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

[Robert]

You should have seen this comming. You can't order around a civ almost your strength and expect much less. You can't screw a small civ out of land on multiple occasions and not expect them to wait for the day when they can have their revenge.

Once again: I have no problems with Korea declaring war on me. I even already said that I totally digged his story.
And like I said before: I also fully accept you declaration of war.

But the 'army loaning' and 'fleet requesting' is just cheap.
But I'll deal with that. I've already said that as well.

But the entire combination of 2 nations attacking, fleeting requesting, army stealing and double move exploit together is pretty big, isn't it?

I think this is what you were counting in the whole time. You have manipulated this entire situation to gain various advantages.

Which advantage?
The only advantage of my fix to the double move exploit (your words) is that I saved the GE, but I am ready to return that GE.
What are the other advantages? I have no advantages.

If all other civs agree I'm fine with reloading, but there is no need for a reload.
Maya: you know that The Capo pushed the border far too much when he refused to play the turn. You played your turn and you were wise enough to not pull the same exploit korea did. I saw that you left the game seconds before the turn moved.

I know that you are trying to keep things fair.
I have no problem with you.
I hope that you are willing to try to put a fair verdict onme as well.
Like I see that you did some wise things (play your turn, not using the exploit) I hope that you can see that I also try (accept the double-cross backstabbing, accept the outcome of the judges, keep the GE on the spot for returning to Korea)

You and me try to cooperate.
Now explain me 1 thing were Maya tried to cooperate at least some way to a compromis?
Can you plaese at least talk the reload out of his head?

I demand to know what the game was not paused? Or was this also not in the "spirit" of what you ment by the above?

A. Nobody requested a pause.
B. there was no need to pause the game, we could undo the things easily by returnin the GE.

This dispute was only about who should have that GE.
Since I kept the GE on it's spot (and did not use it for a GA or sail it away in my galleon) there was no need for a pause.

We never paused the game during your korea-maya double move either.
Neither did we pause the game when you double moved on Rome, or when Rome double moved on you.

I demand to know what the game was not paused? Or was this also not in the "spirit" of what you ment by the above?

If I would've thought that then I would not have kept my GE on the spot, ready to be returned to Korea.
Can you not see that things can easily be fixed? And that it was stubborn Korao who did not do his turn, even while he joined to the game? While he was there he could easily have finished his turn. But he decided to hijack it.

RULES YOU WROTE.

I did not write the rules. We did.

[Robert]

Portugal: Ozzy, Russia and Rome have expressed to be against a reload.
If everyone agrees I'm fine with reloading.
But there is no need for a reload. Korea can grab the GE back as soon as the judges say that he's right.

[Robert]

the hour is over (twice) so I'm going to sleep.
If the judges rule against me, the GE is ready for grabbing already.

[OzzyKP]

Ok, our three judges are: Ming, Rah, & -jrabbit. All three did a tremendous job of weighing all the facts and making the best possible decision. Due diligence for a game dispute has been more than met.

All three said that Capo DID NOT break a rule (either by the letter of the law OR the spirit of the law) by doing a "double-move" before war was declared.

Two of the three said that CS is at fault for doing a double-move after war was declared.

The best solution that was suggested by everyone (and I concur) is that CS should lose his GE as a penalty for his violation of the double-move rule. No reload is needed.

Here are the facts as I presented them to the three judges. I think I did a fair, impartial job:

Spoiler:

I am hoping you could help settle a dispute in our Diplogame, Beyond the Pit. There is
an accusation of a double move that we can't resolve on our own. So it has been
requested that someone not in the game should decide. This game is played in Pitboss.

The Initial Sequence of Events:

Action A. 1630 Greece moves
Action B. 1630 Korea moves
Action C. 1635 Korea declares war and moves
Action D. 1635 Greece moves

So the main question to be resolved is:
Does the double-move rule apply to the turn BEFORE war was declared?

Arguments for Yes, it does apply:

1. The turn before war is declared is just as important as any turn during the war.
2. It is accepted MP practice to include the turn before war in the double-move rule.
3. When our initial double-move rule was discussed and written down there was some
discussion about including the turn before that was never disputed.
4. It is common for diplogames to use "accepted practices" that don't necessarily follow
the letter of the law/rule.

