atawa, berzerker, Trev, SRH, deity, Winzity 1x game: EVERY SATURDAY

[deity]

This is the game thread and story thread if so inclined...

Agreed rules:

wet cool 3 bill
size of world = 60x90 +
Landmass = Normal
Landform = Varied
NO GL, no tech stealing or tech trading
NO alliances
Villages barb level
All cheats in Rah rules forbidden

We got off to a good start last week with huts providing the luck factor.
Atawa got a couple of Adv tribes early and has rocketed away.
I got weeds from early huts then techs later on that totally stuffed my progress in Government...
SRH and Trev are trying to settle an agreed border but things sound pretty tricky!
Berz had his Science set to 30% from the outset because it was a 4000BC save where only four of the players picked civs. It wasn't picked up until 1000's years later so another civ gave him a tech to make up for it (no tech trading/gifting normally allowed).
Haven't heard much from Winzity but he did fix up his Science Rate from the start.

SRH may be late tonight but Graag has agreed to be generally available if needed as sub.

[deity]

Even though alliances are banned and each nations battle plans must remain top secret and NOT synchronised with another civ's military plans; it is OK to co-operate by making peace, trading maps, trading goods, agreeing on land deals etc.

But we better clarify unit & city ceding. I'm against it.

Also i think it goes without saying that it's no city bribe but what about unit bribe? I'm easy either way.

[atawa]

But we better clarify unit & city ceding. I'm against it.

I second that.

Also i think it goes without saying that it's no city bribe but what about unit bribe? I'm easy either way.

Dont care.

[atawa]

900BC

Dutch city of Den Haag builds Hanging Gardens

[atawa]

575BC

Dutch city of Rotterdam builds Oracle

[atawa]

225BC

Dutch city of Leiden builds Michelangelo's Chapel
That should take care of happyness problems

[srholmes]

200 bc world forms coalition of the willing against the aggressive aztecs!

[trev]

Rules state no alliances, but apparently that does not preclude a coalition of the willing (3 civs) battling one struggling civ, sneak attacks to prevent a player capturing a third party's empty city, armies fortified adjacent to the city of a friendly civ to attempt to prevent successful attacks on the city (they did not know I had sent other units by a detour to destroy the city from the other side though)

Is this normal for no alliances?

[atawa]

No, this sounds like a normal allience to me.

[StrategicKingMi]

Why cant anybody get together a multiplayer 2 x 2 king game on a 100 x 100 board with same rules.
(5 billion conts, wet warm)
That would be fun....

[srholmes]

It must be a coincidence if it sounds like an alliance. Maybe the aggressive Aztecs have independently annoyed all of their neighbours with their belligerent behaviour....

[deity]

Yeah, I think we are in grey territory now.

No synchronised battle plans = no comms about tactics.

But all civs operating militarily and mutually exclusively in good faith might sometimes look like an alliance. I've born the brunt of this in other games!

[deity]

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
Why cant anybody get together a multiplayer 2 x 2 king game on a 100 x 100 board with same rules.
(5 billion conts, wet warm)
That would be fun....

Why can't you!

I find it very easy to get a good group of players together...

Particularly at 1x1x deity level

[trev]

The Indians with an totally unprovoked sneak attack whose sole purpose was to prevent the capture of a Russian city which was empty by myself and subsequently fortifying an army on a forested river square within the city radius of an Russian city with the sole purpose of preventing me attacking the Russian city I think constitutes the tactics appropiate for an alliance only (this army was an veteran archer initially positioned there when my best attacking tech was horseriding)

Winz, the third enemy has done nothing against the normal rules for a game so I will not include him in the alliance accusations, but the actions of the Indians are not appropiate for the special rules agreed to for this game

[srholmes]

Well, this is a grey area as Deity pointed out, and I think that at that particular moment Prometheus was subbing for me, but I can assure you that, in general, The Russians (myself) and the Indians have not discussed attacking tactics, troop movements or anything that would be commonly discussed under an alliance, as alliances are not allowed in this game.
If the Indians are acting in their own self-interest though, without collaboration with me, I don't think that that would be deemed illegal.
I guess we need a global forum within which to discuss these matters. I know, lets call it the United Nations.