HOTW4 Out of Character Thread

[Rasputin]

such a fine line, it would have made no differnece to the attack as it was.. so we proceed

[Ljube]

Originally posted by deity


I didn't expect you to post this sort of stuff. I was playing the 'role' of Lizard in that game and not as 'deity'. I developed a storyline that was true for the Azande leader, delusional or otherwise is beside the point

I posted "deity" cause this is not role playing thread.
The delusions of Lizard and her family are going to be discussed in another thread

And you must admit your "response" or should I call it "pre-emptive action" was way out of proportion. I mean, it can't be compared to what Frank did to atawa cause Frank took only one city which he immediately returned.
Your attack, on the other hand is a pure genocide!

I mean, don't expect me to applaud.

[Ljube]

I sure hope Frank is not out after this.

As promised, the save of last session. Session 16.

[Ljube]

Deity, this is my most recent save, but some of your moves appear to be missing (L'hasa is still chinese). Can you check with your own save?

Please post it so we can compare and start next week with the right save.

[Frank Johnson]

Any comparison of this action to my play in Classic Euro Dip is insane. One ammounted to temporary advantage of the 7th ranked player against the 1st ranked player, across a viable path of sea.

This ammounted to a howitzer rush by the 1st ranked player, using explorer guiding in areas of Egypt, which allowed deity to use more engineers for the building of railways in central asia. Even if city cedeing could be used, I've mentioned serveral times now the destruction caused to cities by city cedeing.

Also, this was as you mentioned pre-emptive action, involving complicity of a 3rd party to attack a nation with which you shared not land border. My assault was a head on attack against, what could only be assumed to be Rome's primary potental enemy at the time.

Given the degree of azande demands, their method of attack, their willingness to use other nations to achieve their purpose in launching sneak attacks, the extent of the destruction, and the questionable tactics involving diploguiding, I can only come to the conclusion that the attack was designed for no other purpose to eliminate me from the game, using whatever methods required to do so in a single turn, for no reason other than rumors of an attack (unless that is, you've been save peaking as well deity.)

The same fate may have come to me in 2 or 3 turns, but diety would have won an honorable victory, and I would have had a chance to offer a fair defense, also other parties would have had a chance to intervene and dilute Azande aggression.

In the current situation, I must admit that if the other players are willing to continue the game in this format, I was the one with the misunderstanding of what type of a game this is. I misunderstood the game rules, and as a result, my empire was unable to fullfill its role within the game, and now has no remaining role which can be set against the wasted months of effort and percieved deception and overhanded use of raw game manipulation. Under such circumstances, I cannot be presuaded to hit the enter key 6 hours a night once a week for this effort I misunderstood.

[warlon]

I can take in for the Chinese...

[deity]

Quite simply I used a strategy within the context of a diplo game that was within the agreed rules. No question.

All other players acknowledge this and are continuing the game. Any argument is really about the in-game storyline and role playing and that's where it should stay.

After I took just one city off the Chinese I posted Lizard's demands and even offerred a quicker way out by saying that if all Chinese howies and Armour were disbanded I'd not take any more cities. When to be bold and when to fold? Ljube saved his civ by understanding this, as I have in the past. Frank needs to learn this, especially in a diplo game. But as a leader he remained on the warpath and would not compromise, other than to offer to disband howies only. This was not acceptable. So he got destroyed. I had no intention of doing this and thought he would have done the deal.

I've played Frank for 5 years or so and he's been great to have in games. An excellent maturing player, especially in diplos. This is the first time that I've ever attacked him from memory but he's attacked me several times. I sufferred session after session where he attacked me from the West and Markus from the East in a no alliance game! I was damn annoyed about that but you have to play out these situations. Frank and I have been great allies too and in one MEMORABLE game he, me and Berz dfeated Nappy, Makeo and Hydey in a brilliant team effort.

I believe my turn was entirely legitimate and I've not broken any rules or used any kind of cheats. I tested everones patience with a long turn but I was prepared to curtail the turn several times but Ljube, Berzerker and Raz to some extrent insisted I play out my turn as it was the end game and we all knew that takes time. With or without spy/explorer/partisan guiding I would have achieved the same result.

But I really want to keep you involved Frank, so I'm prepared to wipe my turn and pick up from start of session but others may object - not sure...

[Frank Johnson]

To my understanding, the attack was not legitimate.

You can have all the other players come up and say its the opposite if you'd like. But to MY understanding of the rules, the assault you carried out was illegal and impossible.

I've suffered assaults like this before, in fact in exactly the same manner, just on a smaller scale. Was the type of resistance you faced that of a determined attacker? Or even a wary defender? Granted, if you can get everyone to come out here and say, "Frank, you just got owned." I'll just take it at that and leave. But as you say, I'm not exactly that stupid.


Maybe I was just limiting myself too much. Maybe if I took the direct path, asking for an easy cede, and using explorers, spies, and diplos to dodge anything lmiting my movment, I could have wreeked havoc on your empire. What you say the rules were after the fact doesn't change what my understanding of them was the entire game, played out thus far, it cannot be made up with any single comment.