Arguments for No, it does not apply:

1. The double-move rule was explicitly written down and made no mention of the turn
before war is declared. The rule is posted at the top of all game threads and reads:

- 6 hours time between moving during war-time
Civilizations that are at war have to wait 6 hours after the new turn started after their
last move. When all opponents have moved before those 6 hours have passed the player can
move as again well.

Thus, a civ at war can move after:
- 6 hours have passed since the new turn started after his last move
- all his opponents have moved after his last move

2. Accepted practice in other games or side discussion earlier in this game has no
bearing on the rule itself, and the rule guided and informed the action.
3. The game is hundreds of turns along and no prior attempt was made to clarify or reword
the rule before now to include the turn before war was declared.


Other Important Facts:
1. There is no assertion from either side that the "double-move" by Korea gave them a
tactical advantage in the main war.
2. At issue however is the matter of a Greek Great Engineer passing through Korean land.
3. Had Greece played first in 1635 the Great Engineer would be safely in Greek land.
With Korea playing first in 1635 (and declaring war) the GE was bumped out of Korean
lands and made an easy target.
4. The Greek player is also the game's host.
5. When the dispute first arose, several players asked the host to pause the game so the
matter could be resolved.
6. Greece refused and instead decided to double-move and save the engineer and thus
"correct" the imbalance created by Korea's "double-move".

Summary:
1630: Greece moves
1630: Korea moves
1635: Korea moves & declares war
1635: Greece moves
1640: Greece moves & moves GE to safety
1640: Korea moves

A diagram of the Engineer situation:
http://jvhebron.nl/website.nsf/bcc4a7cdec6f807ac1256e37007c54c8/7a0458708de7b373c1257549005c4686/$FILE/explanation.jpg

Possible Solutions:

1. Continue Playing - Korea's "double-move" does indeed violate the rule (or the spirit
of the rule) on double moves, and Greece's double-move fixes the problem. Play can now
resume normally.

2. Reload Start of 1640 - Korea's "double-move" was allowed by the rule and Greece's
response was unwarranted, so Greece's double-move should be undone with a reload.

3. Reload Start of 1635 - Korea's "double-move" does indeed violate the rule (or the
spirit of the rule) on double moves, but Greece's double-move is also in violation. We
should just start the whole thing over and do it correctly this time.

4. Delete Greece's Great Engineer - Korea's "double-move" does not violate the rule, but
Greece's double-move does. Reloading is a pain in the ass however and would piss off all
the other players, so deleting the GE at issue is the simpler, easier solution.

5. Another solution I haven't thought of.

Any reload will be poorly received by the other players not involved in the dispute.

FYI I'm not putting scare-quotes around Korea's double-move to indicate a bias, just that
Greece's double-move is not disputed, but there is dispute over whether Korea's
"double-move" really was an illegal double move or not.

Here is Rah's response:

Spoiler:

In my opinion, somewhat based on our interpretation of why we have a no double move rule.



Their rule does not cover this situation, so in my opinion Korea did not violate any rule.

Since he didn’t declare, move into their territory, then attack before defensive changes could be made, I don’t think that the spirit of the rule was violated either.



The engineer is a trickier issue. Greece never got a chance to move him after the declaration of the war. (our rule wouldn’t have accounted for this either)

BUT since Greece moved an engineer into a position of risk he must assume that risk. A merchant I could understand but if you’re moving an engineer, he should have at least been escorted.

But since this is special situation that has probably not come up before, it’s foggy.



So my ruling would be. KOREA did not violate the double move rule since it doesn’t specifically cover prior to war. ( if they’d like to change it for the future, do it)

Normally I would say Greece was in error moving again to save the engineer.

But since there is a rules interpretation issue here, AND IF the second Greece move did not give any additional advantage to Greece) I’d be willing to say OK THIS TIME.



SO I’d rule #1 continue playing. But not for the reasons stated.

And clarify rule for future use.

Does the double move apply to turn before. I’d say NO

And If A GP is in your territory when you declare war, he should be given a movement turn to get away. I could accept the tough luck rule here also. (this rule should not apply to workers or other units since this is sometimes part of the DOW strat)

RAH

Here are Ming's thoughts on the issue:

Spoiler:

While I'm going to spend some more time on it and read it a few more times, my initial thoughts were VERY clear.

