HOTW 9 Organisational Thread

[deity]

Originally posted by Toni
Looks like you guys had a good session there. I wasn't here because i paid to have in my room only 24hrs internet. Choose HOTW8 over HOTW9 because that game needed me more.!

I now find this a bit incredulous Toni.

There was no communication from you about missing this crucial session (April 7). We waited a good while, then lined up Nico to play your civ. We had a fun session and you complain that you should not be attacked when you are a only a few turns from SS victory? Nolan is now saying (and probably at the time as well) that we should have waited for you to play this session.

I think most of us would have agreed to that if we knew IN ADVANCE; but we all showed up expecting you to be here. Then you didn't show and we didn't know what had happenned. A decision was made to play on since all other players were here and Nico could sub for you.

Are you seriously suggesting we should have waited (which we did) and then after an hour decide not to play because you weren't there?

And then we get this AFTER the session time...

Originally posted by Toni I wasn't here because i paid to have in my room only 24hrs internet. Choose HOTW8 over HOTW9 because that game needed me more.!

Thanks a lot mate..

[Toni]

I said last week that the start time is late for me, my schedule has changed here, I also said that u can finish it with a sub.

[Toni]

And to be honest, i will just spoil the game for you all, knowing that you had to play a big role into getting others to attack me and nuke me, so u can have a chance at the SS. If i play i will just attack you straight away and try to kill you on the spot. OOC totally but i have to be stupid to continue playing by the diplo rules that game.

[deity]

Originally posted by Toni
I said last week that the start time is late for me, my schedule has changed here, I also said that u can finish it with a sub.

But the week before (the crucial session) you said nothing.

And it is possible to discuss the starting time I think.

[deity]

Originally posted by Toni
And to be honest, i will just spoil the game for you all, knowing that you had to play a big role into getting others to attack me and nuke me, so u can have a chance at the SS.

Ask Trev, who first attacked you. From memory I had no hand it. Trev drove that strategy and both he and kb (Vikings) cancelled their defensive pact with me. I was isolated but of course if I had won the SS I would haver announced it as an alliance victory - but that's the fun of the diplo side. I might have played a big role (nothing wrong with that) but on this occassion it was Trev and kb's planninfg (not mine).

If i play i will just attack you straight away and try to kill you on the spot. OOC totally but i have to be stupid to continue playing by the diplo rules that game.

You take this WAY to seriously Toni

I have NO expecatations of winning either with or without you in the game. My production sux and as a non-Financial civ with predominantly island cities I can't possibly compete with the brilliant Inca position and your 4 other allies.

I'm more than happy for you to make that decision to attack me. In fact I want to see you do it!

But I know why you haven't.... I might explain that one day...

Also Toni, I think you are confused about the 'rules' of a diplo game. It doesn't mean no nuke war and it doesn't mean we always have to be diplo-nice all the time.

But it does mean things should be kept in character and not taken personally.

It does mean that if one civs plays the bad guy, like the Zulus in HOTW8, then most other civs will apply diplo pressure to avoid explosive world wars - BUT if the world war comes, particularly in the end-game, then we just have fun with it. It's not against the law of diplo.

In fact I think you weigh yourself down with so much pesonal baggage that you honour alliances like they were real life things between people. This is why ozzy beat you in HOTW7. You should have beat the crap out of him

[Toni]

This is why ozzy beat you in HOTW7. You should have beat the crap out of him

I'm pretty happy that ozzy got the SS in HOTW7. He was my ally, so a win for him was a win for me. It wasn't a contest, i just put on the presure the last couple of turns (SS was never my goal there)

And yes my alliance undertsnadings are very different from yours mate

[Toni]

I think you are confused about the 'rules' of a diplo game. It doesn't mean no nuke war and it doesn't mean we always have to be diplo-nice all the time.

Hmmm so you are saying that game is a great example of diplo, lol when after missing +3 session trevs cames back and starts a Nuclear war from no where. What happened with the story development 1st and then aggression.

U know why i'm annoyed that people always tend to attack me when i'm gone for a session, this isn't the 1st time and i bet not the last time!

NO sportsmanship what so ever!

