Should we get stroppy with the Data Angels?

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Drogue
The post was not nasty in it's message, but could be construed to be so in it's language.

That's why every diplomatic message I suggest should be triple-checked and rewritten until it becomes unrecognizable I ever suggested it.

Originally posted by Googlie
And let's not forget that this is the same GM who was peppering the Peace Conference with questions about our "Protectorate" contact prohibitions while all the time engaged in selling techs to that very Protectorate.

That might not be the case after all. See my post earlier in this trade regarding the University switching to Knowledge SE settings.

Apparently Lal is very generous in providing his submissive ally with techs. Last year DAP and this year AdapDoc.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Googlie
(it won't affect personal relations with GM, will it?)

That would be rather silly. At the start of the ACDG he himself was rather looking forward to the possibility that he might do some nasty probe tricks to the Spartans.
But whatever. I have some experience with being a 'bad loser' myself (to use Modo's words) - most recently at the end of ACDG2... - so who am I to speak? As Drogue points out, such a game can become stressful if you're busy with it for over a year.

[Googlie]

Originally posted by Maniac
That might not be the case after all. See my post earlier in this trade regarding the University switching to Knowledge SE settings.

Apparently Lal is very generous in providing his submissive ally with techs. Last year DAP and this year AdapDoc.

Well, let's look at the facts

Zak had 77 credits in reserve when we finished our 2169 turn, and just 1 inefficiency credit. His income was 13 per year

So he starts 2170 with 89 (77 plus 12)

He changed to KNOWLEDGE, and, as we know, the AI plays all games at the Librarian level, so it'd cost 24 ec's to change, so reserves dip from 89 to 65 - actually 63
(he changed his SE sliders from 40/40/20 to 30/50/20, so his economy took a hit), and in spite of Knowledge being +1 EFF, he takes a greater (2) inefficiency penalty in Mendelev College than he had last year (1)

So, clearly, the Angels couldn't have sold him anything

Let's now look at the sequence of events, in turn order:

• After our turn ends, in 2169, Lal is 1 turn away from an unknown conquer tech
• Lal gets Adapt Doctrine, but doesn't give it to the University - see below for rationale
• Gaians open 2170 and have Neural Grafting, which they sell/trade to the Angels
• University "opens" their turn and now has Cyberethics. They "place Cyberethics in the diplobox for us - "It is my pleasure ..." (If at that time they also have Adapt Doctrine, they would have transmitted both techs to us
• Angels get their turn, and trade Neural Grafting to the PK's in exchange for Adapt Doctrine (The PK's can't have gotten NG from the Gaians, 'cos they are in vendetta with them)
• There is no tech that the Uni had in 2169 that the Angels didn't have, and in 2170 only Cyberethics, so clearly the Angels didn't trade Adapt Doc to the University
• So when we open the 2170 turn, we get Cyberethics from Zak, and after closing - and reopening the diplobox, he also gives us Adapt Doctrine. How has he gotten that? If he indeed got it when he gave Cyberethics to lal, why didn't he offer us both?
• And if Lal had Cyberethics when the Angels traded him Neural Grafting, why didn't the A's select Cyberethics (the response "give me xxxxx tech instead and we have a deal"? - unless Lal replied "Sorry, it's Adapt Doc or nothing"
• And if indeed the A's and the PK's execute that deal, why didn't then lal immediately gift Neural Grafting to Zak?

Lots of questions with few answers.

I think, though, one thing emerges - Lal got Neural Grafting from the Angels, and the A's got Adaptive Doctrine from Lal The A's and the Uni haven't traded, and Zak got Adapt Doc from Lal (and might have gotten NG at the end of the 2170 turn from Lal, so we might see it gifted when we open the 2171 turn)

But I think, on balance, that the Angels are "clean"

[wuy3]

good job googlie
show em whos the better man in the end

ohya, shouldn't we now consider DA's basically our enemies until the end of the game? Their members must be fired up over this recent development.

[DeathByTheSword]

do they have any members left?

[Googlie]

Yeah - Hercules and IT Mart (Mart 7x5)

[Snoddasmannen]

Originally posted by Drogue
However I would like to address one point Snoddasmannen made seperately:


This is not the case. Yes you are roleplaying, but you are also playing according to your playing style. Everything you do does reflect on you as a person, as it is you roleplaying something. Even in the extreme case of an actor, they are roleplaying in the extreme and yet there is still an unmistakable style of themselves. If you break deals in a DG, it's the same as in a PBEM, you are seen as someone who will break deals - a realpolitik.

Fair enough, I see your point, but I disagree. Of course our individual playing styles are a component in how Sparta plays, that's not my point. I simply believe (and hope) that players will condone actions when playing in a role-playing context which they would not condone in general. So even disregarding the fact that we are a team with some 30 members I still don't think it's fair to pass a general judgement on players by their actions in a specific context.

If Sparta breaks deals in a DG, it is not the same as me doing it in a PBEM, and it would be a mistake to see me as one who breaks deals, imo.

Whatever Sparta does reflects on the Spartans.

Exactly