The Koreans did not break the "stated and agreed upon" double move rule.

Frankly, it should have been discussed more prior to the game if some thought it was an issue. Since there was no agreement come to, and since it wasn't added to the rules, there can be NO violation of a rule that doesn't exist. As far as it being an "implied" rule, I have to laugh. The fact that it was brought up before, and NOT added to the rules (for whatever reason) takes away any argument that it was implied

Plus, based on how many other groups handle this problem, the turn before declaring war is never considered as part of a "cheat" double move. The double move rule is to keep people from declaring war and getting two turns before a response can be made. Yes, the turn before a war is important... but the problems start when war is actually declared. So again, based on your own rules, and the REAL intent of the rule, there is no violation here.

In an ideal world, you should go back to the moment just prior to the double-move that saves the Great Engineer. However, this isn't an ideal world. I offer up two possibilities...

The Best... Continue the game and delete the GE.
Advantages... saves time... no reload needed... game is where it should be anyway... everybody but one person happy.
Disadvantages... the host is pissed off and may cause problems. (even though it was his own mistake that caused the loss of a GE)

Compromise
Just continue the game and let the host keep his GE. I hate this one, but as you know from your vast experience in such games, the real and RIGHT decision could break up the game. I've made similar bad decisions before... IF there is a real fear that the right decision could end the game, you sometimes have to suck it up and make a bad call. If nobody else cares about the GE, and the host is the only one whining... sigh.

Either way, I would suggest that a rules discussion take place before you continue. It should be stated very clearly that what was done was NOT against the rule. And that the rule will not change during the game... and if people disagree, they should keep it in mind when they agree to rules for future games. Because as you know, most pre game rules were created to avoid problems caused in earlier games Sometimes I read a rule and think to myself, what the heck happened to cause this rule to be now considered a standard

I will read through it again and see if my opinion changes... but I doubt it. It's really very clear. There was no violation of the double move rule for the attack. There was a gross violation of the rules when a double-move was done to save the GE. What you agree to do though is clearly open to debate. I think we both know what should be done. However, you may need to use your best judgement to make the proper call.

And finally, -Jrabbit's thoughts:

Spoiler:

OK, here are my thoughts:

1. Re: 1635 - Korea declares war and moves

OPINON: This is technically legal and should be permitted. The fact that the
group discussed the "turn before war" inclusion but DID NOT WRITE IT INTO
THE RULES is the key determining factor. The fact that Korea did not gain a
tactical advantage further argues for the legitimacy of this move.

2. Re: 1640 - Greece moves (double move), moving GE to safety

OPINION: This is obviously a double-move during wartime and illegal. The
"just fixing an injustice" aspect of this move is irrelevant.

3. Solution -
(A) Delete the Great Engineer and continue the game, and
(B) put the "spirit" of the double-move rule into the LETTER of the rule,
immediately.

---

COMMENTS: Intentional breaking of the double move rule in retaliation for a
perceived double move comprises a self-assigned judge-and-jury role that
violates the integrity of the game.

When investing time into a CIV MP game (or truly, any game), the fact that a
ruleset is written and agreed to should be sacrosanct - AS WRITTEN. These
are the rules of engagement for the enterprise and must be respected. Again
I stress: as written.

Try traveling the U.S. playing pinochle. The same practice that creates
victory in one city will get you run out of town in another. The fact is,
"accepted practice" in one circle of gamers does not mean that practice is
accepted everywhere -- especially in a game involving over a dozen players.

I hope this helps. Feel free to post this online. Yes, I'm willing to be
identified.

Best of luck with the rest of the game.

-Jrabbit

[Pitboss Maya]

No reload is needed.

You never mentioned to them that Korea didn't play turn 1640, KNOWING that a game pause or reload was in order.

Especially now that we have third party input as to who was in the right and who was in the wrong, Korea was completely justified in not playing his turn.

He should not be penalized for that.

I still call for a reload to 1640 so that no turns are lost by the "victim" in this debacle.

Of course Greece is willing to give up the GE in exchange for screwing Korea out of a turn. Korea's assault on Greece is literally going to come down to how many troops Greece can rally to defend his city, and is measured in each and every turn.

