The HOTW VII - Setup Thread IV - We Talk Too Much

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by CyberShy
The problems I had with HOTW 5 was that the 4 best players allied together against the weakest players.

Correction, the 5 weakest players allied together against the 2 strongest players. Then we brought in some others to even the playing field. And we were allied in that game before we were the best as well.


I guess it is the luck of the cards that Toni and I showed up to most every session in this game, and Lz & Frank (who with Deity were posed to be the top alliance in this game) didn't.

I have sympathy for Deity whose allies just crapped out on him. But that doesn't mean that I or Toni did something wrong. If Frank and Lz had stayed in the game and showed up each week I bet by now the situation would be reversed. Deity-Lz-Frank's alliance would have remained the same since the beginning of the game and they'd be the most advanced and biggest.

The difference is, I wouldn't complain about it.

btw, thanks Toni.

[Toni]

Hey its just Sat and look all that activity around here

Thank you England for the exciting session

Lets keep up the good work and post post ......

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by CyberShy
The game was boring till England invaded the Incans, thanks to England 8)
So far only Arabia, India and England dared to shake things up a little bit

See, this is a point others seem to always miss. Usually in diplogames if you really want to be on top and get the space ship first the most logical course of action is to be nice to everyone, never make any enemies or attack anyone and just build yourself up peacefully till the end of the game. (Like Deity)

But that's boring.

So invading a bunch of people and declaring a jihaad isn't helping me in the game and I didn't do it to win territory (the only city I got for my wars was a Celtic city that I was gonna take via culture anyhow). But it spiced the game up and made it more entertaining for everyone. I don't mind being the bad guy as long as I'm the bad guy in game and that stays in game. What I don't like is being called a bad guy outside of the game because I think that is unfair and unwarranted.

If anything going around invading people hurts you in the game - it wastes resources, it makes people upset with you, you risk a lot. So I did my wars more out of a desire to handicap myself (and make the game fun, historical & interesting) than out of a desire to win.

If that's not diplo, I don't know what is.

[Toni]

Knowing that Deity is working now with the Vikings (Ryk), which are one of the top civs I think all is fair.

Don't forget that I had a tundra start this game, luck was on my side that i was able to race other nations to settle into the west from my starting spot. So for many turns things looked very dark for me as a nation. But kept making deals and because I didn't lose hope I was rewared at the end.

[Glohithia]

Well, Im gonna throw in my two cents also.

First, about the Inca's and the war without getting into the details. I purposely killed as few units as possible (only 5 I think) and I destroyed absolutely no improvements. I took Cori, but had told Levi in chat that I would return it to him when I took Olly. In the end, the only thing I got from this was Hippo, a small city gifted to the Inca's by the Carts/Vikes/Republic (I cant keep track any longer, heh) and vassalage to ease the culture on Hastings (which, by the way, didnt work at all). In the end, I didnt even take Olly and left all his forces intact. I find it hard to believe that anybody would consider that a game ruining experience. So to echo what Ozzy, Toni, and CS said, I obviously didnt do this to gain vast amounts of territory. I did it to mix things up a bit, save Hastings, and break the tedium that had set in.

Sure I backstabbed Levi a bit, but I did give warnings and I held myself in total check in the interest of the game. Its my understanding that what happened was exactly what this game is all about.

What I didnt really care too much for was the implied threat (for lack of a better word) that I would ruin the game by continuing my conflict. In all honesty, I was going to take Olly, that was my only goal. I would never have settled for Hippo if it wasnt for that hanging over my head. That wasnt in the spirit of the game I think. I also think that personal attacks have no place here, it is just a game after all. But at this point, Id be happy if the game would just continue

And for the record, if anybody harbors suspicions that I had help in any way, shape, or form from my allies (other than tech trading), I have saves and chat logs I will make available to show that to be totally untrue. There is no X-File-ish conspiracy going on here. I did it on my own and my allies were not informed of my plan until I posted my intentions in the forum. I hate to have to say all this here and give things away, but (in the words of CCR), I heard it through the grapevine that this fact is being questioned.

Peace and see everybody next week ( I hope)!