[Rasputin]

only one other city would needed to have been ceded to allow the same attack to occur. I would quite willingly do that too to achive the same outcome. check the map guys, azande have their owbn railway from their territory thrut to suez, only city in way is oasis, from there through to china their is nothing stoping movment, onc ein china, deity is quite free to bribe the partisans and so no rules broken there.

frank assumed he was safe due to my self being in his way. Wha the failed to realise was that once my citys were in deitys hand frank was terribly exposed.

the whole thing with civ 2 is , as shown by deity and india, he who attacks first with howies will win big time, only limited by the number ofhowies.

no one complained when india rolled through my well defended citys off asia, yes 2 veteran infantry or stormtroopers in all, no stopping howies. so for china to rant about possibly attacking azande territroy in the pacific, which he did often in king chat and in the threads here, surely left deity with no other chooce but to attack first. again knowing what howies can do when used first.

deity waited after taking the first city for franks agreement to detroy all offencive units in china. He failed to agree so deity took more citys, not once did frank call for lenience or peace, he just kept claiming it was unfair and that deity was cheating.

as deity said, ljube faced same situation and chose the honourable option of surrneder and loss of two citys. agai nserbia was attacked in same manner as china, city ceding was used again.

now ljube is still in game and is an end time power. still ahead of egypt !

Frank can be same, he will have all his citys returned and he still has his american ones fully un hamred.

My prefered option is for frank to return.

however we already have one volunteer to join in if frank doesnt return.

[Rasputin]

double post

[Rasputin]

ooops .... forums playing up .. overposted same thing

[Frank Johnson]

Your opinion is corrupted due to your game position Raz.

Plus, why should I have to make a choice between upholding the understood rules of the game by even you now, and disbanding my entire attack force? That's leverage he got by using outside forces.....

The thing that is bothering me most is players are admitting, that while deity's attack was techincally an exploit, they prefer the countcome due to deity's accidental revolt and full comiitance of his howitzers in my distant territory, they have full range to counter attack. So if you are going to base your opinion on how much you like it for you civ, maybe you should remember that fact that they'll go through you.

I might play for the amusement of my allies if they want to run away from principals. But of course, it'll be a genocide game, and I won't have any the story thread.

[Ljube]

Originally posted by Frank Johnson
To my understanding, the attack was not legitimate.

You can have all the other players come up and say its the opposite if you'd like. But to MY understanding of the rules, the assault you carried out was illegal and impossible.

I've suffered assaults like this before, in fact in exactly the same manner, just on a smaller scale. Was the type of resistance you faced that of a determined attacker? Or even a wary defender? Granted, if you can get everyone to come out here and say, "Frank, you just got owned." I'll just take it at that and leave. But as you say, I'm not exactly that stupid.


Maybe I was just limiting myself too much. Maybe if I took the direct path, asking for an easy cede, and using explorers, spies, and diplos to dodge anything lmiting my movment, I could have wreeked havoc on your empire. What you say the rules were after the fact doesn't change what my understanding of them was the entire game, played out thus far, it cannot be made up with any single comment.

I agree with everything you said Frank. Although the attack was possible according to civ 2 mp gold rules, this fact doesn't make it realistic. The attack was a clear exploit of the game mechanics.

I was under the impression that diploguiding was not allowed in this game. Deity was not. It is true diploguiding was discussed and Frank, Berzerker, Ozzy and I agreed to ban it. Raz even went one step further proposing to ban all guiding. Deity was undecided on this.

These are the facts, so you can decide if diploguiding was allowed or not. I think not. Deity thinks it was not agreed upon. Since he is claiming diploguiding was not prohibited, I can only interpret his move as unintentional breach of the rules, so he is not to be penalised for that in any way.

[OzzyKP]

At game start I was under the impression that guiding was alright when done with paratroopers, or possibly partisans (maybe). However as there were many rules we discussed at the beginning of the game I entirely forgot about it until reading through these forums again.

[Ljube]

Below is the discussion from the thread "Eager to return"

Originally posted by Berzerker
I can play Saturdays, but I have a suggestion - NO DIP GUIDING! That has to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen, several dips allowing a massive army to slip thru zoc. Ugh

Originally posted by ljcvetko
They are using the wonder called diplomatic immunity.

If it's no to diplo guiding, should it also be no to caravan guiding?

...

I suggested diplo cost be increased significantly (as well as spy cost). That should alleviate the diplo guiding capability without banning it.

Originally posted by Rasputin
geez you guys use too many exploits !!! i just play for the fun.

I agree no guiding should be allowed at all.

prior to paly commencing can we get a co0mplete list of what we are banning here..

any player found using banned stuff will not be invited back for anoher session

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I'm ok with banning diploguiding. But we've got so many damn rules in this game... gonna be hard to keep track of everything.

Originally posted by Frank Johnson
Well if we can't diplo guide....what about whatever units have no ZOC, like partisans?

What if I PARADROP paratroopers on a square to control it so I can pass ZOC? Etc etc? Let's not get too picky now folks. I'm all for no diplo / caravan guiding, but there will need to be openess for interpetation later, not, "If you break a rule, you're gone!".

Originally posted by Rasputin
whatever!!

Originally posted by Berzerker
I don't care much for banning diplo guiding I guess, it just makes it a priority for defenders to secure roads so they can't be used to guide armies thru zoc. If we vote on it, I'd vote against any kind of guiding. However, the game was designed to allow units to move onto squares occupied by friendly units, and that is pretty much what guiding involves if you have a string of units. Ugh, okay, guiding is okay by me...

Originally posted by Rasputin
there is adiffernece in moving a unit onto another friendly unit and moving a unit via a chain and guiding it past the enemy.

Diplos were designed to sneak past enemy units using there stealth techniques. thereby bypassing enemy ZOC, but moving a complete army past without being stoped by enemy ZOC is not IMHO what the designers intended , i beleive they just overlooked the usag epeople would put this too. ZOC were implemented IMHO to make you have to fight the defenders as you passed them rather than bypassing them and destroying their home citys thereby destroying them anyway...

I can see people will be taking this pretty seriously so i hope this doesnt interfer with my fun......

Originally posted by deity
Diplo-guiding I use a lot but I think it sucks

This is provided for fairness and openness.