Partial justice is not justice. And to tell you the truth I am still pissed that because of Cyber's blatant disregard for the game rules, even with a reload to 1640 he has gained advantages such as knowing the location of my fleet, knowing my plot to sink his galleon in the east, hell even knowing the my full intentions regarding the war.

Bottom line is rules were not followed, procedure was not followed. If Capo was Greece in this situation I CAN ASSURE YOU IT WOULD NOT HAVE PLAYED OUT LIKE THIS.

[Pitboss Maya]

From Cyber...

A. Nobody requested a pause.

From Capo, page 16 of this thread...

I even asked him in game, I have screens, to either get a save of the game or pause the game so we can sort it out and he refused to do it.

[OzzyKP]

Korea victimized himself by choosing not to play his own turn. I didn't mention it to the judges because only recently did Capo reveal that he decided to just skip his turn.

Capo has a remarkable way of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. He did not trust the system we set down to resolve this dispute. He figured he was better of throwing a tantrum and forcing everyone to do what he wanted by reloading. I for one don't want the game to be held hostage to such thinking.

If Capo had just done what I told him to, and relaxed while things were being decided, then he'd have exactly what he wanted. But no, he decided to throw a fit. So he has no one but himself to blame for that.

[Pitboss Maya]

Lets say he did play his turn, and we ended up reloaded (which we should do).

This would have allowed Greece to see his next move. This is the reason the game should have been paused until it was resolved. I waited to play my turn the last minute of 1640 for this exact reason... I was hoping this would be decided before I potentially had to reveal my next move, then be subject to a reload.

Again, he was totally justified in not wanting to reveal moves knowing the turn should be reloaded.

I only moved because I realize that even with a unanimous decision by 3 independent judges...

All three said that Capo DID NOT break a rule (either by the letter of the law OR the spirit of the law) by doing a "double-move" before war was declared.

The powers that be would still say, "oh well, game on, no harm, no foul"

Korea victimized himself by choosing not to play his own turn.

Why the hell even waste the judges time deciding on this if you are just going to do what you want anyway???

[Pitboss Russia]

OK kiddies you now have 2 wars to back date if you wish to. BTW I didn't double move it's just the city was on border and so were my troops.

[-Jrabbit]

Is this the "diplomacy" part I've heard so much about?

[OzzyKP]

Is this the "diplomacy" part I've heard so much about?

Looks like fun, eh?

[Robert]

Well, like I said, I accept the outcoming of the dispute.
And like I said, if Maya/Korea are going to be stubborn about the reload as well, and YOU GUYS (other players) agree with a reload, then that's fine with me as well. (no disadvantages for me, I just think that we give in way too )

I am tempted to comment on the outcome, but let's not do that.
Like I said earlier: I am willing to stop defending my southern-city for 1 turn to give Korea a chance to compensate for his lost turn (lost due to his own stupid stubborn being)

[The Capo]

First of all I would like to say that, while I did not agree that third parties needed to be involved (because the answer to this was obvious to me the entire time) I appreciate that they were truly unbiased (like a lot of you) and made the right decision.

That said their decision wasn't entirely accurate. A reload must occur according to the rules (which was the basis for their decision). I will right now post, and stress in BLUE what I am talking about. This is the rule as it appears in the threads:

- 6 hours time between moving during war-time
Civilizations that are at war have to wait 6 hours after the new turn started after their last move. When all opponents have moved before those 6 hours have passed the player can move as again well.

Thus, a civ at war can move after:
- 6 hours have passed since the new turn started after his last move
- all his opponents have moved after his last move

--------------------------
If any civilization violetes these rules the game will be paused and the concequences will be decided.
If damage has been done then the game will be reloaded back to the last available save on the Pitboss Server. The Pitboss Server saves every turn and keeps all saves till the game has finished.

Possible penalties, besides loading the last save are:
- removing all or a % of the votes the violator receives in a certain month or all months in a certain category or all categories
- The loss of tech vouchers (a few or all)
- removed from the game
- a warning

This depends on the seriousness of the violation, which is not only determined by the damage being done but also by the reasons and attitude of the violater.'

