Beyond the Pit [Pitboss Diplomacy Game] [Organization Thread IV]

[Pitboss Celts]

The reason I'm quitting is not because I'm doing badly, it's because I have NO potential of getting anywhere. I'm boxed in by a hostile military superpower, I have no tech production, no hammer production and small cities with extremely limited development possibilities. The one thing I do have is spy points to the superpowers Rome and Portugal, and I'm watching them tech into the industrial age, while I'm still stuck in the early medieval. This game is already decided. Two of the biggest powers, Rome and Portugal, have conveniently snuggled up against eachother and that's a game breaker.

I have no chance of winning this game, at all. None. So why should I stay? The game is not fun for me. I don't mind an underdog position, reference Germany in Hotw5, but this is hopeless cause there's no way out. No potential. No hope. So what's the point? In about 10 turns or so Portugal will have Democracy. When that happens my people will start demanding Emancipation. No way I can get that before my cities have all collapsed to size 1 due to unhappiness. So please, give me a reason why I should stay.

I have no chance of winning either, and I don't plan to quit. I can't tell stories, so I obviously won't be getting points there. I'm not going to be able to race to the top of the score list. My military is not doing anything. The one time I started an attack, I stopped after one turn to pursue peaceful alternatives. I still find this type of play a much better alternative to the bloodthirsty normal MP games. I much prefer a strategical builder approach than a turn based war game.

[Robert]

LzPrst: I have no chance of winning this game, at all. None. So why should I stay? The game is not fun for me.

If only the players stay who have a chance to win, then we'll have only very boring diplogames. I've stayed in all games where I never had a chance to win.

And why is it boring if you can't win?
There are many in-game ways to have fun. Small goals to reach.
That's the beauty of civ. Not only 'winning' is giving satisfaction. Also being first to do X, or being able to override your neighbour to give up Y, etc.

[LzPrst]

I've expressed myself unclearly. It's not about winning. I can enjoy the game if I'm not winning, as long as there is something for me to do. Russia has nothing to do. They're in a crappy position, landwise, strategically and otherwise. There is nothing there to do except keep developing at a snails pace. And let's face the facts, that if there's no chance of competing with the big civs, you're just filler waiting to be wiped out when one of them gets a grumpy leader. Which is the position Russia was in for most of the game, and lo and behold. Rome gets a grumpy leader and the mini-civ gets hit by a superpower. How long until it happens again? Portugal wanting more land? Rome? Some offshore civ wanting a beachhead on our continent? Russia is completely incapable of defending itself, from anyone, due to a lack of production. And living at the mercy of major civs is basically living on borrowed time.

Russia has no future. I can't see how they're ever gonna get anywhere. So basically I'll be playing a slow game of wait to be wiped out. That's not fun. Sorry.

[LzPrst]

If only the players stay who have a chance to win, then we'll have only very boring diplogames. I've stayed in all games where I never had a chance to win.

And why is it boring if you can't win?
There are many in-game ways to have fun. Small goals to reach.
That's the beauty of civ. Not only 'winning' is giving satisfaction. Also being first to do X, or being able to override your neighbour to give up Y, etc.

First to do X? What would that be when the civ is centuries behind? I have one neighbour, Rome, and another civ nearby, Portugal. I could never override them at anything. The only goal for Russia would be to try to get Democracy and Emancipation before unhappiness shreds the whole civ... And that is just not possible. I did the math.

[Pitboss Portugal]

LzPrst I for one never plan on switching to Emancipation. Not because of Russia, it is just not part of my long term strategy.

Portugal tried many times to befriend you only to be turned down by Russia. You make it sound that Portugal was an enemy. I offered you for us to team against Rome in ancient times. But you said no thank you, If you only have agreed i doubt Rome would be what is today. Russia would be still in this game!

[LzPrst]

I turned you down, cause you were extremely powerful and aiding you in beating on Rome would have made you more powerful, and gained little for me. As I've tried to say the whole game, Russia's production is so abysmal, that I cant fight or defend against anyone or anything. I've had to rely on poprushing for defence. And no, Portugal is not a direct enemy, but you do support Rome, which is an enemy. That the 2 top civs cooperate ruins the balance of things. Russia is in such a dead end that there is no point in playing them. Feel free to log in and look around.