[Robert]

Mike, when I looked at the map I saw that the cultural pressure was released! Now you say that it didn't work.... what do you mean? The tiles surrounding the pressed city were free now. (Not all tiles of the fat cross, as I thought, most probably because the fat crosses of both cities overlapped each other)

The problem is that In Game situations (like yesterdays) are being discussed with OOC arguments. That's so fun-destroying.
I'm all for people being harsh and evil and insulting, but do it IN GAME!

Like:
"The evil and blood thirsthy english cannot be trusted"
NOT:
"Mike backstabbed me while he promised me on AIM to not attack me"
Good:
"Bulgaria has been helped by the Incans in time of evil and now they show their true face"
Bad:
"Toni just doesn't do what he promised to do"

That's another good reason to use in-character names when you play civ, not real names. In-GAME must totally be split of OUT OF CHARACTER.
And all diploplayers will make sure that no civilization will be minimized. If England would start to totally slay the Incans then all other civs of Terra would have joined together to stop the English.
That's how a diplogame works.

Maybe I'll make that more clear at the beginning of the next session
CIV is also fun btw to try to get the most out of a crappy situation. I think I did that in HOTW5 where I was the worst civ by far. I enjoyed it till the last turn.

And Ozzy: about HOTW 5, let's say that it was an unballancing situation, I won't blame anybody for that. Sometimes things go as they go.

[Glohithia]

Sorry CS, I should have been more clear. I did get the use of the land squares that border the city. But the Incan culture is still present and growing.

It seems that a vassals culture is still present, but ignored in those specific squares. It doesnt make the territory more Englsih, on the contrary, the Incan culture continues to take it over. If the Incan's stayed vassals of mine the rest of the game, I would not notice any ill effects and all would be well. However, that most likely wont happen. As soon as they renounce vassalage, their culture will be as it was before plus what it grew during vassalage.

Of course, at the time we all thought this would work. Stuff happens and we learn. It was a good idea CS and Im certainly not trying to take anything away from you or your efforts

[Robert]

A vassal cannot renounce vassalage after capitulation. It can only become 'free' again if it loses 50% of it's land or population. (thus if it's 'master' was incapable to protect it).

And if it becomes free again, you could be ready to invade the cultural city again. That's how vassalage works, keep the nation under your thumb military wise.

[OzzyKP]

I think after 10 turns it can renounce vassalage at any point. The master gets a note that says their vassal is leaving and they have the option to let them go or declare war. That is what I got when the Celts renounced me.

[Toni]

I never got that option from the bloody Chinese, they just left me

[Robert]

Strange, that means that in MP games capitulation works different then in SP games. That sucks, imho.
Certainly with a 10 turn duration.

In Marathon games that should be 30 turns at least.
Anyway, it's up to England to keep much military pressure on the Incans to keep them as vassals.

Firaxis should really re-concider vassalage in MP games, what's the bonus of capitulation for the 'master' if it's over in 10 turns anyway?

[OzzyKP]

There isn't really much bonus in MP at all for vassalage. But it is strange how much people seem to hate the idea of being vassals regardless of how irrelevant it seems to be.

[deity]

I'm not officially complaining about anything because without even saying anything look at all the posts!!

You are protesting too much!!

And the person who has suspicions about the game etiquette has I believed discussed things directly with ozzy - so leave it at that. Remember ozzy in Civ2 how I was often called "cheater"? It's not nice and I know how you feel

I warn anyone against casting aspersions as it's impossible to prove and most unlikely with these and most other diplo-players - inc ozzy. (Mind you I'd much rather have passwords on)

---

I don't want anyone telling me what I should do for the 'health' of the game as I play my game my own way and don't give away information other than what's in the story thread.

I posted ages ago about a few things I thought were unhealthy for the game but decided to shutup and plough own cos I don't like being called a 'whinger' and having endless debates about it

[Toni]

Can someone please remove the last two posts from the story thread, and maybe add them over here!

[OzzyKP]

We used to have more varied story threads, but we've become rather stodgy lately. I'm in favor of leaving them where they are at, but if y'all want them moved I'll move them.