Now, if you are going to read this and then still tell me I am being selfish or out of line when I knew I was in the right the entire time. And then blame me for NOT taking a turn which NEVER SHOULD HAVE OCCURED TO BEGIN WITH, you are the one who is selfish. The only way this game can proceed is by following rules, and I (as well as many others) attempted to clarify the rules more than what was offered, Cybershy consistently (and arrogantly) denied all of these requests. He willfully broke the rules, he willfully denied a request for a pause when a rule was in question. Now we are going to continue despite the fact that the rule calls for a reload in this exact situation.

I asked him to pause the game even in game, I took this screen shot which does not show me doing it (I asked him prior and Japan can hopefully vouch for this if he remembers) but this screen does show that I attempted to get him to pause the game or not do what he was going to do BEFORE 1640. You can clearly see it from these screen shots:

WILL EDIT IN

WILL EDIT IN

I am going to check the chat log right now, I am not going to move any units because I still demand a reload. The reason I am checking is to see if my request for a pause is still there. Either way I made it numerous times and it is in keeping with the rules established for this game. I am not being selfish, this is what SHOULD happen. You wrongly blame me for wasting your time when in reality it is cyber who is doing it. I did not move because a reload was clearly in order. And the judges have determined that I did not break the rules and cyber clearly did, which means a reload must occur.

Furthermore, to explain why I didn't move - besides the obvious point that a reload is certainly in order I did not move becuase I did not want to sully my, already immaculate, position on the matter. Had I taken a move I would have ruined any chance of a rightful reload. I would have seen Cyber's defenses, I would have (if relevant) been able to change my move based on what I saw when I made my move. So for the purposes of keeping the war fair, and knowing a reload would have to occur (or at least assuming I was playing with logical people who would realize a reload would occur) I did not make a move. You can call it a tantrum all you want, but it was, under the circumstances, the CORRECT move to make. So in order to avoid gaining an unfair advantave, and thus continue Cyber's complaining, I refrained from moving further into Greek territory. I feel this is as appropriate as possible an explanation. I have already shown that I was in my rights to expect a reload, I have already been judged to have been right and have been wronged by cyber, I have shown why making a move in this circumstance would have resulted in me gaining an unfair advantage and while I may not have proven that, 100% I asked for a pause, if Cyber and the Japanese player are men of their words they will admit to this (I will be checking the chat log anyway to see if it is still there, so I suggest they do).

I have been through hell for this. I have been called selfish, I have been called a baby, I have been called biased, I have been called many names throughout this process. In the end I held that I was right, and I am right, but it is not over. To repeat the demands I have been making from the get-go: I demand a reload to 1640, I demand to be allowed to move before Greece, and I demand that the turns be played in proper order according to the rules we have established.

But you know what? Screw you guys. I am going to play this out, but if you all think for one second that I don't see you all for the morons that you are, that you'd rather play QUICKLY (in a one turn-a-day-game no less, LOL) than to play CORRECTLY you are mistaken. I will always remember this crap. I will remember who was reasonable and who was being selfish. This is a shameful day for diplogaming, and you are lucky to have me around to accept such an ignoble and dishonest result.

-The Capo

EDIT: Oh yeah, I expect him to follow his promise not to reinfoce his city as he stated he would here:

I am tempted to comment on the outcome, but let's not do that.
Like I said earlier: I am willing to stop defending my southern-city for 1 turn to give Korea a chance to compensate for his lost turn (lost due to his own stupid stubborn being)

In exchange for me not rightfully demanding a reload. There are a few players who actually talked to me you have to thank for this, I won't name their names in the interest of getting this game going, but they were at least respectful and admitted the truth behind this crap. I'll PM Cyber too.

SO DONT MOVE GREECE, AND REMEMBER YOU OWE ME A TURN OF NO MOVEMENT!

[Pitboss Greece]

I will not move or upgrade anything NEXT TURN (I Obviously already did this turn) in the area around Thebes / Knossos / etc. and even stop all reinforcements that were sent into that direction from whereever in my land. This includes the frigate.

Let's move on now.

[Pitboss Greece]

[OOC]For the record: one cannot GRAB a GE, Korea can only kill it! When Korea moves a unit into this GE it'll be gone!!!

I obviously will renegotiate the peace deal if this will be the case since this part is of a very larage importance to me.

I will keep my GE on spot during peace negotiations.