Lizzy's rise to greatness

[Hercules]

Yeswe are talking frequently. Andcfc is doing their part. They are caotous, but fighting well.

This is from Mzprox earlier.

In short it hints that Apoly and CFC can defeat Aztecs and Maya. I am sure they could agree to divide the spoils fairly. Then turn attention to HRE who have contributed little to the game as far as I can see.

[MJW]

If this games goes on without a sub they are going to get destroyed regardless of the situation on the frontline. Missing turns in modern war is devastating.

I actually agree that CivPlayers should just miss turns but that is not the issue here. What was agreed to was to set a hard-deadline so you have to finish by then. In order for the deadline to be hard you have to make the late civ miss their turn when they miss it. Civplayers ennui is so bad that they basically won't play at all which is a different category entirely. The other civs didn't agree to that. That would be much worse than AI takeover-at least the AI would do something! Everyone hates AI takeover (see the RB thread in this forum about their negative reaction and why) so that would be a non-starter. There's a reason MZ didn't list that as an option.

Also I think that a civ being taken-over by an AI or not moving is highly unusual so doing that is a effectively rule-change and requires unanimous vote. However, I think the situation is unclear enough that Caledorn needs to show up and react to Civplayers not moving at all--not just being late. That's the real issue. Civs breaking the rules should cause the mod to show up each time that happens.

EDIT:

If I were Caldorn I would say:

1. This game cannot go on without a sub turn-player (worse than AI takeover=lol). If CivPlayers doesn't find one or the other teams don't freak out and demand a sub (what happened with maya) I'm ending the game in 48 hours.

2. I will forfeit CivPlayers for breaking the rules (remember this is pitboss and the turn is supposed to flip after a set amount of time). If CivPlayers changes their tune and decides they want to play because if this they will forfeit the rest of their turn as punishment for causing drama and to make CivPlayers play their turn on time. If a sub happens they can play the turns and no punishment is needed to encourage CivPlayers to play their turns on time.

3. I've already ruled I cannot forfeit anyone as long as they are in the game and follow the rules. So the standing of this game if it ends now would be:

Survived: HRE, CFC, Apolyton and Maya
Forfeited by mod: CivPlayers
Everyone else: DEAD

[Hercules]

If this games goes on without a sub they are going to get destroyed regardless of the situation on the frontline. Missing turns in modern war is devastating.

I actually agree that CivPlayers should just miss turns but that is not the issue here. What was agreed to was to set a hard-deadline so you have to finish by then. In order for the deadline to be hard you have to make the late civ miss their turn when they miss it. Civplayers ennui is so bad that they basically won't play at all which is a different category entirely. The other civs didn't agree to that. That would be much worse than AI takeover-at least the AI would do something! Everyone hates AI takeover (see the RB thread in this forum about their negative reaction and why) so that would be a non-starter. There's a reason MZ didn't list that as an option.

Also I think that a civ being taken-over by an AI or not moving is highly unusual so doing that is a effectively rule-change and requires unanimous vote. However, I think the situation is unclear enough that Caledorn needs to show up and react to Civplayers not moving at all--not just being late. That's the real issue. Civs breaking the rules should cause the mod to show up each time that happens.

EDIT:

If I were Caldorn I would say:

1. This game cannot go on without a sub turn-player (worse than AI takeover=lol). If CivPlayers doesn't find one or the other teams don't freak out and demand a sub (what happened with maya) I'm ending the game in 48 hours.

2. I will forfeit CivPlayers for breaking the rules (remember this is pitboss and the turn is supposed to flip after a set amount of time). If CivPlayers changes their tune and decides they want to play because if this they will forfeit the rest of their turn as punishment for causing drama and to make CivPlayers play their turn on time. If a sub happens they can play the turns and no punishment is needed to encourage CivPlayers to play their turns on time.

3. I've already ruled I cannot forfeit anyone as long as they are in the game and follow the rules. So the standing of this game if it ends now would be:

Survived: HRE, CFC, Apolyton and Maya
Forfeited by mod: CivPlayers
Everyone else: DEAD

I never suggested an AI take over. If they don't play, so be it. If us and CFC can agree a fair split or destruction of civ so be it. There is no rule change involved. Turn up and play or whatever happens to you civ is out of your control. I am asking Caledorn to enforce his stated position. That is No undue pause except for very, very good reason.

I repeat this is about teams.

[Hercules]

I also looked again at OT4E's comment.

