The Dance of Civilizations [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread Pt1]

[St Jon]

I brought this exact scenario up on the set-up thread. The double move rule as it stands cannot cope with amphibious landings and things will only get more unworkable with modern units and their greater movement range. What Russia did, in my opinion, does not constitute a double-move just uses the greater movement range of Galleons than land units can manage during wartime.

I cannot see what is wrong with, declare war + move + attack + take city, on one turn. To stop it you build scouts, spies, caravels, subs, etc rather than render a perfectly legitimate tactic of blitzkrieg attack illegal.

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Well yes St Jon, I remember you arguing that, but that wasn't what was agreed in our rules. And you are distorting the issue. The rules don't ban "declare war + move + attack + take city, on one turn" they only ban it when the player also moved last the previous turn. Blizkrig of declare, move and attack in itself is definitely allowed.

I think Egypt is right. We have to wait and hear from Ottoman and see if something can be sorted out which works for people and gets us going. In a few more hours of course Ottoman will have had his 24 so Russia could have moved anyway - which would be a bizarre twist!

I think it is important that we remember that nobody had intended any wrong, and nobody is talking about anyone being punished/penalised. We just need to ensure that the Ottomans don't end up damaged by their war opponent having moved, and then declared war and moved again, without them having a chance to respond. Rightly or not (respecting what St Jon says) our rules say he has the right not to be harmed by such a move.

Its the harm that matters. India and I are double-moving against each other all the time at the moment, but we agreed it didn't matter at the moment, and so aren't following the letter of the rule for the sake of an easier life all round. So there is not much we can do but wait for the Ottomans to comment on whether this has caused them any real harm.

[Robert]

1. @Korea The rules say that it is allowed to agree upon a new turn order. If the Ottomans and the Russians can agree, then that's ok. No pressure on the Ottomans to agree. If they can't agree I will reload the login from the Inca. It's then up to Russia to miss one turn in 1360 or to wait till the Ottomans played in 1365. (or even: attack in 1360)

See the bold part:

Rule 03. Civilizations that are at war or want to declare war have to observe the turn order which is set the turn before the war starts.
Thus: no double moves during wartime or when declaring war. Players are free to agree on a new turn order if all involved parties agree and this new turn order is published in the organization thread and all involved parties publish their agreement there as well. Every player gets at most 24h to make his war moves. The host will pause the game if the turn is about to advance in 1 hour while any player involved in the war did not have a chance to play his turn. When 24h have past the player just missed his turn. If the 2nd player in the turn order misses his turn he'll be first in the turn order from that moment on.

2. @Russia: The double move exploit has caused zillions of problems in a zillion pitboss games. History shows that games collapse because of no good double move rules, or b/c they are not obeyed. Beyond the Pit almost collapsed because of it, but eventhough it continued, it never recovered.

It's impossible to be sure during all those wars we have during a game, that there are no exploits done. It's not possible to be sure yourself. Perhaps you did something that gave you an advantage without you even knowing.
Not to mention that we most probably can't even agree with each other wat an exploit will be an what not. (getting back in to raise you tax slider to react on an action done by the other player during his movement, an exploit or not? not a question, it's an example. don't answer it please ;-))



3. @St Jon: Your examples have nothing to do with the double move question. Whatever someone can do within one turn to which the other player cannot react is always good and allowed.
The double move can perfectly cope with the amphious landing.
An amphious landing is only allowed if you follow the correct turn order. (just like any attack)

And it can still succeed if you follow the turn order as well.
There's no problem there.
No problems with modern units either.

You are mixing up the advantages modern units give to an attacker with the advantages a double move give to an attacker. The first ones are perfectly acceptable, the 2nd ones are an exploit and a game breaker. Despite the fact that they both can have the same in-game result.

It's as with a nuke.
It is allowed to hit a 10 stack army of your enemy with a nuke to remove it.
It is not allowed to hack his password, go into his civ and disband the 10 unit stack.

Now your argument on double moves would equal to: "because it's allowed to remove a 10 stack army with a nuke, it's also allowed to hack into his civ and disband the army. Same result, thus both allowed"

Nope, advantages b/c of a game mechanics exploit are forbidden, advantages of clever use of the proper use of game elements are not forbidden but encourags

[Korea (DoC)]

as i said , based on your agrement with india byz , then we should throw out hte rule all together, no need for rule if htere are excpetions.

