Turns of ACT054 game in Apolyton PBEM Tournament

[Darsnan]

on to Chairman jdm.

[johndmuller]

2213 to the Cool Col. Hobbes.

Winter Storm Warnings (i.e. a cold war) in effect due to the ongoing massive arms race.

I will be out of town (without internet access) later in the week - from Thursday the 1st through Monday the 5th. Given my current 'pace' in this game, it may or may not seem a noticable departure.

[H0bbes]

How can I be still pacted with Straz when he destroyed 7 of my units? Straz, did you accept a pact after attacking me? That is illegal. I would like a replay of this turn to sort this out.

The relevant rule is:

* If a player employs a tactic that causes a state of vendetta, they are not allowed to "accept" a pending diplomatic agreement with that faction in the same turn, causing a change in diplomatic status or the transfer of energy or knowledge.

[johndmuller]

Funny, I just quoted that rule myself in another game - where a person I was at vendetta with bombarded my base from a ship and accepted my truce offer on the same turn. They claimed that bombarding doesn't cause a vendetta so it was OK; on the other hand, when I later bombarded his ship back (from the same base), it wouldn't let me do it without declaring a vendetta (fortunately, Santi asked me to join her in one, so my reputation didn't suffer). This story is not entirely relevant, but I certainly understand how Hobbes might feel about this.

The rules leave some loose ends on this, particularly by not mentioning whether or not a previously existing vendetta was present between the parties. Clearly it would be improper if the two parties originally had a treaty and a pact was on the negotiating table when the second party first blasted away and then accepted the first parties pact offer (although the 2nd party might have had to take a reputation hit to make that attack).

Before I get into my opinions, I just want to say that I think that whatever they decide to do is OK with me, as from what Straz says, the only difference I would have seen is whether or not they had a pact when the turn went by me, and I don't think that I would have done anything much differently if the only change was that instead of a pact, they were at vendetta with a pact offer on the table from Straz (which I don't suppose I would have known about unless he told me). Naturally, I'd rather not have to play my turn over again, but I will do it without complaint if that is what you two decide is the right thing to do.

I know from my experience above, that it feels wrong when you are on the receiving end of the blast away and then accept peace maneuver, and I got a much milder dose of it in my game, but i wouldn't be surprised to hear that it felt OK from Straz's point of view either, since, as he said. that once he had gotten rid of those men, he felt more like having peace than he had before.

My take on it, although I am not particularly an authority on the rules, is that Straz should not have done that, and that if Straz wanted the pact back, he should have either accepted it before attacking, or if he wanted to attack first and then have a pact, he should have rejected Hobbes' pact offer at some point so that it would ultimately come to Hobbes as a pact offer from Straz, which he could then either accept or reject (or flail away at Straz and then accept, thus putting the shoe on the other foot ).

Given that Straz says he would make all those attacks in any case the major question IMHO is whether Hobbes still wants that pact now or not. If he does, then the only departure from my idea of what was correct will be that Hobbes and/or Straz will get the commerce & intelligence benefits of the pact sooner than they would have otherwise (Straz and Hobbes have already gotten the intelligence benefits if they bothered to look and I don't know who would get the commerce benefit extra early). I could live with that, although perhaps they should both be made to contribute to the endowment of the Drone Retirement Home.

If Hobbes wishes the pact to have never been, he would have to take a reputation hit to get back to vendetta (although I think that he would first be getting the pact's commerce benefits, which might make up for that) except for the unlikely case where Miriam were to oblige him by requesting that he join her in a vendetta against Straz. Now at this point in the game, I don't think that the game's idea of reputation means anything to anyone except Miriam, and (you can quote me on this) "I think that her faction is no longer significant".

So, the intelligence horse is already out of the barn to the benefit of both of them, no matter what we do and if I had to guess, the pact commerce benefits would accrue first to Hobbes under the current arrangement. If Hobbes wants to resume fighting, he most likely will lose some reputation, but only with Miriam, and that will be the extent of his negatives.

I think that I'm the one with the most at risk here, since I played my whole turn under the assumption that the war was over. As I said earlier, I probably wouldn't have done much different (although I reserve the right to rethink this if it turns out that I've overlooked some major item), so I'm willing to live with what I did if Hobbes wants to play on, whether he wants to resume fighting or accept the pact or cancel the pact or cancel and then re-offer the pact or whatever.

Anyway, whatever you two decide is OK - there is also the option of referring it to Tau Ceti to judge.