I agree to finish, method is up to others. No problem with any kind of draw or order. Sorry for being unable to continue. Hope everyone's city razing hunger is satisfied now.

He agrees to finish and doesn't care about method or order.

In other words he agrees to leave method to others. ( That is, if pushed, agreeing to any rule change, if one is needed). The method I suggest is in the posts above.

[MJW]

I didn't suggest AI takeover. I said that AI takeover is strongly disliked by pretty much everyone. Not moving at all is much much worse than AI takeover. So none of the other teams would probably agree to your plan. The other teams didn't agree to play on with CivPlayers refusing to move. Rather they agreed to play on with a hard deadline were your turn ends if you don't finish your turn (otherwise it's not a hard deadline).

In real games you get banned or forfeit a deposit so no-one ever quits unless they have a legitimate reason (ie something other than dislike playing out having your civ being burned the ground). This doesn't work here for obvious reasons (being forfeited isn't even a punishment when you are losing anyway) so you ether have to abandon the game, continue with that civ not moving or bring in a sub. My AI take-over tangent is explaining why that option 2 wouldn't work--there's a reason MZ didn't list it...

[mzprox]

Being realistic this game won't change so much that ppl would want to play on, just no one really want to take the responsbility to say it's over. So I wait a a bit to let Caledorn make the ruling, I'm sure no one would really had anything against ending the game as it is quite dead already.. but if nothing happens then soon I will just leave the game as others had apparently lost the interest long time ago anyway. I think I can say that I remained the most active player in the last period. CfC and cp (until Bemep dissappeared) did their turn but sometimes with long and unecessary pauses. Hre andespecially maya just logged in for a few mins/turn. that's not how a competitie gam0e is played.

[MJW]

How do you like my suggestion that if nothing happens by 24th we will consider this game to be over and open our forums? This would make sure that Civplayers cannot restart the game after you left and put us at a huge disadvantage...

Edit: I don't think Caledorn is going to show up. He's active at RB. I can PM him to make him do something if you want.

[mzprox]

I wouldn't expect that form cp, everyone plays fairly in this game. And yes,my idea was to wait till monday, then call the game ended if no conversation happens about how to continue.

[MJW]

Well I gave in and prodded the mod...

I don't think the real CivPlayers would do that. However, CivPlayers is now effectively dead so it would be easy for their team to get hijacked--especially after a week or so of nothing happening in this game.

I've also talked to an RB mod so they will open up their forums and Hercules can watch them suffering if wants that.

[OzzyKP]

Caledorn posted and set out a Monday deadline like you guys were discussing.

[MJW]

I like how the mod agreed with my logic in general...

GG everyone. You should feel free to post your thoughts about this game like I have. I also you suggest you read RBs forum when the open on Monday.

[MJW]

Well I've noticed there is one last thing to do. Caledorn has asked for some things from us. I suggest:

1. MZ decides if we should vote if the game should go on if a sub is found.

2. CivPlayers should lose the game for breaking the rules in a way that caused the game to end. Moving five minutes Maya and HRE style is an option eventhough they would totally get destroyed. The fact that HRE and Maya snuck in a draw because Caledorn said that no-one could lose the game eventhough they cannot win doesn't matter. Two wrongs don't make a right here.

Edit: Well Maya is suddenly okay with not winning the game. Doesn't matter because HRE is still in the way. It might be possible to agree with a 3 (or 4)-way draw with CFC, HRE, us and maybe Aztecs. It's probably not worth the effort though.

Edit 2: RB has opened their forums. I won't read anything their aside from checking if I was in the right forum. I should point out that there's a 90%+ chance of those twitch TV videos not working because twitch TV changed the rules after this game ended. Everything else should be go through because of RB's negative reaction to the Templars forcing their hand.

[Hercules]

The only true last contestants are us Apolyton, and CFC. To have any other site contest that decision is an insult.

I could settle for a joint winner, Apolyton and CFC, nothing less.

[MJW]

MZ has already said that he doesn't like HRE and Maya being among the winners but more polite than you. That's why I didn't talk about it. If HRE doesn't show up and complain Option 1 without CivPlayers will probably win.

I really think you need to react to the mod's post about if CivPlayers should get kicked out of the winner's circle, MZ. My only argument I want to point out is that if they didn't refuse to play they would move 5-minutes Maya-style and they would get destroyed. Not kicking them out is rewarding them for rage-quitting... I don't think a sub is possible so you don't need to comment on anything else.

