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

[Robert]

I have every right to not end the war

I double agree.

So much for "measured war". I like to call this section of the manual "the insurance policy" for certain players. Rest assured if what happened to Maya happened to certain others there would be screaming, hollering, and reloads.

Well, eventhough I am not in favour of taking that many cities from you (and argued that actively against Rome in the game!) I do see Rome's point, you were not negotiating or doing anything to stop he war. some very serious suggestions and proposals were made. you either ignored them or denied them. That makes it hard for Rome as well.

In my case, players justify the destruction of my civ because of my past military actions

It was more b/c of your absence from peace negotiations.
Toni once nuked half of my empire and once took all my important cities in wars where I was too stubborn to negotiate with him. That was the concequence of my stubborness.

For the record, I think the whole concept of "measured war" as outlined in Ozzys guide is problematic. Again, another ill defined "rule" which gets trampled in some cases, and staunchly upheld in others.

It's a "code of honour" rule that doesn't need to be enforced.
Those are things that should be dealt with in-game.
It morely describes that diplo attitude then that it is about strict rules.

Also, I think it is bad form (Rome and Sparta to a lesser degree) writing about how my people are happy to be be "freed" from Mayan rule.

If that's your position, fight it with stories.
You write 'Sparta to a lesser degree'. A very very lesser degree. Maya occupied Korea and wrote more or less the same, Sparta and Korea had much stronger bounds then Maya and Korea. Obviously Korea prefers to be autonome, but I think it's story wise very very valid to let Koreans be happy that Sparta liberated them.

Capo: Also considering your video speech that you made on the walls of Knossos, I highly doubt the Koreans would ever see the Greeks as anything more than arrogant imperialists.

Korea invaded Sparta and then Sparta is arrogant and imperialistic for fighing back
I know your people better then you do :P
Your people hated that Kim general that brought war and destruction over Korea, and which resulted in being a part of the Mayan empire in the end.
After you died your people remembered the good ancient days of peace between Sparta and Korea again

Then when the Maya pulled Korea once again in a war, the Korean people (most of them) were happy to be freed from these Mayans. These Mayans who brought war on them twice

Hey, this would better be done in-game

[Pitboss Rome]

Very happy to discuss it all here, but lets stick to the truth:

1. I haven’t broken any OOC rules.
2. I haven’t complained about the endless war. It is clearly bad for the Mayan people, and of course other nations don’t like the fact the declaration of endless war rather justifies Rome holding on to Mayan territory (since it can’t be given back). Also I think you misunderstand war-weariness dynamics it will slowly diminish given no military engagements.
3. I haven’t suggested you should be removed from the game. I asked for a pause at one point because you were missing turns and wanted to check you were still with us. You are, which is good, and I certainly don’t begrudge you missing turns.
4. Your quoting Ozzy’s guide about capitals is difficult because I took my lead from you. I wondered about capitals myself but you proposed to me invading and burning Athens to the ground (razing it) because ‘Greece needs taking down a peg or two’.
5. Measured war is a concept I know very well, but it can only work if the nation you are at war with wants to make peace. Look at what happened with Pierica. I captured one city and then kept posting asking Pierica to negotiate. But Piercia wouldn’t talk. In the end I just had to give up and stop anyway. And then finally Pierica started to engage again, and we worked out a deal which left me just holding two Piercian cities. You made no attempt to negotiate or even talk in game during the initial phase of the war, and nobody else said anything. The Khmer had tanks on the way to help you but turned back because they got no response! It’s a diplo game which means it works by diplo! Finally when I gave up and stopped anyway you refused to engage in any diplo and just attacked me again. The way I see it OOC ‘values’ like measured war can’t be used as rules to exploit “I won’t talk to anyone, I won’t engage in diplo, I’ll keep attacking him, but meanwhile he isn’t allowed to fight back because that wouldn’t be measured war”. If you had enter into negotiations you would have every right to claim I should have been measured, and I would have been (just as in the case of Piercia) but this is Diplo – the results have to emerge from the story and if you story endless war, what do you think will happen?
6. You say now that you have two cities. That is true. But there were open offers of peace which would have left you with five times that many, but you instead chose to declare endless war and seize cities by force. You can’t blame me for your choices.
7. I have never storied any suggestion that the Mayan people are happy about the events, or portrayed my actions as ‘liberation’. I did story the factual truth of revolutions in many cities which allowed my armies in. That’s a simple IG truth.

All I can see is that you were annoyed IG understandably, rightly, because you had been trying to manoeuvre a way between two neighbours slightly more powerful than yourself. You tried to cripple one with the attack jointly with the Koreans, which involved a complicated build up and a double-crossing of the Spartans (the Koreans borrowing troops from them which were turned against the them). At the same time you had arranged a treaty with me to keep me out of that war, so you could attack the Spartans. Great diplo. IG breaking of agreements (at least by the Koreans) but underlined with story. Sadly though, you didn’t win the war.

You then tried to get me on board for another attack against the Greeks. This was when your diplo went downhill. For you didn’t have the strength to take on the Spartans again. Your anger at the Greeks for the way the Korean/Maya war went, was clouding your judgement. Strategically, I stood to gain very little from attacking the Spartans – none of their territory could every realistically be held by me – while Mayan land is close by. And story-wise Roman antipathy to Maya was a steady diet and was written in explicitly the day Marcus Aurelius became emperor. But you pressed on and found yourself at the receiving end of the same sort of in-game trickery and twisting regarding deals (but in keeping with stories) which you and Korea used against Sparta.

But then rather than handle it in-game with Diplo, you were so annoyed that your IG plans hadn’t worked, you tried to turn it into an OOC argument. First with the deliberate double move, and then with arguments on here about measured war, when you would have a country five times as big if you had chosen to engage in IG negotiations. Turning IG frustrations at wars and diplo turning out differently than you had hoped, into endless OOC arguments doesn’t help anyone.

It seems to be the bane of this game, that IG surprises just result in OOC arguments. When Korean and Maya originally invaded Sparta there was the odd 'peace treaty' business because of an earlier offer of maps, and immediately there were accusations of cheating on here. Then Sparta was annoyed at the Koreans using their troops against them, and got us into that double move fiasco. And now this. I understand the situation, I''ve been there myself. When four nations attack me, including the Piericans breaking all sorts of treaties (which I had paid for by giving them a city) I was annoyed and did question the legitimacy of the Piercians actions (ending turn and then declaring war and moving troops into my territory). So I understand the IG frustration boiling over into OCC stuff. In that case I was just told by CS "i can understand your annoyance but no rule has been broken" and he was right, and we just got on with it IG. And after a couple of days I realised, the answer to my annoyance was to fight IG and make sure the one nation which lost from teh war was the Piercians! I almost feel that whenever a war is declared we need to pause the timer for 3 days so everyone can get over the shock, grumble, adjust and start playing again.

In fact I think that that is a real suggestion. All our problems seem to come because in the first 48 hours of war everyone is frustrated/angry at the change, trying to work out what is going on, no tiem for diplo, you are busy and work and now this happens etc.!

[mzprox]

A few comments:

-As far as I know in Civ4 endless war wont cause war weariness in itself (only combat actions). however if WW already in effect it will go away slower in war and faster in peace)

-Not wanting to make peace=agreeing to total annihilation

-Measured war/keeping some kind of balance in the world:
Very hard to define. I do think that diplogames should have this concept, but i don't know how could we make good and exact rules for this. We don't want to see always peace games, but wars, especially early wars hurt. However an aggressive civ with bad land would hurt himself if he wouldnt try to invade its rich neighbour.

[The Capo]

In general I agree with what Rome said. The measured war theory is more of a concept than a rule, however it is something that would be sad to see go in Diplogames (a genre I am getting very tired of lately... here at Apolyton at least). Although I will say this is the FIRST time it has ever been seen as just an option and accepted by others (including allies). In most games if someone were to conquer Maya the way you guys did the rest of the world would jump you (friends and foes alike)... I know, it happened to me before. This game just got way too personal and no matter how you try and rationalize it you guys are just fighting a personal squabble that could ignore the entire history of this game. It wouldn't matter what happened before, this same crap would go on because, in all honesty, there are personal issues here you guys are fighting over. On both sides.

The ONE THING I don't agree with that Rome said was its comparison to burning Athens down. You have to realize Ozzy's guide was written in Civ 2. You didn't get back a new capital in Civ 2 when you lost your capital, you had to build another (again, I know this because in that very aforementioned game my capital was taken over and I had to rebuild a new palace). So the loss of a capital is no longer an issue in Civ IV (I mean it still sucks, but its not as bad as it was in Civ 2).

I especially agree with Rome's final statement. Twice this game has been stymied and ruined because of unexpected wars. And in both cases the players used OOC methods (intentional double moves, refusing to negotiate, etc.) as a reaction. That is the true problem here. I really hope we can solve these issues fairly, and I'm hoping the "big discussion needed" thread can eventually result in a uniform set of procedures. I urge everyone here to please visit that thread and put in their two cents so we can get back to playing these games for fun again. If we can't, I am going to have to try and resurrect the genre somewhere else.

[The Capo]

BTW Cyber, a quick history lesson; the Korean people didn't blame Kim, that's something you just added in. The real history is this.

- GREECE convinced the Emperor that the Duke of Wonsan was plotting against him.

- This lead to the civil war that cost Korea 70% of its population, ultimately leading to the murder of Kim's wife. Again, none of this would have happened if not for GREEK intervention. That YOU began by the way.

- For centuries GREECE bullied Korea and took whatever it wanted, the last straw was the settling of the Gobi. You can say, well Korea squandered this. But Korea was too busy dealing with you and your buddies who demanded Korea settle this and that continent. Even if this weren't the case under TREATY WITH GREECE that was rightful Korean land.

