@UltikanaRe@Jbcool I am still interested and I do not mind sharing Sparta, though it would make posting a little more difficult i'd say so i'm unsure if that would work well or not.

@UltikanaRe@Jbcool I am still interested and I do not mind sharing Sparta, though it would make posting a little more difficult i'd say so i'm unsure if that would work well or not.

Ya...sharing will be hard under any circumstance. I think we could make it work, but your call since yo had first claim.

@UltikanaRe I think that because i'm also managing and currently starting up my own roleplay as well, that I would not have the time to also discuss possible posts with you in detail. Hence it would be best for to not attempt to play as one faction together.

I'm willing to play co-op I don't see it as a problem as it's a nation role-play and what's more realistic than having the Athenians do what they do best... debate :D

It's actually a very good system and can be easily done wherein our successes or failures contribute to the assembly's support for us. Basically if as Navarch you seize lets say... Korinth and its a 'major success' (player consensus) then the assembly is gonna be happy happy. However if as Strategos you let 2,000 hoplites get overrun in Thebes, a 'major failure' the assembly might decide to exile you...

@Louis Dabout@UltikanaRe What do you say to that?

I get the feeling that you're deliberatly avoiding what could actually be a rather good deal - or you're intent on leading a nation single handidly, in which case there are plenty of powerful poleis that are neither claimed nor Sparta or Athens; Syracuse, Korinth, and Thebes are just three examples.

Sven has explained, Louis has also explained quite accurately, in the end it is up to you.

@Louis Dabout@UltikanaRe What do you say to that?

I get the feeling that you're deliberatly avoiding what could actually be a rather good deal - or you're intent on leading a nation single handidly, in which case there are plenty of powerful poleis that are neither claimed nor Sparta or Athens; Syracuse, Korinth, and Thebes are just three examples.

Sven has explained, Louis has also explained quite accurately, in the end it is up to you.

My main concern is who controls the assembly? If it is the players, than that strikes me as unfair. If it is me and Louis flip coins on everything, than that may be difficult. Yet again, having somebody to share to burdens of research and strategy would be good. In addition, a co-op can be fun indeed. I will go with Strategos of Athens (BTW, Athens didn't have Navarchs according to wikipedia).

@UltikanaRe I control the Assembly according to the decisions made, and achievements/defeats placed at the feet of the players, as well as taking into account the more 'general' feeling across the board; one example would be if you lost a naval battle and wanted to try again immediatly, a move likely to be blocked by the pro-peace party but supported by the pro-war supporters and so forth.

@Sven the Silent If that is truly the case, do you think it even wise to be controlling Sparta at all? If your attentions are split, and you have your own RP to run, would it not be better to give Sparta over to someone with the time on their hands to use one of the two biggest powers in the war, then take on a smaller nation/city-state perhaps?

@Jbcool There is a difference between writing a post on your own or having to also take the time to discuss things with a partner in my eyes. So far I just have to set up the OOC for my own Nation roleplay, just like you still need to set up the OOC for yours. I'm confident in my ability to be able to run one myself and participate in another at the same time.

@UltikanaRe I control the Assembly according to the decisions made, and achievements/defeats placed at the feet of the players, as well as taking into account the more 'general' feeling across the board; one example would be if you lost a naval battle and wanted to try again immediatly, a move likely to be blocked by the pro-peace party but supported by the pro-war supporters and so forth.

@Sven the Silent If that is truly the case, do you think it even wise to be controlling Sparta at all? If your attentions are split, and you have your own RP to run, would it not be better to give Sparta over to someone with the time on their hands to use one of the two biggest powers in the war, then take on a smaller nation/city-state perhaps?

Isn't you controlling the assembly a tad unfair, being everybody else gets to control their own nations? Also, please read the link I provided for political parties and the lack thereof in Athens.

<Snipped quote by Jbcool>

Isn't you controlling the assembly a tad unfair, being everybody else gets to control their own nations? Also, please read the link I provided for political parties and the lack thereof in Athens.

I'll give my own input on this;

Athens is already a superpower in the roleplay, and to make a comparison, a single party in Athens is still more powerful than my semi-united nation I have in mind when the Rp starts/nation sheets are made. It solves the problem of one player having a little too much power, and it appears as though it would reduce the confusion compared to two people needing to control the assembly otherwise.

Just my two cents...

>retreats back in the western mountains

@UltikanaRe I think you misunderstand me, and should take a look at what ArenaSnow has written; I am not going to be controlling it to the point that I essentially run the Delian League/Athenian Empire, I'll be moulding it around what you and @Louis Dabout decide to do during the RP.

Also, are you seriously stating that Athens, the home of democracy and democratic rule, had no political parties? That Perikles was unopposed in his choices, and that Thukydides himself was not actually exiled by political opinion?

I'm genuinely confused at the moment.

