An important battle. Civplayers are appraising the situation but just a few hours left.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Lizzy's rise to greatness
Collapse
X
-
Well they haven't finished but they raised a cfc city. This could be really good for us. They might want us to win over CFC and attacking CFC is the fastest way to do it.“...This means GCA won 7 battles against our units, had Horsemen retreat from 2 battles against NMs, and lost 0 battles.” --Jon Shafer 1st ISDG
Comment
-
It has to be CFC because Caledorn would have posted something. Also the uploader was not disconnected so CFC could have finished.
It's too harsh to make CFC not move without warning (if I'm right CivPlayers launched an all-out assault and this turn would take forever to play) but we can prod them.“...This means GCA won 7 battles against our units, had Horsemen retreat from 2 battles against NMs, and lost 0 battles.” --Jon Shafer 1st ISDG
Comment
-
I am sure you all know already. Caledorn changed servers. This was posted in the main 'server, changes, updates' thread at CFC Civ 4 ISDG.
The game server has changed entirely, as I have moved the games into a VPS which is hosted at a location with UPS and surge protection.
The new game address is pitboss.watto.no
For now, it's a temporary arrangement, as I need to test that it actually works - so I have everything stored locally still until we know things work 100%.
Enjoy!On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZation
Comment
-
Well I read this thread and come up with a few thoughts and reactions:
1. Inca sucked for not seeing the RB attack coming. RB would have been strong enough eventually to force a dogpile but it would have been less ridiculous. For the record if you are friendly and helping someone in the game you have an implicit NAP but that doesn't cut it and Inca paid the price.
2. We were short of workers at some point. Why? I've read a bunch of PBEM's and PitBosses and never seen anyone short of workers unless they were bad. I'm not saying your did anything wrong MZ just wondering what happened.
3. That Missionary-Spy trick was uber-cool. Great job!
4. We got the freaking Kremlin on a coin-flip. Do you think Maya vassaled to Aztecs when they were trying for the Kremlin? And would you be okay with that? I think Maya becoming a vassal is okay as they were not going to win the game at that point. So all the useful things they can do is to screw-over CFC. And the best way to do that is to vassal. We and Uciv would not be logic choices so that leaves Aztecs.
5. WPC committing suicide by giving trying to give away their cities. If I were them I would only defend against the team I didn't like (Maya) and allow other players to just walk in. I would explain that territory is already effectively Maya so it's not an act of aggression. I would request Gold payments if the army is in danger of going on strike. If you don't want teams acting out when they have no chance of winning you must allow tech-trading or disable diplomacy. It makes logical sense to act out and be a folding douchebag if your Civ is burning to the ground!
6. Maya, for quite sometime, before this war was a vassal to Aztecs. The Aztecs didn't have to allow it. They could have attacked Maya with CFC. After that Aztec+Maya were on the same team. This would cause (with HRE being neutral) an Apolyton+CFC team to form. Otherwise Aztec would cruise to a cakewalk domination victory being killing off the other civs one-by-one. Aztec's are responsible for the Apolyton+CFC team and must deal with the consequences .
7. CFC+'poly vs CivPlayers+Maya . CFC+'poly was losing. But now we are winning to such an extent that CivPlayers was willing to resign earlier. That doesn’t make sense after losing Aurora. What happened?
8. If we lose this war Aztec's win the game. If we win we still have to deal with CFC (and maybe HRE because they are closer to CFC than us) but we have to focus on winning first. And what happened to the 25 turn option??? Remember all five teams agreed to it so it's technically on.“...This means GCA won 7 battles against our units, had Horsemen retreat from 2 battles against NMs, and lost 0 battles.” --Jon Shafer 1st ISDG
Comment
-
Events of the current turn:
Aztec has moved about 160 units into moneyman city, including 110 tanks. They even emptied two coastal cities which we had destroyed. after that i disbanded our units so they can't kill them for xp. After 3 of their northern coastal cities are destroyed we are quite safe from the inner sea.
Aztec has pumped a huge amount of culture recently and we even lost a tile next to one of our cities in the east.
Now I faced a difficult decision, mainly what to do with my main army. Options: retreat, stay, attack.
i ruled out attacking quite fast. we don't want a massacre even if we would win. (but probably we wouldn't had)
If we stayed We would had needed to increase our strength by moving in even more units, but then we would be weakened at other parts too much. The benefit would had been however that if we occupied aztec's forces in the west then cfc could had destroyed them on the east.
So I moved our units back, trying to defend our cities asmuch as I can. I even emptied the rest of our transports, we don't need to attack from sea now. They can still attack our cities with 120 tanks, but at least we could hit them back if they do.
In the meanwhile I try to slow down with military production and focus on recovery a bit.
Comment
-
Here is a screenshot fromthebeginning of the turn. Red arrows show where azteccan hit us. green circles where our army stands. Most of the units are north of moneyman city. There I have destroyed the road on the hill, so maybe they can't hit us with everything if they wanted at all. Our defense is the ability to strike back with great force anywhere.. or almost.. In the southern cities I'm pumping culture to fight with aztec's. I have sent spies to destroy the road on the hill SE of our eastern city so they can't directly attack us with one-movers.
Comment
Comment