[OzzyKP]

I agree that the map sucks. Sucks for me too. And even though the game hasn't been all that fun for me for months, I'm sticking it out. (despite what Maya says). You should too.

[Pitboss Khmer]

If only the players stay who have a chance to win, then we'll have only very boring diplogames. I've stayed in all games where I never had a chance to win.

And why is it boring if you can't win?
There are many in-game ways to have fun. Small goals to reach.
That's the beauty of civ. Not only 'winning' is giving satisfaction. Also being first to do X, or being able to override your neighbour to give up Y, etc.

Take a leaf out of HRE's book. They are doing brilliantly against all criteria.

Japan seems to be having great fun too and working out a path in this game.

And look at the clever power diplomacy and strategies of the Celts and America! They say little but it's quality stuff they are doing.

And even the Metals are working things out for that band of drug addicts

[Robert]

LzPrst, I must say that I have huge fun right now, running Russia against Rome.
I also think that you did not get most out of your territory. Way too little workshops, ie.
And you have 9 vouchers left over!

And you should have gotten a big friend early in the game.
That has always been my tactique in diplogames. get a big allie.

You have been way to passive on the diplomatic thing.
And unfortunately you were away when the big invasion on Rome happened. Maybe you should have asked one of those civs to sub for you.

[Pitboss Celts]

I've expressed myself unclearly. It's not about winning. I can enjoy the game if I'm not winning, as long as there is something for me to do. Russia has nothing to do. They're in a crappy position, landwise, strategically and otherwise. There is nothing there to do except keep developing at a snails pace. And let's face the facts, that if there's no chance of competing with the big civs, you're just filler waiting to be wiped out when one of them gets a grumpy leader. Which is the position Russia was in for most of the game, and lo and behold. Rome gets a grumpy leader and the mini-civ gets hit by a superpower. How long until it happens again? Portugal wanting more land? Rome? Some offshore civ wanting a beachhead on our continent? Russia is completely incapable of defending itself, from anyone, due to a lack of production. And living at the mercy of major civs is basically living on borrowed time.

Russia has no future. I can't see how they're ever gonna get anywhere. So basically I'll be playing a slow game of wait to be wiped out. That's not fun. Sorry.

Why don't you become a vassal and play from there? If you can't beat em, join em.

[Pitboss Celts]

How long before the next score update. I want to see if I moved out of last place (or next to last place).

[Robert]

The december score update is here: http://apolyton.net/forums/showpost....0&postcount=74

You have gained 3 positions on the score chart, you share the 14th position with Russia now.

The next score-list update will be somewhere februari 9th or 10th. (after the next voting round)

[LzPrst]

well, my strategy is usually becoming a major power and then challenging the other major powers to create some kind of balance of power...

this was just not possible in the situation i was in. And I won't get much out of workshops cause I don't have much food resources. And building workshops at this stage gives -1 food and +1(2 if caste) production.
Which means that if I threw up a bunch of them, I would produce as much as a civ that had nothing but plains' forests for production. compared to a mined plains hill 4 hammers or mined grass hill 1 food 3 hammers. compared to 1 food, 2 hammers. There's not much to make from that. I guess I'm not good at running a sub-prime landed civ.

[LzPrst]

How long before the next score update. I want to see if I moved out of last place (or next to last place).

that's what I did! I got the Piercians to help me, by joining them. but they asked me to arm for a war against a superpower, when I wasn't there and didn't have the production to build anything.

And yes, I've been inactive in diplomacy cause I've effectively had only 2 neighbours, Rome and Portugal, and they have had nothing to gain from me for centuries. except cities.

[The Capo]

that's what I did! I got the Piercians to help me, by joining them. but they asked me to arm for a war against a superpower, when I wasn't there and didn't have the production to build anything.

And yes, I've been inactive in diplomacy cause I've effectively had only 2 neighbours, Rome and Portugal, and they have had nothing to gain from me for centuries. except cities.

ACTUALLY, I am not sure when you started, but Russia asked to become Piercia's vassal. After that it was Piercia who did so to prevent war (keep in mind the war began with only Russia v. Rome), but Russia complained and practically forced Piercia into war (I used the term practically because that isn't entirely true, but if not for Russia I doubt Piercia would have gone to war with Rome). Again, I don't think you were really the one ruling Russia at the time, but you can't blame Piercia for this. It was Russia who tossed the sheets, and its Russia who must make the bed.