest ((x: 695, z: -2427)) to the borders of the hinterlands to the northeast ((x: 975, z: -2682)), and roughly along the western banks of the river across from the Vladovs' castle.

A preview of the general terrain in question.

 

--

Warclaim

Type of Battle: Field battle

Time: 8/2/2015.  Sunday.  To occur the weekend after this post.  Time to be decided, will work out what works for defenders.

Attackers: House de Sola

Defenders: House of Vladov

Location and Boundaries: The field region just across the river from Barrowyk.

From: x 695, z -2427 in the southwest

to: x 975, z -2682 in the northeast

(Would like GM to screenshot overhead area to map out the battle space to be more precise on said region.  Will elaborate if necessary)

Terms of Victory
Victory for Attacker: Defenders are killed or driven from the battle area
Victory for Defenders: Attackers are killed or driven from the battle area

 

Rewards
Attackers win: de Sola continues to mount an offensive on Barrowyk and promptly lays siege to it, raising a war camp in the aforementioned territory and constructing siege engines.
Defenders win: Vladov turns the de Sola offensive back and no siege occurs.

 

Rules:
1. All server rules must be followed.

2. This is a feudal, intranational war between de Sola and Vladov, I would like to see it kept as such.  To avert a massive influx of mercenaries or alts to either side I would like to see both sides capped at 30 players.

3. I would also like for one day alts with no real purpose behind them except for tactical OOC warfare to take a hike.

4. No strategic OOC warfare or dirty tactics.  Pokings on teamspeaks during critical moments, screwing with statuses, DDoSes, wandering soul spying/commanding, returning to battle after death, use of hacks, and what have you are all cowards tactics and I expect my side as much as the other to recognize this.  It should go without saying.

5. No scarring the earth of the aforementioned territory in any way from the posting of this warclaim, nor modifying the river(s).

6. Hiding in forest or trees and refusing to engage the other party forfeits the open grasslands (the territory being contested) and thus cedes victory to the other side.
 

(let me know if ive made any discrepancies in the post.  dont be afraid to PM me im not as unreasonable as some think.)

 

 

(format shamelessly stolen from ark)

[Gunner 775]

 

(( Please do not post if you are none of the above. ))

[Fireheart 2768]

Taking the fact in that this is indeed an attack with the intent of eventually taking a siege to a holding held by House Vladov I would ask that rules 5-6 be removed before I accept your terms. The defenders, if  the name is true, will be allowed to defend themselves in any means, in an RP sense. Whether that be light fortifications, to the use of the terrain to their advantage. Light fortifications will not be mini keeps or 'Great Walls of China.' They will be reasonable things such as trenches and cover for any forms of long ranged attacks. Boundaries will be reviewed upon my return from work and I will approve those within 24 hours. Date and time will suit me with a preposed time of 5 EST or after.

 

If you have any concerns with the preposed request feel free to respond. Otherwise you may approve them. Anything else I missed and also the boundaries will receive a more detailed look through upon my return! Good luck to all sixty who participate.

 

 

~Fireheart~

[calculusdesola 1658]

Well, use of terrain to the advantage is absolute, but we can't have your side or my side hiding in trees the entire battle not engaging one another (which is what is going to happen).  Maneuvering through forest/mountain/etc is one thing.  Hiding in it for 30 minutes+ and not coming out is Fringe-tier non sequitur which I would like to avoid.  That's all that rule 6 addresses. 

 

Also, the only problem I have with the fortifications is that it would seemingly metagame our impending arrival.  I had also hoped for a field battle before either one of us is besieged.  So long as we are able to have the same fortifications set up near our starting point I don't have an issue scrapping rule 5. 

 

Let me know how all that sounds.

[Fireheart 2768]

The time for 5PM EST works then, I assume?

 

EDIT: 8:16 PST 7/27/15 tl;dr included!

tl;dr (For those of you who do not want to read the wall of text.) 

>Boundaries agreed

>Fire wants rule six removed

>Fire wants rule five removed and gives RP reasoning.

 

After reviewing the boundaries I will agree to the coordinates of x 695, z -2427 in the southwest and x 975, z 2682 in the northeast.