Thats why i won't play this game out, there is nothing for me there left.

Let a sub play it, he can easily win it, tell him just to take you out i figure 10 turns max and finish the SS

[The Capo]

Whoah!

This seems a little too much for a diplogame, the point of the game is to have fun and to increase the diplomatic aspect of the game. What this entire discussion sounds like to me is a personal issue between a couple of disgruntled players.

Using nuclear weapons is not a bad thing to do in a diplogame, whether or not the majority of the world is for or against it. But I'd have to agree with Toni on his point that Trev was absent for three sessions and returned only to start a nuclear war. Diplogames are hard to manage correctly, and often there are disagreements between players as to what constitutes appropriate actions in a diplogame. I am not trying to "teach" you guys in the arts of diplogaming what-so-ever, but what I want to bring up again, and this is directed to the entire diplogaming community, is the point that when there is the SS victory condition in diplogames this issue is going to come up again and again. At the end of almost every single diplogame the same thing happens.

Diplogames SHOULD NOT end in an SS victory. Its the reason they end in wars, its the reason they end in people bickering with eachother, and ultimately it makes absolutely no sense in a diplomatic aspect for the game to end with one nation going to space.

I will admit I do not have an answer to this problem, so pointing that out will merely be a waste of your time. But I think we must come up with some type of ending to the game, whether there is a winner or not. I understand this is a competitive game, so the want of a victor is important, but I think we have to trash the idea that the SS victory is the end of the game before we can come to an ending that is agreeable, makes sense, and will not end in some sort of rancor between the players.

Peace

[kbarrett]

Actually ... it was all trev's notion.

He suprised the hell out of me by launching nukes at both Toni and Conq's empires.

I simply honored my commitment to the alliance and launched.

The only reason I broke with Diety was so I could nuke the snot out of some Stacks O' Doom that Niko was trying to get across the new no man's land ... a few of his units were in the blast radii.

[deity]

Originally posted by The Capo
Using nuclear weapons is not a bad thing to do in a diplogame, whether or not the majority of the world is for or against it. But I'd have to agree with Toni on his point that Trev was absent for three sessions and returned only to start a nuclear war.

Thanks for input Capo!

I posted a while back that we could go back a session to bring Toni back into the game from the point where we left off. The game without Toni means we have no game. He's a core player in the game - heart and soul

But are you seriously saying that Trev can't start a nuke war because subs ran his civ for 3 sessions?

Don't forget we are in the end game and Inca are about to win SS victory and we did find a sub for the Inca.

---

Also, I cant agree with a non SS victory ending Capo - remember all those Civ 2 diplo-games that ended in mad war non-endings? It's nice to encourage peaceful endings to diplo games SOMETIMES; other times it can be MAD

[trev]

Subs destroyed my civ by changing civics and therefore reducing the production bonuses on a key wonder from 75% to zero, this was despite posting prior to the session the desire to finish the wonder, but all players chose not to tell the sub my strategy. He also built 2 useless cities which were a cost to my empire for the remainder of the game. On top of that the subs did not begin to build the Apollo program so that I had no chance in the Space race despite being top or equal top in technology. Toni goes on about alliances all the time, but during my sessions I freely and often traded techs with him, yet I am accused of being in cohorts with deity and others all game. I also trade some techs with others in Toni's so called alliance. It was some generous onesided trades in the early part of the game that allowed some civs who were behind in technology to catchup, but my generosity was not repaid by advice to the sub for my first absence.
I had no desire to continue the game after my first absence because of the serious damage done to my chances, yet whenever possible I did return to play. I had never experienced a nuclear war, so I just decided to begin one basically for the experience, but took several minutes to land my first missile as they would not explode when deity's spy was in the target city, this I think is a flaw in the game as a neutral spy should not affect the ability to detonate a nuclear weapon. Kbarrett joined in, in response 3 civs delared war on me, but none on Kbarrett, so I am fighting 4 civs, he is fighting one.
Basically disappointment that other players failed at a key time to assist my game by notifying a sub of my posting, despite it being a diplo game and boredom led me to take the unusual step for me of starting a nuclear war. Also the constant carping about an alliance when I had traded generously with all civs also caused angst and a desire to destroy something.
Sorry if that had ruined a good game, which it was not for me anyway

[Robert]

The Capo: Diplogames SHOULD NOT end in an SS victory. Its the reason they end in wars, its the reason they end in people bickering with eachother, and ultimately it makes absolutely no sense in a diplomatic aspect for the game to end with one nation going to space.