[straz]

Ok, just so we're all clear on what happened here, my take on events was:

1) I offered a pact to Hobbs along with a diplomatic note -- if you accept, I will not invade your territory. I did not accept this offer. This offer initiated a series of e-mail discussions.

2) Hobbs accepted the pact offer and sent the turn on.

3) E-mail dicussions did not really reach resolution. I decided (and e-mailed all of you individually except Hobbs) that I was unhappy with outcome and that a pact would probably ensue but was unlikely to last.

4) I decided to play out the turn prior to deciding on Hobbs acceptance. In that turn I found 7 offensive units and transports within range and eliminated them.

5) Afterwards, I decided that I could afford an unsatisfactory Pact for the near term and accepted. Yes this was rather mean.

Unfortunately, I agree that it probably violates the quoted rule. My apologies for causing a replay.

As for whom has been damaged by this action, it really depends on how much intelligence is being transfered each way via diplomatic channels and infiltration. I know where I stand on this and did not find anything particularly newsworthy.

Thus, I will now replay (hopefully destroying the same 7 units) and offer even wors terms this time around.

[Darsnan]

I have replayed the Gaian turn as closely as I can recall playing it previously.

Turn replayed on to Chairman johndmuller

[johndmuller]

Sorry, Lord D, I was thinking that you went before Straz even though I should know better. You had just as much of a stake in the inconvenience as I did and as much right to vote for replay or continuing.

So is it really necessary to replay the turn if we're just doing the same things?

I thought my previous post ended up saying that the only difference was that Hobbes would either get or not get the commerce income due to Straz (and that I didn't care either way) - and that the intelligence info cat was already out of the bag no matter what we do.

The things that could be different are the random things, like battles (i.e. those 7 of Hobbes/Straz), including those Lord D and I might have had.

[H0bbes]

The main point is that I am not interested in Pacting with someone who acts thus. It may be too, that I am unable to attack Straz after his attack- under a white flag of truce while discussions were being carried out, I might add; thus prolonging an unwanted state of treaty between us, with the attendant trade bonuses that occur with that status.

There exists now no possibility of peace with the so-called "Peace-keepers" and I look forward to their destruction by any means possible.

[johndmuller]

It doesn't look like I'm going to have the time to replay my turn before I go out of town, so it won't be until next Tuesday probably. If you want to play on with the original turn instead of waiting, that's OK, but I get the impression it's not going that way and that I'll be replaying the last turn when I get back. No major problem with having to replay, mostly sorry to be the focus of a delay at an bad time. Well, maybe peace will resume after this cooling off period (sure!).

[johndmuller]

Lord D, If You would be so kind as to resend the replay, it would be appreciated. We seem to have encountered a hardware problem making Our copies at least temporarily inaccessable. Sorry for the additional delay.
Thanks.

[Tau Ceti]

You already made the correct interpretation yourselves, but just for the record, let me state that the quoted rule is meant exactly for situations such as the above. And it applies whether or not a state of vendetta already exists.

[H0bbes]

Hello? Pull your fingers out guys.

[johndmuller]

Hobbes, if you are wondering what's going on, it is mostly me taking a long time to play the turn. My computer welcomed me back to town by requiring extra attention in the form of needing some repairs; meanwhile the drive with my SMAC files was unaccessible. That was not entirely essential as it did not take the computer completely out of service, only removed access to my current notes and email messages. I (re)played a good bit of the turn, but having noticed that Brother Straz followed a somewhat different approach this time, I delayed completing my turn until I could look at those materials to see what I thought I was doing and other little details like where your navy had been hanging out.

I got the replacement part in over the weekend and the labor action that the disgruntled drive had been staging was successfully resolved. I played some more of the turn and I promise that I will get the turn out within the next 24 hours, probably within 12. Sorry for the delay, Mea Culpa, etc., etc., etc.

The House of Secrets reports that there have been some discussions going on behind your back (and doubtless some behind Our back as well). Some of these are quite innocent, such as Lord Darsnan's plan to take a vacation (perhaps he will visit Our People's Resort at Drone Retirement Home) starting soon - which, We must confess, dimished Our sense of urgency in attempting to finish the turn before fixing the computer - and other discussions possibly less innocent, but (as far as is known by the House of Secrets) not (yet at least) accompanied by any joint resolutions to gang up on anyone. We trust that the Greater Hive Co-Prosperity Sphere will continue its struggle toward Transcendence in either a spiritual or military fashion(, fingers and all ).

[johndmuller]

2112 (replayed) to Col. Ultra Cool.

Strange, after all that hot talk, things seemed a bit cooler this time .

[H0bbes]

2112 2 PK's.