History of the World XI [Diplomacy Game] [Organization II]

[Frank Johnson]

He gifted the AI tech so he's a cheater.

He has 6 defensive pacts so he's a coward.

Just keeping my comments in character for ya.

Originally posted by Asmodeous


I think his complaint that you were making it personal came with the cries of "cheater," "coward," and other such things tossed in both his direction and the directions of the various entities that were benefitting from his rather skilled diplomatic workings.

I suspect that had you left those parts of it out of the discussion to begin with, he would not have claimed that you had made it personal and therefore a "sin against diplogaming".

Me.

[OzzyKP]

Ah, diplogames, how I love thee.

On the tech gifting thing, I think the main reason we have banned trading with the AI is so humans don't take advantage of the AI. That is why we don't, unless everyone agrees, go to war with or trade with the AI at all. If someone is out for a session and everyone gang bangs the AI, that is obviously wrong. Or if some leading player misses a session and everyone tricks the AI into giving away important techs or maps or something. That is the reason, as far as I understand it, for the no-AI trade rule. The key is respecting the wishes of the human player.

The rule is created to serve the principle. So if the principle doesn't apply, neither does the rule imho.

If you have a pre-existing tech relationship with a human civ and you owe them X tech, I see no trouble whatsoever in gifting that tech to the AI. Or even, in some circumstances, making a full tech trade that had previously been agreed to with the human player.

I'm a bit unclear about the circumstances of Toni's tech gifting. I just skimmed the last 3 pages. But I think one example I heard is that Deity was inventing Civil Service (or something like that) and when his civ went AI Toni gifted the tech to the AI in order to prevent Deity from researching it himself and trading it to his allies. Is that correct? If so that is a pretty severe exploit and cheat imho.

On the other hand, the other example I think I heard is that Frank was planning to go to war with the Russians and Toni gifted a tech to them to upgrade their military. Was there no owner of the civ? Was it understood to be a vacant AI civ that wouldn't have a human returning to it?

Going to war with the civ is just as permissible and/or impermissible as gifting tech. Going to war with an AI is taking advantage of it for your own gain and disrespecting the wishes and ownership of the human player. That is why we typically will have someone (like CS) join as the AI to end the war instead of letting it be fought out.

On the other hand, if the civ was understood as vacant and not expecting a human to return to it, and if all the players decided it was open season of a sort, then it would be perfectly ok for Frank to go to war AND perfectly ok for Toni to gift tech in hopes of weakening Frank. Both are then using the AI for their own ends.

But yea, it depends on the circumstances and I don't know them all.

As for the 3 on 8 thing... *sigh* alliances and tech trading are always a source of argument for these games. We need to figure out some solution. I thought my point system would be a good possibility. But even if we play with a point system, no one seems to really accept it or allow it to change their play style (which it should).

Whatever you guys resolve, I don't think that Frank can just declare victory based on having a bigger army. If he thinks the 3 can take on the 8, then fight it out. If not, then quit *****ing about it. Or better yet incorporate it into some in-game diplomacy in the other thread.

[Toni]

Arv i have send u the last save via email

[Asmodeous]

I'm a bit unclear about the circumstances of Toni's tech gifting. I just skimmed the last 3 pages. But I think one example I heard is that Deity was inventing Civil Service (or something like that) and when his civ went AI Toni gifted the tech to the AI in order to prevent Deity from researching it himself and trading it to his allies. Is that correct? If so that is a pretty severe exploit and cheat imho.

I don't know enough about this to say anything. I didn't think the person was AI at the time though. I could be mistaken.

On the other hand, the other example I think I heard is that Frank was planning to go to war with the Russians and Toni gifted a tech to them to upgrade their military. Was there no owner of the civ? Was it understood to be a vacant AI civ that wouldn't have a human returning to it?

Mr. Lincoln has been unreliable, but he intends to be back. The civ wasn't "Vacant", and as far as I am aware from prior to the situation, they had a tech-trade deal that was coming anyhow, and instead of waiting for Frank to chew up the AI-controlled Russia and trade the techs to Russia when Mr. Lincoln returned the following session (or his sub if we found one), he made his part of the trade (which was going to be done with Mr. Lincoln prior to Lincoln's finishing researching the tech anyway) ahead of time.

In Frank's defense (even if I feel dirty doing so given his attitude thus far), his plans to invade Russia were also fairly situated prior to the AI taking over for the session.

Me.

[Frank Johnson]

Guys, the Russians got the #1 army building up to fight someone else. They went AI and then stuck the army on my boarder, then got the benefit of being the AI (low to no upgrade costs) and free techs from others.

Self-defense.

[Robert]

Frank, can you please stop calling names? It serves no purpose, you have made your point. Let's please close the subject and advance the game.

In retroperspective, can the others please stop pushing Frank's in game remarks under his nose? You force him to either say sorry of make the remarks again. I think the first isn't nessecary b/c sometimes things are being said in the heat of the moment, which leaves the latter for him, which serves no purpose, thus please stop hunting him.

Regarding the 3 vs 8, I personally think there's no 8-way-alliance. I was wrong.
I think it's more or less a fact that Toni has defense/trade pacts with 6-8 civs nevertheless.
I think he has token advantage with many of the new diploplayers in this game. But he's right that there's no rule against this.

We can discuss that forever, but that once again doesn't serve no purpose either, since neither party will admit to be wrong anyway. (and both parties have good reasons to not do so, either moral or principal(?)).

Let's focus on this game.
Everybody can reconsider his/her position in the game with the known facts.
I think the game is still fantastic, and I'm sure we can continue it to end it fantastic.

Let's close the book and continue the game

We'll discuss alliance-rules later.
I agree that my religion-alliance model isn't perfect. Maybe others have better ideas. (don't make things to complicated) or maybe ideas to flesh out the religion idea, or maybe we can either accept that what we have right now is the best or that the religion alliance concept is the best bad concept.

But that's not for now but for the next game.

I have a save game, I'll upload it from my laptop later. (this is my desktop)

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Guys, I have a serious issue re: this weeks game. At first I thought I simply couldn't make it &-therefore-would need someone to Sub for me (& I still might btw). However, I just learned that I will have an Internet Cafe near where I will be staying, & so might be able to play after all. The only caveat is whether or not they will let me install my copy of Civ4 & BtS on one of their computers. If that's the case, then I will be there for the game, but I cannot guarantee it. Can ANYONE suggest a Sub as a standby so that I can discuss strategy with them prior to the game? Its vitally important that I have SOMEONE just in case I can't be there. Please someone, ANYONE, suggest someone I can get in touch with .

Aussie_Lurker.

[Toni]

I remember what Ozzy said long time ago "Don't be a score leader in these kind of games because people will hate you for it" something along those lines.

Sadly now from mine own experience I can say that he was right

[Frank Johnson]

At least I'm consistant.

[OzzyKP]

You guys allowed Toni to be the score leader again?

[Glohithia]

Hehe, Toni is looking a lot like the Patriots are these days!! Thats 3 in a row where he is dominating. Good job Toni, just tell them “don’t hate the player, hate the game”

[Toni]

Well you two should stop with the compliments because u are making my life harder

(Still thx though )

[Asmodeous]

Ozzy said something about a point system? What is this "point system"? I would like to see it so I can at least know what it is, it might have been a good system to go with.

If you have it somewhere you can point me to or can post it here, Ozz-man (HE COMETH!) do let me know.

Me.

[Robert]

Ozzy's point system is a failure since we're still waiting for the results of HOTW VII

[OzzyKP]

I think this was the final version:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=4513045#post4513045