Both HOTW 5 and HOTW 7 ended with a perfect SS victory without huge world wars and nuclear holocausts. Thus I perfectly disagree with you here

Part of being a good diplomat is securing your defense by having enough allies that will defend you when working on the SS.
If a player is dumb enough to just go for a SS victory without being able to defense himself....... then that's a no no.

Like I said (and did) in HOTW8, if a civ is truely a bad-ass evil civ, then I think it's a bad idea if his good-guy allies stay allied with him.

Obviously, an Italy/German WWII alliance is possible in-game
An England/German WWII alliance makes no sence.
Thus a civ can perfectly start trowing nuclear bombs around and be the ultimate evil itself. But I suppose that all civilized good guy civs must break alliance with him.

The problem of many diplogames is that people will not break an alliance, no matter what. It's fine to have an alliance as long as there's an in-game reason for it. And you can obviously make in-game reasons up. But please, people, if it makes no sence, then end the alliance.

That way trev can launch as many nukes as he want on Toni, in a good diplogame that should cause many civs to start war against trev. If not, then the concept of diplogaming is broken.

That's the problem I had with HOTW 7, where Ozzy started a Islam Jihad by the sword while his confucionistic, pascifistic allie Toni just stayed allied with Ozzy. That makes no sence. Toni should've either converted to Islam, or broke the alliance.

It's as if Iran starts a jihad to turn all european nations into muslims, while the 'christian' English people stay allied to Iran.

[Toni]

Part of being a good diplomat is securing your defense by having enough allies that will defend you when working on the SS.

Hope you are not talking about me CS, because in this game i got enough troops to get rid of my three enemies all together!

And Trev pls get your bearings a bit better, everyone was telling your subs to do what you told us before.

[Toni]

I had never experienced a nuclear war, so I just decided to begin one basically for the experience

Nice diplo concept

Just makes the game more diplo, deity you were right

[The Capo]

I didn't mean to say that you can't start a nuclear war, I just thought it a bit odd that someone who was absent for nearly a month would return and start a nuclear war. There should be no ban on any use of weapons or warfare. Warfare is considered, at least by the professors I have had, a type or extention of diplomacy.

And I agree with Cybershy (that was difficult for me to type) in that diplogame alliances tend to stay pretty much the same throughout the game, and the obvious reason is that while players act as if they have different leaders, ultimately the leaders will act the same way and despite one leader being more "warlike" and one being "peaceful" this usually coincides with what the player wants his nation to do.

There is nothing wrong with this, obviously, but it is the reason why we get alliances that never seem to be broken.

As far as Cybershy's contention that HOTW V and VII ended peacefully I say this; the only reason that occured in V at least was due to the fact that Spain and China decided to take no action against India when we knew their ship would go up. I am sure Ozzy can atest to the fact that therew as a substantial military build-up by the Chinese and Spanish along their mutual Indian borders, and there were plenty of nuclear missiles prepared to fire upon India. The difference here, and please if you are reading this do not take this personally, was that the Spanish and Chinese player decided not to start a nuclear war, from what I gather in THIS situation that decision was not the same.

So no Cybershy, I don't think your point was made correctly. The fact remains that the SS victory will USUALLY end up in a nuclear war, it just depends on the players, and I did say using nuclear weapons is fine in a diplogame, and it is. But I would reserve that for situations where all DIPLOMATIC measures have been taken to prevent it, or if the nuclear war is tactical in some measure. To prevent a space ship though? It just doesn't seem in keeping with the principles diplogames were built upon.

I agree with you that HOTW V, which I was part of ended peacefully and without issues, but I think that was more or less because the players had a better repor with eachother, and that it was basically the first diplogame in Civ IV so the players had a much greater interest in the game's success.

My position remains the same; we must find a different way to end the game, or to win the game.