New "Ancient Empires" PBEM created

[SlowThinker]

Persian stack in radius of Zariqum

Do you remember a reaction of anti-paranoid Persians after a single Babylonian Early Chariot appeared 3 and more days of travel away from Persian cities Kyrousata and Tushpa in 2550? 'Persians in the upper Al Kabir valley are boarding up the windows in preparation for a Babylonian invasion.' ... 'We expect that war looms ahead.' etc.
Now there is a Persian stack (with a Military Engineer) in a radius of Babylonian city of Zariqum. In the stack there may be an unknown number of C4s. Try to imagine what the paranoid Babylonian citizens of Zariqum do now!

Originally posted by Sinbad now
Our generals are concerned about ... border encroachments, such as the skirmisher fortified ... clearly past the Tushpa line.

Babylon built Zariqum in a moment when only the red point was disputed and both sides agreed the white points should be neutral (see a picture). Only afterwards Persia came with her 'Tushpa-Arraphka line'.

In short:
Persia is violating the radius of Babylonian city Zariqum.
If Persia builds a road or a fort in the radius of the city or keeps a stack there then she can count with consequences.

Legend: The picture shows a map after The Great War but present placement of units.

[kengel]

[SlowThinker]

rules corner

We read only negative postures to the stack size trick, so we have a new rule (unless somebody vetoes it):
The stack size trick (it is possible to see a size of foreign stack by diminishing the status window) is forbiden.

[Kull]

Re: Egyptian skirmisher at Agade

As expected, the King of lies and deceit has wallowed in his paranoia for so long that he now believes only his own falsehoods. Be that as it may, Agade will reveal her secrets in due time.

Pharoah is nothing if not patient.

R2

[SlowThinker]

Re: Re: Egyptian skirmisher at Agade

As expected, the King of lies and deceit...

All Babylon admires R2's unflagging effort to convince at least one soul. What about one little concrete example of a lie/deceit launched by The Immortal?

[SlowThinker]

rules corner

We have a lot of new rules that are scattered in the thread, so I am trying to collect them. During the work I noticed one thing that may be confusing:

Originally posted by Rules version 3
Barters cannot be broken or crooked (unlike arrangements). For example if you agree on exchanging map screenshots then you cannot refuse to send your map after you get the opponent's one. Also the screenshot must be true (but you can blacken some areas - if you announce it).

Originally posted by germanos on 20-03-2004 09:20
I don't see why map-exchanging (in the form of screen-shots) is exempt from manipulation, while I can lie, misinform or manipulate my opponents in many other ways.
I would argue that only deals (barters) made and resolved via CivDip will get you exactly what is negotiated, as neither the game nor the tool does allow for any manipulation. What the barter-file says it gives (and/or demands) is what you get.
....

Originally posted by SlowThinker on 20-03-2004 23:51
... I can agree with any solution here.

From this point (or from some point further, but I wasn't able to find a continuation of this issue) I supposed it was allowed to change/falsify any screenshot.

I am not sure if this didn't cause any confusion when Sinbad offered to send screenshots from Al Kabir and The Immo rejected this possibility?


Edit: A bit of elucidation:
My original idea was we could name any deal as 'a barter', not only a CivDip barter, MP deal and a F3 exchange, but also some less formal deals (eg. "I will send you a screenshot of Caspic, you will send 50g by a CivDip"), and this kind of deal must be kept.
But then I agreed with germanos' idea that we need no special rule, and only (unbreakable) 'barters' are a CivDip barter, MP deal and a F3 exchange.
I think people took rather the 2nd concept, but I am not sure.

[SlowThinker]

I edited my last post.

[Peaster]

> I am not sure if this didn't cause any confusion when Sinbad offered to send screenshots from Al Kabir and The Immo rejected this possibility?

I did not know there was a rule against it, but I thought it was odd that anyone would even consider it.

I assumed that any quick exchange was a barter, and that a promise to do something was a deal. But the distinction could be unclear, so I was always prepared to ask "Is this a barter?"

@Slowthinker the King: I do not remember any firm agreement in the western Zagros. But I do remember that our borders were to be unaffected by

*cities like Zariqum, which you built after talks began.
* and by the disappearance of cities such as Nimrud.

You've argued loudly about the second point. Have you forgotten the first one?

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Sinbad
But I do remember that our borders were to be unaffected by
*cities like Zariqum, which you built after talks began.
* and by the disappearance of cities such as Nimrud.

I don't understand why you do mention it now. Yes, we agreed on a principle the border talks would be based on settlements that existed just after The War. But the border talks failed and ended. AFAIK we have no western borderline.

I do not remember any firm agreement in the western Zagros.

I was pointing out Zariqum had been built in the following situation:

• we had no firm border agreement (this is correct), but a current status of the talks was Persia had objected only the red point
• Babylon had announced her plan to build Zariqum and Persia didn't complain.