 

In your request of keeping rule six in the war rule set, revolving around forced engagement, it will still not be accepted. Within the war claim format and RP reasoning itself would lead to no reason in having us have to push out to engage the enemy. We are labeled as the defenders and we will defend ourselves from your attacks. I do not agree with a forced charge from my party. This would be to the same regards if my party wished to eventually siege your settlement and sought out a field battle.

 

In your statement revolving around rule five. You state that creating fortifications would be labeled as metagaming or OOCly preparing for this event to take place. I will gladly remove your fear of this and assure you that fortifications to our keep itself have been added on for quite sometime as well as the construction of road systems to better support the flow of troops. To reassure you once more it will not be some Great Wall of China or PvP fort. In an RP sense we have been to your lands quite frequently and always have someone on watch for movements outside your main settlement, your keep. I would assume that we would have a small window of preparation upon the movement of such a large force, geared for war mind you, thus we would assume the worst and hastily prepare ourselves for the battle. Fortifications would consist of a possible rock moved over for small cover or even a small ditch dug so to protect the solider somewhat of archer fire. Things as such and so on. All of this would be done in RP with an overseeing GM to dictate what would be allowed. My request would be that it is a GM not affiliated with Humans. Any preparation from you on your side would be borderline shocking, if you indeed are being attacked at your entry into the battlefield.

 

~Best regards, Fireheart~

 

Edit: 11:48 PM PST 7/29/15

 

I have waited patiently two days now with no reply from the other party. I have spoken briskly with a GM regarding a discussion to nail down the rules for this war claim with progress hopefully being made. After recent events I would like to make two request for this war claim. 

 

1) That the war claim would be overseen by a GM not affiliated with humans. To ensure that this war claim goes off smoothly I would suggest a GM that is not a team leader so to allow other GM's to have dedication to this event. Suggestions from me would be Cosmic or Ricky as they are both not involved with human RP and would show no favoritism to either side.

 

2) As of recent raids and events I would view the 30v30 cap to be useless in it's purpose. I would request that the defenders now consist of the party showing rebellious actions to Oren, whether they be official or viewed a different way. Then the attacking party to be other human factions tied to de Solo. I would refer to this party as Oren to keep all confusion to a minimum. 

 

These are my two add-on request to my already pending statement. Thank you and good luck. If you have any concerns with either of these request. These two request or the one from two days ago please feel free to reply!

 

~Fireheart~

[CosmicWhaleShark 2484]

I'll be overseeing this warclaim. You folks have my Skype, I assume, both sides pm me with any details you wish to discuss - concerns you wish to address - memes you wish to share.

 

But yea, anyways, I'll be seeing to it that the bullshit is kept to a minimum and the RP that everyone is so adamant about is kept to a relatively high standard. Help me help you, that goes for everyone involved, not just the leaders.

 

A few ground rules - Community conduct rules are in effect, naturally, but this serves as an additional reminder. If I see any RP shouts of anything that is a remote OOC reference rather than RP, you will be dealt with. Expect it to be inconvenient to your agendas, so just don't risk it, you don't want to be put out of the fight for that day. 

 

Accusations of alting, meta, the aforementioned dirty OOC tactics, whatever else falls within that line will be dealt with if evidence in its fullness is provided to me. Don't expect any immediate reaction as I will be taking time to confirm whatever you submit to me.

 

Both sides will need to produce a list of their 30 players if they don't want me to just randomly tempban folks for the duration of the fight. I'll want to make sure the correct people are included and the ones who don't belong stay out of it.

 

If you want more than 30 players, then just give me a brief description of the groups that would bring it over that cap, and why they'd be participating, considering I literally know next to nothing about either side. I'll be reserving the right to determine from the descriptions you've given of the groups if they will be allowed to participate or not. Don't insult my intelligence nor your own by thinking that I won't catch on to any spontaneous groups.

 

Keep it fun, keep it fair, keep it clean. Leaders, get in contact with me.

[calculusdesola 1658]

Apologies for taking a while to get back to this.  With the rise of more and more powers in the conflict, it seems this feud has already faded into relative obscurity.  That said I'm gonna cancel the warclaim.  Please move to denied. :  )