@Sven the Silent Fair enough, if you think you can handle it, well then I'll take your word for it, sir. :)

Don't mind me. Just a lurker who wish he could participate but doesn't have the time.

I am kind of surprised that no one has taken up Thebes. They are still a relatively big player. After the Peloponnese War, the Thebans eventually grew in power to such a degree that they eventually held hegemony in Greece for a short time (they even kicked the Spartans out of Messenia). They definitely have potential.

And for that article, there are some issues that I have with it. First, the argument that "if we don't have any evidence, it didn't exist" is kind of a weak. Second, I don't see how the merchant booths that would sell the pottery shards for ostracization votes would be evidence against political parties. Doesn't this just show the low literacy in the ancient world and a prudent practice because of that lack of literacy? Finally, the important thing to take away from this article is that the author is arguing against a status quo that upholds that there were political parties. Obviously they were probably not like ours, but they were there in some fashion. Even the author admits that there is a possibility that there are some smaller-scale parties, mattering how far you want to take Demosthenes' comparison between political parties and symmories.

You all have my best wishes for this roleplay. I like the era (I prefer the archaic era a little more), but I don't have the time to devote to it.

Aegina strong (too bad they will probably get wrecked by Athenians in the first year, just as they did in real life)!

@UltikanaRe I think you misunderstand me, and should take a look at what ArenaSnow has written; I am not going to be controlling it to the point that I essentially run the Delian League/Athenian Empire, I'll be moulding it around what you and @Louis Dabout decide to do during the RP.

Also, are you seriously stating that Athens, the home of democracy and democratic rule, had no political parties? That Perikles was unopposed in his choices, and that Thukydides himself was not actually exiled by political opinion?

I'm genuinely confused at the moment.

@Sven the Silent Fair enough, if you think you can handle it, well then I'll take your word for it, sir. :)

Please read that article that I provided. Yes, there was opposition, but it was never organized to any high degree. To compare them to our own political parties in the US (and UK) is misguided. There was never a formal organization dedicated to promoted a certain candidate.

Also, I see what you mean about controlling the assembly. I thought you were going to randomize a result whenever we want to do something.

@ArenaSnow I kinda get what you mean, but Sparta gets it own thing too, and they are supposed to win the war. I would understand if it was weighted, but still. I think the arrangement of maybe having sways depending on things would work.

Don't mind me. Just a lurker who wish he could participate but doesn't have the time.

I am kind of surprised that no one has taken up Thebes. They are still a relatively big player. After the Peloponnese War, the Thebans eventually grew in power to such a degree that they eventually held hegemony in Greece for a short time (they even kicked the Spartans out of Messenia). They definitely have potential.

And for that article, there are some issues that I have with it. First, the argument that "if we don't have any evidence, it didn't exist" is kind of a weak. Second, I don't see how the merchant booths that would sell the pottery shards for ostracization votes would be evidence against political parties. Doesn't this just show the low literacy in the ancient world and a prudent practice because of that lack of literacy? Finally, the important thing to take away from this article is that the author is arguing against a status quo that upholds that there were political parties. Obviously they were probably not like ours, but they were there in some fashion. Even the author admits that there is a possibility that there are some smaller-scale parties, mattering how far you want to take Demosthenes' comparison between political parties and symmories.

You all have my best wishes for this roleplay. I like the era (I prefer the archaic era a little more), but I don't have the time to devote to it.

Aegina strong (too bad they will probably get wrecked by Athenians in the first year, just as they did in real life)!

I do understand your point, but the status quo isn't evidence either, and I would argue it is not even the status quo. The author makes no claim, whereas asserting that there were political parties is a positive claim, creating a burden of proof. I suppose it is possible since it is alt history anyhow, but still.

Also, thank you for the luck :-)

They werent political parties as much as parties built about personalities and oratory. In many ways it's far more fun for us to rp those assemblys as we exhort the crowd to follow us and the like I think :D

Tell you what, I'll not play actually, I do have important things occuring... I'm currently training and trying out for a professional soccer club (FOOTBALL!!!!) so I'll let this oppo pass by for now... hopefully at a later time I can jump in... right?

Well @UltikanaRe looks like, if this ever goes ahead at this rate, you'll have Athens to yourself now; I'm still going to control the Assembly, but, unless anyone else steps up, you are now the tyrant sole player of Athens.

@Dedonus You write all that, and then say you can't participate?! What are you, some sort of hope-dasher?

I'm now going to go and weep in a corner somewhere.

With that in mind, have ye a NS I can bite into? :)

Well @UltikanaRe looks like, if this ever goes ahead at this rate, you'll have Athens to yourself now; I'm still going to control the Assembly, but, unless anyone else steps up, you are now the tyrant sole player of Athens.

@Dedonus You write all that, and then say you can't participate?! What are you, some sort of hope-dasher?

I'm now going to go and weep in a corner somewhere.

Actually, it was I said I couldn't participate, write all of that, and then repeat that I cannot participate.