Then Babylonian government asked colonists to build a new city Zariqum. Zariqum was built.
(Only afterwards Persia changed her demands and started to claim the Tushpa-Arraphka line.)

Babylonian government is obliged to ensure a safety of the colonists and also a safety of other Bab cities on Tigris' river system. We are sorry, but a Persian stack above Zariqum wouldn't be compatible with their safety.

[SlowThinker]

summary of rules added after version 3

Here are all rules that I found in the text since a launch of Home Rules version 3 .
I rephrased some rules a bit now, especially the first one ("what is a barter").
Time indicates where we talked about that rule (I suggest to work with a printable copy of the thread).

Please say if there is anything wrong in the text, if you understood there was another convention, you disagree with anything etc.

---

A barter is an instant exchange based on CivDip, a MP session or the Foreign Minister (F3) or their combination. It can't be broken, any other deal can be broken.
(20-03-2004 09:20)

The stack size trick (it is possible to see a size of a foreign stack by diminishing the status window) is forbidden.

A production of [nil] caravans is forbidden.

White player is obligated to publish event messages.

'Giving' cities by an approved bribery is allowed.
(19-01-2006 05:12)

Diplomatic contact with an AI is forbidden (also with respawned civs).

End of the game: there may be only one winner of the game, not an alliance.

If a caravan is passed to another civ it cannot be delivered if the revenue would be bigger than the revenue of the original owner. (This may happen due to the international bonus, no Bronze Weapons loss, no Persian culture loss etc.)
(14-07-2005 19:13)

It is allowed to try anything in cheat mode with the starting save (not only to reveal the map but for example to create units besides a barb that you want to kill but you are not sure how the barb is strong). You can also play new SP games of the Seeds scenario.
(18-09-2005 17:08)

It is allowed to manage your civ in a MP session during a turn of another player.

Ending alliances: no special rule. Have in mind it needn't be easy to end an alliance if your ally doesn't want to end it. So use alliance with a care.
(10-07-2006 20:25, 27-09-2006 18:20)

You can't open/play a game of your ally (even if he agrees).
(20-10-2004 18:10)

If a cursor is on an invisible foreign city (on both black or revealed square) and you press Enter or Spacebar then you get a list of demanded commodites.
So don't use Enter and Spacebar on non-city squares.
(14-07-2005 19:13)

Problems with CivDip
Great Library: CivDip doesn't support it. Therefore after a CivDip exchange you should assure the tech also for the owner of GL (eg. make a barter for the GL owner). (08-07-2006 01:55)
If you forget to unfreeze unit(s) bartered by CivDip then you can hexedit the barter file and prolong its validity. You just change one byte (byte 88 decimaly = 58 hexadecimaly): This byte represents the game turn and it must be upped by +1 (this way a validity of the .dat file shifts by +1 turn). More here: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...50#post3754350
Don't use CivDip for units in black, because they dissapear.
Also remember freezed allied units create ZOCs.
With civdip map exchange sizes of cities of third-party civs are refreshed


Homing units
(14-07-2005 19:13)

If a unit is homed in a foreign city then

• it never consumes a shield of support
• it (a Farmer/MilEng) never consumes food
• it never causes unrest under The Republic

This happens with CivDip usage, so after a unit is unfreezed you should avoid that you get an advantage this way.
(Ways how to rectify it:
the home city must "unhome" some units so that no shield support would be consumed (for example under Monarchy the city must support only 2 own units + the said foreign unit)
or the owner of the unit must rehome it to his own city (a fast trick how to rehome a unit is to connect online with ANY civ and to pass the unit back and forth)

Rehoming units by giving them forth and back within one MP session is forbidden.
An exception: the unit was homed to a foreign civ (you are rehoming it this way - see last paragraph).

If you see any enemy unit (or a defended city of an enemy) 3 squares from your city then you can give only one unit homed in that city per turn.
An enemy civ = a civ you are in war with.

************************************************** **************
Added:

Don't press [escape] when you open a foreign save in the SP mode and you are asked to choose your civ. You might open a position of your opponent this way. To prevent somebody accidentaly sees your map it is advised to set a password or to center your map in black at end of your turn.

CivDip doesn't clean memory properly and keeps maps and treaties from previous barters. Therefore it is advised to specify all content of a barter in a name of the barter, and to restart CivDip between if needed (for example if you make a barter with a map and then you want to make another one without).

[Zedd]

Crazy week, I had to play fast so hope I didn't miss anything.

[Straybow]

Crazy turn, so much planning and stuff... hope I kept it all straight... F11-free and Ctrl-n positive.

[SlowThinker]

bab 2460

Nothing to report ...

[Straybow]

20 minutes to spare.

[Kull]

Originally posted by Straybow
20 minutes to spare.

Curses! Foiled again!!