Us-Against-Them Free-for All

[Bloody Monk]

Unless there is some effect from the non-standard map, restarts under deity end at 1500. Here is a thread from last fall that includes some fantastic research by Zenon among others.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=2347561#post2347561

Monk

[-Jrabbit]

Originally posted by Elephant

Romps are no fun, just figuring out how to end it as quickly as possible. We are past 1500; isn't that enough to cut off the restarts, or is is 1750?

Couldn't remember the restart date, but didn't worry about it since 1750 will happen in next turnset.

We are nearly 6 weeks into this Free-For-All; we seem to have dropped the "first poster wins" mentality and gone back to the "I'll take it for this week" mindset...

Not sure what the deal is. This forum has been generally slow for 2-3 weeks now. I disagree with your "mindset" position. I think it's a simple matter of complexity once you get over 40 cities -- things just take longer, which means you need to plan a considerably longer time window to take a turn. "Play and post" is pretty easy when you're doing 20 turns of exploration and growing cities to size 3.

[Elephant]

Hmmm - maybe we need to limit Free-For-Alls to 20 or less cities? or just smaller maps?

[-Jrabbit]

Well, I think gigamaps, while expanding the challenge, do guarantee a need for extended turnsets. It's just damned hard to keep track of all the units, cities, and encounter scenarios.

As a result, ppl tend to take their time. They don't want to be the one to mess up the group's effort (and be pilloried by RCC).

Believe me, I've been there (see O Sole Mio for about 2 pages on how badly I screwed up ).

[Old n Slow]

Well, I think that part of the sloth is that best of excuses, RL. I tend to procrastinate about taxes, (hey this time I finished 10 hours early! ) and the holiday W/E (we were out of town visiting the new grandling) adds to the away time from gaming.

But JR is right -- games well along seem to slow down -- maybe we need a new "early" one in the mix. Hmmm after I finish my obligations (Lazy, Free+) I might see if the market would like a new one?

[Grigor]

I am away from this forum until next Thursday - concert in Salt Lake City on Monday - but I hope to be released from durance vile by then. Perhaps Sparrowhawk?

[Sparrowhawk]

I was checking this game out and reread the thread first (to make sure I knew the rules). It seems someone else doesn't, as our reputation is "despicable" and per SG(1)'s first post of this thread, we need to maintain a "spotless rep". This brings up a question that was asked previously...is Eiffel Tower allowed (and I normally wouldn't want or need it, but if we are to return our rep to spotless, is this allowed as a way to do so?)

[Scouse Gits]

I think we should convene a Judicial Enquiry to determine the person or persons currently unknown responsible for this lamentable fall from grace - and they had best get their toothbrushes packed!

Stu

[Bloody Monk]

Looking back at the previous saves, the rep was spotless at the end of Stu's turns in 1590. Unless I missed something, there was only one subsequent turnset posted, 1690. I will let him speak up, though, anticipating that he will claim confusion with another game that requires a horrid rep.

I know that things have been slow lately, but, this needs to be taken down. Hopefully, the offense against fair play ( ) came late in the set and the first part of the set can be used as a new starting point. The whole point of this turnset was to grow under Democracy and that benifit should not sheild this misstep. If the rep hit came after the switch back to Fundy, it should not be too hard to redo from there.

Monk

[-Jrabbit]

Um, yep, that was me.

This is strange. Looking at my log here, I don't see anything that would puts spots on our reputation. In fact, I see several notes indicating I played by the rules -- declining all offers of CF/peace, but abiding by Senate dictums during the Democracy years. If I read the logs correctly, the only time any possible stain to reputation could have occured would be after the return to Fundy (1680 iirc). I could swear all my attacks were upon civs we were already at war with...

I will check the saves tonight (should have one for every turn) and report back around this time tomorrow.

I was actually being pretty careful to play by the rules, so this accusation (which, sadly, I have no reason to doubt) seems quite bizarre...

[Sparrowhawk]

Accusation is such a strong word....I prefer "error".

I was quite certain that this was an honest mistake, and it seems that is the case. SG(1) convened a grand jury (of 1 person....Bloody Monk), Bloody Monk investigated, and determined the cause of the problem. But no accusations, just an error that you can correct.

All is good No real harm done

(and in truth I hadn't considered the option of replaying the turns, I assumed that the Eiffel Tower was our best and only option, replaying did not occur to me.

/me

[-Jrabbit]

Not to worry, SH. I'm not upset, just mystified.

"Accusation" seems accurate enough...

[Old n Slow]

Yeah, I opened up the game this morning (to have something to think about during the slow process from sleep to functionality) and noticed a less than sterling rep -- as well as war with everyone.

It might be that the action occured during the Fundy years -- thus the lack of warning (do you really want to do this?) that definately occurs with Democracy.

If the game starter desires, I'll (a) wait; (b) build a Tower ASAP (c) go to Democracy & "allow" the ai to "undo" the war mongering (d) something else.

I'm almost caught up with my other obligations (logs to write), so am thinking about moving along with this one tonight.

[-Jrabbit]

OnS -- Let me check out what happened when I get home tonight. With any luck, we can just back it up a turn or 2 and let you work from a spotless save...

[Old n Slow]

OK -- otherwise I was just going to use some of those leftover camels (now trucks) to make a tall wondrous spire...