- GREECE forced Korea to sign the anti-emancipation pact. Korea wanted Greece to help them stop a war, and Greece demanded that Korea sign the pact in exchange. For the record Greece did not hold up its end of the bargain and DID NOT attempt to settle the dispute in the north with Korea.

- The civil war, sparked by GREEK intervention in Korean politics, lead to death and the rise of the peasant army. Which, rightfully, saw GREECE as the origin of Korea's ills.

You can call it aggression. But saying that is tantamount to saying that in a slave uprising it is the SLAVES who are the aggressors and the MASTERS who are the victims. Maybe in a semantic sense this is true, but not in any real sense at all. Good show though, politics are politics.

[Pitboss Greece]

Capo, the story continued after you left
At first the Koreans were happy with kim, later they found out that Kim in the end brought them under the rule of the warmongering Maya, and they started to oppose to that. They were happy when their old time friends, the Spartans, freed them from the Mayans.

Let's be honest, Kim's actions weren't the best for Korea, in the end

BTW, your in-game view on certain things are pretty weird. No problem in-game, if it stays in-game, but now you bring it ooc.... that's even more weird.

But for the sake of the argument: Korea was not forced to sign the AET, Sparta never bullied Korea, Sparta even offered much land to Korea, Korea just never settled it. Korea had no claim on the Gobi.

And Sparta was right, the duke was plotting against the emperor
don't blame the messenger

And I didn't start the intervention, it was an reaction on letters Sparta received from 'the duke' that contained insults towards the Emperor. Alcetas informed the emperor about that.

Sparta never intervented in Korean politics.
But friends discuss things. So did Sparta and Korea.

Anyway, Korea was a free nation, till Kim did his thing. Kim started a war against Sparta, lost the war but Sparta had mercy and didn't take any of korea.
The Mayans then took all of Korea. It's not weird that the people of Korea later welcomed those who showed mercy on Korea as liberators of those who conquered Korea.

But hey, if you would not have left this game you could have had an influence on the story of Korea. You can't have it both ways. Both stop the story of Korea and blame the people who continued it for not continueing it your way. :B

[Pitboss Russia]

Mighty Lord of Poly,

Are you gonna start a new thread for May?

[Pitboss Khmer]

McFungal hasn't played a turn since 1730.

Can I or someone check his civ?

[Robert]

Yes, I'm going to do it right now.
I'm sorry, the apolyton transition is eating time!

[Robert]

It's time for voting again.
I'm sorry for the delay!

Cast your votes before the end of May 12th!

[The Capo]

At the risk of continuing this pointless debate; you can't make the following statement...

But for the sake of the argument: Korea was not forced to sign the AET, Sparta never bullied Korea.

I was Korea, I was there when this happened. I was FORCED to sign it, whether you like to think of it that way or not that is basically what happened. If I didn't sign it, I wouldn't get what I needed to happen, even though you had previously agreed to what I wanted and decided to change your mind. The only reason you could do so was because of the power you had over me, so in my opinion you may not have said "sign this or die" but you might as well have.

And Sparta was right, the duke was plotting against the emperor
don't blame the messenger

And I didn't start the intervention, it was an reaction on letters Sparta received from 'the duke' that contained insults towards the Emperor. Alcetas informed the emperor about that.

Sparta never intervented in Korean politics.
But friends discuss things. So did Sparta and Korea.

You did intervene, you started a storyline without talking to me about it and I followed suit/played ball just for the fun of it. But you have to take the good with the bad, had Greece not intervened in what happened the war probably would have never taken place and Kim's wife would never have been killed, which indirectly led to the peasant uprising.

Anyway, Korea was a free nation, till Kim did his thing. Kim started a war against Sparta, lost the war but Sparta had mercy and didn't take any of korea.
The Mayans then took all of Korea. It's not weird that the people of Korea later welcomed those who showed mercy on Korea as liberators of those who conquered Korea.

But hey, if you would not have left this game you could have had an influence on the story of Korea. You can't have it both ways. Both stop the story of Korea and blame the people who continued it for not continueing it your way. :B

I'm not blaming them for "not continuing" it my way. I am just saying that your version of events prior to my leave from the game is incorrect and skewed.

[Robert]

History is written by the winners
Your Kim is dead, and the Koreans of today consider him to be the Bane of Korea, and there are very good reasons for that :B

[Pitboss Celts]

Out for a week. America has agreed to sub for me. Anyone can contact me by PM

[Pitboss Khmer]

Interesting scenario

Here's a possible scenario to consider:

Civ A is at war.

Civ B wants to covertly help Civ A by gifting troops.

Can they double move to get the troops there quicker and safer?

I guess so...

[Pitboss Japan]

Here's a possible scenario to consider:

Civ A is at war.

Civ B wants to covertly help Civ A by gifting troops.

Can they double move to get the troops there quicker and safer?

I guess so...

I guess B can play a double turn because in none of those turns those units could enter the war. They will join after they get gifted but A not allowed to make double turn anyway.