Announcement

**War4ever** · February 16, 2004, 23:42

all i have to say is this, if player A starts kicking @ss and taking the lead, we can't bow down to this sort of tyranny. There must be an agreeable way to try and carve up his empire.

same holds true if after the demise of A....that C becomes too powerfull, otherwise, with all the rules we have, the power will have shifted too far in one direction to change the outcome of the game.

i want diplomacy without ruining the game and turning it into a caravan sleeze

**Deity Dude** · February 17, 2004, 00:54

2)Interaction between players

a) no cooperation between players - need to define
b) no use of diplomacy screen everything else OK - eliminates all trading and gifting and ceding but allows players to make unenforcible agreements
c) no diplomacy screen and no foriegn caravans (this stops the game from turning into multiple trade alliances)
d) everything goes
e) RAH's Rules
f) something else (please explain)

War:

Is that a vote for C?

**Cyber-Spyder** · February 17, 2004, 01:09

should the vote for interaction result be C, are we allowed to TRY to land caravans in foreign cities? A reward for the risk we take? Or does it mean we can't even attempt it?

And after consultation with DD I am going to have a game started and waiting. If you have a specific civ you would like then post here, otherwise you get to choose from the random selections I make. First in first served with reserving civs in case of any clashes. I take white.

**Deity Dude** · February 17, 2004, 01:12

thats a good idea

that way we can have a no tech start waiting and not have to have multiple restarts

**Cyber-Spyder** · February 17, 2004, 03:50

It has just been brought to my attention that certain players about to play this game have recently been accused of unfair {or at least unsporting} play. The problem seems to be more related to people having differing ideas of the rules.

Please everyone READ the rah rules thread to get clear on what the rules are. Anything not specifically mentioned here will default to Rah rules. If there are any questions ASK them now, so there is no ambiguity. If anyone has a problem with any rule POST it, we can vote and move on.

The recent issue largely seems to be concerned with diplo guiding. Rah rules do allow it, but it is true that it can be abused.

So lets add that to the rules vote...

3. Diplo Guiding
a) - Allowed
b) - Not Allowed
c) - Allowed, but only one guided unit per guiding unit per turn.

I vote for C.

I don't mean to get too pedantic about all this, but I'm sick of playing with kids and the last thing I want is for a good game to fall to **** because of a misunderstanding or an exploitation.

**deity** · February 17, 2004, 07:56

[SIZE=1] Originally posted by Deity Dude
Undecided Items: (please vote by gmt 05:00 thurs)

1)Wonders

a) all wonders are OK
b) all wonders but GL and GW
c) 1 wonder per person
d) no wonders
e) something else (please explain)

2)Interaction between players

a) no cooperation between players - need to define
b) no use of diplomacy screen everything else OK - eliminates all trading and gifting and ceding but allows players to make unenforcible agreements
c) no diplomacy screen and no foriegn caravans (this stops the game from turning into multiple trade alliances)
d) everything goes
e) RAH's Rules
f) something else (please explain)

1) c
I love One Wonder games. Extremely interesting to see what each player picks!

2) c
I guess to speed things up.

**Deity Dude** · February 17, 2004, 11:19

I vote:

1 wonder (c)

(I am assuming that anyone can build apollo and/or manhatten in addition to the 1 wonder they select)

No Diplomacy Screen no Foriegn Caravans (c)

(I am assuming this means that players can cooperate in any way they want other then thru these 2 methods. i.e. Players can agree to attack others, let diplos thru for tech stealing etc at thier own risk)

Allow Diplo Guiding (a)

If we are choosing colors ahead of time I will take the American (Light Blue)

Sounds like we have 3 confirmed, now we need to get markus, war and whoever else in here to confirm.

**War4ever** · February 17, 2004, 15:31

ik i am not voting i am voicing....so put me underwhatever category u want...

If you can land caravans, then i agree it should be ok, but its the other players JOB to make sure you dont just walk them up. He must make an atttempt to prevent you.

wonders, really dont' care, 1 , 2 10, what difference does it make, i can predict the top 5 wonders for a civ game anyways.

diploguiding....again, if the person wants to use the resources and your defences suck, odds are he doens't need the diplo

**Deity Dude** · February 17, 2004, 15:38

Originally posted by War4ever
ik i am not voting i am voicing

The real question is - are you playing?

**warlon** · February 17, 2004, 15:51

I would like it to be on emperor lvl to reduce the factor of happy wonders.

I am for all wonders.

I am for anything goes on diplomacy

Count me in as a player.

I pick Vikings as tribe. My tribe is going to be named:

Orcs
Orcish

Leader: Garthank Hellblade
Warchief --- Despot
Warlord ---- King
Utog ---- Comrade
High Shaman --- High Priest
Elder ---- Consul
Savgrat ---- President

**warlon** · February 17, 2004, 21:32

I am for guiding with paratroopers, 1 unit per paratrooper.

I am for guiding with partisans, 1 unit per partisan.

I am for not bribing partisans that arrive out of a conquered city.

I am not for using diplomats to guide units through.

I am for that bombers, fighters can guide 1 unit each.

I am against City bribing.

I am for Unit bribing in general (see note above concerning partisans)

**War4ever** · February 18, 2004, 00:34

Originally posted by warlon
I am for guiding with paratroopers, 1 unit per paratrooper.

I am for guiding with partisans, 1 unit per partisan.

I am for not bribing partisans that arrive out of a conquered city.

I am not for using diplomats to guide units through.

I am for that bombers, fighters can guide 1 unit each.

I am against City bribing.

I am for Unit bribing in general (see note above concerning partisans)

no taking multiple cities, no trading within your own empire, not allowed to build troops...etc..

sigh, lets not restrict the whole game? otherwise lets play a diplo

**Cyber-Spyder** · February 18, 2004, 02:23

Unit bribing okay, city bribing not is standard as per rah rules.

Your guiding opinion obviously most closely matches C {in voting terms}

I think you'll just have to live without exceptions for diplos and partisans, once we start down that road any number of possible alternatives for other rules will have legitimacy to crop up, and we'll still be sorting them out three weeks from now.

**Deity Dude** · February 18, 2004, 13:26

Well seeing as the game is tomorrow we need to finalize settings today. After reading everyone's comments/votes I think the following represents a consensus. If I am wrong please post ASAP.

RAH's Rules except

1x1x deity
60x80 map small archs wet cool 3 bil
1 wonder (plus apollo and manhatten)
no diplo screen or foriegn trade
no hut finder

Consistant with RAH's rules:
diploguiding is ok
oracle extended to industrialization
unit bribe ok - no city bribe (except barb cities that were yours)

Other issues:
Post what civ you want to be or u will be forced to take what is available

Game Time 0100 GMT Friday

Cyber-Spyder to host and have a tech-free start waiting at that time

Try and be on ICQ 10 mins early

Confirmed players:
Cyber-Spyder - Romans
Warlon - Viking
Deity - no civ selected yet
War4ever - no civ selected yet
Deity Dude - Americans

Possible Player:
Markus (posted but has not confirmed)

**War4ever** · February 18, 2004, 13:58

The Villian wears Purple of course....a purple dress!

i think any barb cities should be open to bribery from anyone?

Announcement

weekday games

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment