New "Ancient Empires" PBEM created

[germanos]

Originally posted by Straybow
7

[Straybow]

/me wakes up, wipes drool from kbd…

My faithful ally doesn't seem to have great confidence in non native speakers

Anything above the "Ugh, me Tarzan" level of communication works fine by me.

I had to handle a Civ2Dip transaction for La Fayette since he doesn't have it reinstalled on his comp. I figured it was OK, as our civs are allied and he is sending me a map anyway. I didn't do anything or look around, just re-saved and sent it to LF.

However, I can't recall if there is an explicit rule about how and when we can give permission to other players to open our civs' saves.

Secondly, the 2940 turn screw-up shield restoration thingy. Any final objections? Kull? Stefan?

[germanos]

Originally posted by Straybow
* Straybow wakes up, wipes drool from kbd…

My faithful ally doesn't seem to have great confidence in non native speakers

Anything above the "Ugh, me Tarzan" level of communication works fine by me.

I had to handle a Civ2Dip transaction for La Fayette since he doesn't have it reinstalled on his comp. I figured it was OK, as our civs are allied and he is sending me a map anyway. I didn't do anything or look around, just re-saved and sent it to LF.

However, I can't recall if there is an explicit rule about how and when we can give permission to other players to open our civs' saves.

Emergency breaks rules, as the saying goes (here )
I would say that no matter how closely allied you are, it is obviously not allowed to open another civ's save .
Doing so would effectively merge the civ's.
If you can show me any example in history where allies agreed to replace all heads of Departments with nationals of their ally, I might change my position.

Although it may be bothersome if you're close allies, all information must be shared via other means than opening the save.

Secondly, the 2940 turn screw-up shield restoration thingy. Any final objections? Kull? Stefan?

I want to add your so-called allies as well. I haven't heard a single sillable on this issue from LaFayette or Kengel.
While I certainly trust you Straybow, as a matter of principle I do not accept just your word on the intentions of both these fella's

On a related issue: what is the unit doing now? (that was build instead of the HG) Needless to say this has to be disbanded in either Iconion, or drown in the Med or something.

Good luck with the effort.

Ugh.

[germanos]

Oh, I want to add that before the advent of CivDip, people would work around the AI diplomacy via online (MP) sessions. Maybe that would have worked as well

[Straybow]

Hehe, the last time we tried to arrange an MP session to facilitate trade took days to iron out the kinks.

The unit the AI genious created is wandering slowly towards the periphery of Hatta lands. Any correction shall include the removal of said unit before it bumps into any other unit, which would cause a rift in the time-space continuum.

I want to add your so-called allies as well. I haven't heard a single sillable on this issue from LaFayette or Kengel.

I'll nudge La Fayette. I actually don't hear much from kengel, but I'll send him a nudge as well. Is a "sillable" the equivalent of a "silly word?"

While I certainly trust you Straybow, as a matter of principle I do not accept just your word on the intentions of both these fella's

/me thinks: Muahahahaha, now that I have him fooled I've got it made.

Oops, did I say that out loud?

[La Fayette]

There is an Assyrian skirmisher very close to the proud Minoan city of Psychro: "if you don't leave the vicinity..."
BTW a Minoan skirmisher met an Assyrian caravan west of the proud Assyrian city of Ish-Mandarun. The Assyrian caravan was willing to have war. Could someone please remind me what is to be done in such a case (keeping in mind that Minos doesn't wish to be at war with Assyria).

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by germanos

I want to add your so-called allies as well. I haven't heard a single sillable on this issue from LaFayette or Kengel.

Which issue?
I'm not sure I have clearly understood.
Anyway if it is about the problem of shields lost by the Hittite leader, this is a technical problem that I'll let the specialists solve. I have no idea what the best solution would be and I am confident that you will find a satisfactory answer.

(BTW what is a so-called ally?)

[SlowThinker]

I must disagree with germanos a little (only because my relationship with Assyria is worsened )

Originally posted by germanos
I would say that no matter how closely allied you are, it is obviously not allowed to open another civ's save.
...
If you can show me any example in history where allies agreed to replace all heads of Departments with nationals of their ally, I might change my position.

Straybow, did you ask about opening a save to obtain an information or to let your civ to be ruled by your ally?
I will comment both:

Letting people to look at my save:
I don't think there is a difference between
1. allowing it
and
2. sending map screenshot and screenshots of all my cities or describing everything by words.
2nd way is only more laborious. I think it can be allowed.

Letting another person to rule my civ:
Let us suppose La Fayette is better in caravan management and Straybow in managing a war. So LF will play both civs under peace and Straybow under war. Or they will proceed turns collectively. I am strongly against this. This way this game could finish that only two players are playing all civs

But...
I am not 100% sure if it was in this thread where I noticed a debate like it is normal to let an ally rule his civ if a player is absent.
Also I remember I was asked to rule Minos before LF came: I didn't want to do it, because I was not allied nor I had any info about Minos and it's surroundings (I had black map there) and I would get an advantage.
But this is another case: The temporary leader can obtain no additional info (and so no advantage).
We had several Ctrl-N on both Hittites and Minoans and I think this this could be avoided if they replaced one another.
In other words I prefer replacements in case of absence over those Ctrl-N.

Another point - also Persia got many Ctrl-N hits past turns . Maybe Sparrowhawk (or Zedd again?) could manage Persia temporarily ? (and in a neutral diplomatic fashion)
BTW I added an announcement also to CDGroups.

Concerning the CivDip file applied by Straybow: I do not consider it as breaking rules in emergency. It is a technical issue only. I think LF can let the CivDip file to be applied by his daughter or Straybow or anybody else - I see no problem.

Edited: typos

[germanos]

Originally posted by La Fayette
There is an Assyrian skirmisher very close to the proud Minoan city of Psychro: "if you don't leave the vicinity..."
BTW a Minoan skirmisher met an Assyrian caravan west of the proud Assyrian city of Ish-Mandarun. The Assyrian caravan was willing to have war. Could someone please remind me what is to be done in such a case (keeping in mind that Minos doesn't wish to be at war with Assyria).

Just ignore the AI. If the AI actually declares war, ignore it as well. Peace can be restored via CivDip or other means. If all that fails, the in-game status of war can simply be ignored as a last resort.

[germanos]

Originally posted by SlowThinker

Letting people to look at my save:
I don't think there is a difference between
1. allowing it
and
2. sending map screenshot and screenshots of all my cities or describing everything by words.
2nd way is only more laborious. I think it can be allowed.

I completely disagree
Unless we have a faliure to communicate, as is often the case, and you actually say that the more laburous way can be allowed. In that case I fully agree. Make your screenshots and write your texts or talk on the phone, whatever: ANYTHING but allowing somebody else into your seat.

But...
I am not 100% sure if it was in this thread where I noticed a debate like it is normal to let an ally rule his civ if a player is absent.

I usually object to that as well, and have done so in other games.

[germanos]

Originally posted by La Fayette
BTW a Minoan skirmisher met an Assyrian caravan west of the proud Assyrian city of Ish-Mandarun. The Assyrian caravan was willing to have war.

I think they should be send to trade with Babylon. They can join the fighting once they dropped their cargo's

[SlowThinker]

Concerning the reconstruction of Straybow's shields: you should remember it sooner, you have to wait until next turn because I have no free time now.
What I have to do: I have a source of the Civ2Admin program, I will use it and rewrite it so that it finds your city in the .sav file and changes the amount of shields (maybe gold too? didn't you tell unit was rushbought?)

[SlowThinker]

When I was announcing at CDG I noticed a poll "Should reloading be allowed". Only 14% answered "Yes, it should be banned in any situation" !! There were answers like "I simply don't care" etc. It is terrible.
I must appreciate a discipline we have here. Straybow doubts and asks immediately.
I cannot imagine how are other PBEMs? Do players anything that they want? Germanos? La Fayette? (so far this is my only PBEM)

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by germanos
you actually say that the more laburous way can be allowed.

Do you mean I din't want to let you scout my cities and prefered to write demand manually? But there is a difference between these two ways. With the second way you know position of a city only after a caravan goes there (or goes around).
Conversely I see no difference between opening a save and posting many of images and text.

ANYTHING but allowing somebody else into your seat.

But why? There is probably some intuitive reason, so explain it pls.

BTW...

I usually object to that as well, and have done so in other games.

You agreed more than me when I should manage Minoans in the past

Edited: added a sentence

[SlowThinker]

So far we have no clear system how to solve situations where different opinions exist. (My recent proposition was drowned out . But it still didn't contain instructions how to move in the current question.)
(BTW usually germanos, me and sometimes Kull talk about problems of rules. Others have no own opinions?)

In the begining of this game there was a very simple idea you can do anything that is possible also in SP or MP, except reloading and a diplomacy before a contact.
When new rules were accepted Kull brought in a good principle that all players must agree with a new rule.
I think that everybody agrees up to this point.

Let us take a question if Straybow may work with CivDip in place of La Fayette for example.
There are two main possibilities:
(1) It is allowed until all players say they disagree
(2) It is disallowed until all players say they agree
(Now I won't deal with a question if all players must explicitly say YES or no player must say NO)
I don't have a clear stand to this question...

Otherwise the question with opening saves of other players looks clearer for me: I think it should be disallowed until all players say they agree. Simply because you don't do it in MP or SP.

Similarly with sending screenshots. Such a rule should be disallowed until all players say they agree. It doesn't belong to a normal MP or SP.
BTW ... not all players (if any) said they agree with current rules.

Edited: polished a little