It doesn't make sense to list CFC or Apolyton ahead because who CivPlayers and Maya actions or lack of would play a greater influence than a small lead. Also its very likely that one of them would be able to get HRE on their side.

I broke down and read the RB forum now, http://realmsbeyond.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=48. If a sub is somehow found I will resign from the team. Read this after the game.

Spoiler:

1. RB didn't like your philosophical-trait. It doesn't scale well on huge maps and doesn't work well with financial (financial works tiles while philosophical works specialists; also financial likes going wide to work as much tiles as possible while philosophical likes going tall). However, you did use it effectively. Spamming Academies allows you to use both traits together. And the science boost from philosophical and running a small empire allowed you to get rifles just a "few" turns earlier. Now in most games that doesn't matter but here it did. Corporations also allow small empires to catch up very quickly after they get land.

2. RB's main turnplayer (sullla) drove off a bunch of players (like what happened with BK here) and then quit after he realized he couldn't win. (I do actually believe that he wasn't enjoying the game for a long time before that point but stuck around because he liked the payoff and process of winning. When that went away he had no reason to suffer through the BS.) This made their play much weaker than it could have been. You might find this interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5aQyUy3NP4 to show how quick and good RB's start was.

3. I think the key moment for this game was Mackoti taking over CFC halfway though the game. I don't think they would have been able to make peace with Civ-france if that happened. So it would have just been us+Civplayers+WPC against RB. I don't think the main turnplayer would quit because he would still have a great chance of winning. I would guess that he would not fall for that CivPlayers cavalry-raid and find a way to turn the situation to his advantage. After that I would think WPC would be too afraid to attack RB. After that it would be CivPlayers+Us and I feel killing off CivPlayers main stack (and the nasty Great-wall Statue of Zeus combo) would be too much to overcome. RB would win in a way very similar to the first game they played this.

They could have reacted to Mackoti showing up at once and went in to meltdown mode. It would have been much more interesting fight than. They could have probably brought WPC on their side by letting them take more cities and spinning BS at the least. It would have been a real battle! I'm pretty sure that Mackoti hid his presence from RB until it was too late though... This is why in real games you must list your all team-members and never change them during the competition. Hiding your players has too much potential to be able to sucker-punch and coast to victory and that's what happened here. To use an RB term I would consider anything after Mackoti took-over CFC to be a "shadow game".


4. RB's main turnplayer complained about being dogpiled. However, that was extremely predictable and with no tech-trading dopilling is even more justified. He criticized that people that played these games like Diplomacy with Civ rather than the other way around. However, this is how it SHOULD be played!!! One Civ cannot take on 2 (let alone 4!) unless everyone else sucks. The city-maintenance system makes things much worse too by slowing down the snowball. If it weren't in the game (like in Civ 2/3) RB being a better team would have given them an extra 20-30 turns of strength. This would have won the game right there by giving them access to rifle-draft spam. Now in normal situations dogpills don't work but this was not normal as seen in my post above. There's one more factor that made it easier: Inca's weak defense (in fact they gave up very quickly and then switched over to attacking WPC and didn't defend themselves at all!) caused RB's strength to serge at ridiculous rate and alarmed everyone. In fact this might have been what allowed CFC to sign peace with CivFr.

People trying to stop the leader is perfect natural. It's even in SP games. I don't want to just waltz on through killing everyone one-by-one like in a bad horror movie. For example in Shogun 2 once you reach a mere 20% or so of the land this happens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15laR51BaQE "It is dangerous to be the tallest tree for that is where the axe strikes first." After 15 turns or so everyone declares war on you and won't sign peace ever. (In Shogun 2 the enemies cannot work that effectively together so 20% is perfectly reasonable under normal conditions.)

Also in Shogun there's only one way to win: Domination. It's the same for these games 95% of the time because everything else takes too long. So other civs/players have the right to be openly hostile to the leading civ when gets a lead like that because you our effectively threating to burn their civ to the ground. The fact that RB will stall and build up for 20-30 turns doesn't matter. RB stabbing Inca like they did didn't help (even though implicit NAP=lol).

5. In a small detail that doesn't matter but still amusing: RB ranked Maya as the biggest threat! However, that was caused by their good players dropping out after the first 30ish turns. As seen in this thread, their main turn-player after turn 30 or so is the one we have now.

[Hercules]

Hulkmusclor's, on behalf of Maya, response is derogatory.

He/She doesn't choose, just posts.