Cheap, or Fair play?

[Ninot]

Last night I was playing with two buddies. I was Victoria, they were both Frederick (they lack imagination).

I start off pretty close to one of them (arguably the more competitive of the two). He scouts me out early, and discovers that im pretty much at the tip of the continent without any neighbors but him.

Because this is the same guy that backstabbed me in a previous game, i was cautious enough to build an extra warrior to put in my capitol.

He rushes out a settler pretty early. Not only that, but he sends this settler out without any guardian unit.

One of my warriors stumbles onto this Settler in the middle of the forest. Its my move, and his settler is right next to my warrior, undefended.

I point this out to both players. My neighbor says if i attack, he'll beat me up IRL (he has maturity problems). We both know that hes sending the settler in my direction to box me into my little corner of the continent even more. I dont want the game to end right away, so I tell him i'll ignore the settler if he sends him in the opposite direction.

At first, he just goes in circles in the forest, trying to get out of the line of sight of my warrior. Doesnt work.

Then it looks like he might be sending him west. But nope, he comes back 1 turn later with a 2 warrior guard.

I warn him one last time, go west or it will have to be war.

He replies that he doesnt have to listen to me, and he plays how he wants.


My gamble is... if he rushed out a settler so early, and has 2 warriors guarding his settler, he has no guard for his Capitol.

He sends his settler another tile towards my capitol. I declare war, and march 2 warriors to his capitol.

Yup.... Berlin has no defense whatsoever.

I take it, he complains he cant trust me, and then declares the game over, annoying our other friend who says he had a good starting location.

Our friend thought it was hillarious, and sided with me, because I did give him the grace of several warnings. But the stubborn one insisted that no matter how it happened, its not kosher to declare war so easily.

So, was I right to do what I did, or did I break an unwritten rule?

[Fried-Psitalon]

I would've taken the settler to begin with.

Even pretending you somehow didn't discover the unit, it's foolish to complain that someone is going to prosecute your weakness when you build a settler early; your lack of defenses. If you decide to sacrifice early defense for growth, you take a chance that you will pay the price for your lack of defense.

Your friend needs to grow up and accept that he screwed up not once (the settler) but twice (the capital) and that he needs to accept there are flaws in any strategy, including that one.

Tell him he's a whiner. :P

[Ninot]

ahh, a respectable opinion from a respectable man.

The guy in mention is usually fun to play with BECAUSE im always afraid hes gonna do some backstabing thing, but what annoys me is alll game he'll be asking for alliances and truces and open borders, and making statements like "i wont declare war untill such and such", and he never fails to go against his word.

And I tell him exactly what I plan to do, and do it, and he whines.

[Fried-Psitalon]

Sounds like you're playing one of my students - 7th graders act a lot like that.

[DonnChadh]

Your actions sound perfectly fair to me.

He sent in a settler in what would be considered hostile expansionism, you responded diplomatically and then followed up with force when diplomacy failed.