[India (DoC)]

I don't feel like arguing, but actually I'm at "peace" with Byzantium at the moment-I did not even kill his puny chariot even if I could have done it any time . We are at peace in game terms, but naturally we are not at peace in character, since none of us wants peace.. or not even want to try to talk about it

[Robert]

Korea, read my post 2208: it is allowed by the rules.

[Robert]

I don't know where the Ottoman player is, but I'm going to sleep.
If the Ottomans agree to just continue, I need to agree upon a timeslot to launch the game with the Ottomans. (they must anyway get time to finish their move within this only 11 hours lastin move)

If we agree upon a reload of the Inca last turn, then we must arrange a good reload spot for the Inca b/c they deserve the change to play last turn again. (they can't be the victims of this problem.)

Tomorrow moring I'll be behind my laptop for 1/2 an hour, then I'll leave for work.
Perhaps I can launch it from my mobile phone though.

[Korea (DoC)]

I don't feel like arguing, but actually I'm at "peace" with Byzantium at the moment-I did not even kill his puny chariot even if I could have done it any time . We are at peace in game terms, but naturally we are not at peace in character, since none of us wants peace.. or not even want to try to talk about it

you at war in game mechanics??

[OzzyKP]

So basically the options are:

1. Ottomans agree that there was no benefit from the double move and the game continues on normally.

2. Ottomans feel the double move should be undone, we reload to the Incan turn, and the Russians skip their last turn before doing the amphibious invasion over again. Ottomans still don't have a chance to respond, but now all the combat rolls are done over and Russia gets a chance to raze that city.

Right?

It seems there aren't any major changes to the flow of time or of the war by going with the more active, "extreme" option of reloading. Usually people don't want to reload because it involves lost time. But sitting around waiting for the Ottomans to show up in the thread is taking far more time than a reload.

So I'd suggest we just reload, thus fixing the double-move, and then we can all get on with our lives. Russia still gets their war and neither side is advantaged or disadvantaged.

Then I'll start subbing for the Arabs.

[Korea (DoC)]

isnt there anyone else out there that can sub, i relay dont like the idea of one player playing two civs.


too much pwoer and info

[Robert]

for a reoad we need to be sure that the incans are online

ottomans must appoint a sub. perhaps the arabs are planning something that should not be known to a (couple of) civ(s). that includes Rome.

[England (DoC)]

Ottomans where are you?

So let me get this, Ottos are subbing for the Arabs. That is strange when they themselves can't even take their turn.

24hrs+ no word from ottos

[Orb (DoC)]

The Ottoman posted on the story thread ooc. give them more time.

[Ottoman Empire (DoC)]

Wow, baloney I haven't been in for 24hrs.

1 - Me subbing for Arabs is not private, it was posted on this forum
2- Russia, don't pretend like I didn't know about all your units, I have so much espionage on you I can see every single one of your units, cities, prod. times, etc Subbing for Arabia has given me NO advantage. Also, did you notice I accepted a free trade on behalf of Arabia with you? If I was a dishonest player would I have not declined?
3- I am not OK with the double move as I HAVEN"T EVEN LOGGED IN SINCE FINDING OUT I WAS AT WAR

The game is down and I can't do ^&(^%!

What happened to 24hr turn timer? This is the reason I joined this game, usually I queue 2 moves per day but I was worried about going to war ever. When I learned about the 24hr turn I thought, OK, that's fair. If there's no 24hr turn timer during war then I will need someone to take over for me because I cannot guarantee I will be able to move more than that.

[Russia (DoC)]

as far as I know there has been a 24hr timer since the second I declared war.

Here is what happened. I logged in early in the morning, played my turn. Saw that there was 30 mins left on the timer. Ate breakfeast. Played the next turn. On that last turn I declared war, moved my forces and made attacks. With the exception of a few frigates that made no attacks, nothing of significance was moved. There was not much for you to react to. I have done nothing since that 1 turn attack.

I have no issue with loading the 1360 turn, skipping that turn and then doing everything all over again. Of course that would mean the combat rolls would be different and I'd probably lose troops I didn't lose in the first assault, but I'm willing to accept that.