Council Meeting of the Blue City.

[=OttomusCeasar=]

Since its pretty obvious The Asylum planned to beat us to a Settler, claim tiles in X and then outbid us for X's Settlers shouldn't we ditch the granary and build a Settler instead?

I looked at the save and if we concentrate on production we can build a Settler in 4 turns, The Asylum finishes theirs in 2 turns but it will take 4 turns to reach their city site. So we could build one Settler and we would each get a shot at one tile bid before they can outspend us. I think this situation pretty makes building a Granary irrelevant.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Yeah, that's probably a good idea. But the Settler only has six tiles and we have eight citizens. How are we going to determine who gets a tile and who doesn't?

THOSE IN FAVOR OF OC's PROPOSAL TO DITCH A GRANARY AND BUILD A SETTLER:
=OttomusCeasar=
GhengisFarb
Esoteric

[Esoteric]

THOSE IN FAVOR OF OC's PROPOSAL TO DITCH A GRANARY AND BUILD A SETTLER:
=OttomusCeasar=
GhengisFarb

I am also in favor of this.

[Aeson]

I'd just like to point out that in preliminary discussions with GF about where to place the Settler I was willing to forgo being in any Settlers from X until everyone in X had had the chance to claim their 3rd tile, and willing to try and convince the rest in The Asylum on that point as well. GF never responded to this offer on my part, so I never took it up with the members of The Asylum.

I would also like to point out that even with all 4 from The Asylum in X, we would have only 1/3rd of the votes... votes being able to be used to assign tiles rather than auction them.

Finally I would point out that I and Jonny were set to buy tiles with our $250 to bring the tile count even between us all. "We" (this is not a team game!) can't run Settler auctions in X even if somehow the majority of voters let us, as I would only have $0, TORA and Makahlua would have about average ($20), and Jonny would not be that far ahead of some of the leaders ($58?).

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Originally posted by Aeson
I'd just like to point out that in preliminary discussions with GF about where to place the Settler I was willing to forgo being in any Settlers from X until everyone in X had had the chance to claim their 3rd tile, and willing to try and convince the rest in The Asylum on that point as well. GF never responded to this offer on my part, so I never took it up with the members of The Asylum.

Aeson sent me a pm asking what I thought citizens of X reactions would be when they founded the city 1 tile NE of where they are proposing now. I told them I couldn't speak for the other citizens but I did't like the idea. I seriously hadn't contemplated another city using Settlers to gain influence over one of the other initial cities. I asked what had happened to the idea we had discussed about X building Worker/Settlers and Asylum building military units and he responded that the only one who discussed it was him and therefore it was in no way binding on them or relevant. He then casually mentioned that he would be potentially be willing to forge interests in any X Settlers until X citizens had had a chance to make a bid for three tiles. Which didn't mean much considering he had just said anything he offered wasn't binding.

Originally posted by Aeson
I would also like to point out that even with all 4 from The Asylum in X, we would have only 1/3rd of the votes... votes being able to be used to assign tiles rather than auction them.

I don't see what votes have to with anything, apparently the bidding rules disallow any debt building so money on hand would be the only relevant issue and the three citizens from the Asylum have a private market to generate wealth pretty much insuring they can always outbid anyone else.

Originally posted by Aeson
Finally I would point out that I and Jonny were set to buy tiles with our $250 to bring the tile count even between us all. "We" (this is not a team game!) can't run Settler auctions in X even if somehow the majority of voters let us, as I would only have $0, TORA and Makahlua would have about average ($20), and Jonny would not be that far ahead of some of the leaders ($58?).

How is your spending money to buy more tiles and gaining more votes and much greater income helping to even the field with those who have less tiles and less money than you. You attack me for unfairly and unethically building a Brewery which you propose will bankrupt everyone else in the game yet you turn around and state that you are willing to aquire 3-6 tiles so you can be equal with everyone who owns 1 tile.

[Aeson]

I asked what had happened to the idea we had discussed about X building Worker/Settlers and Asylum building military units and he responded that the only one who discussed it was him and therefore it was in no way binding on them or relevant. He then casually mentioned that he would be potentially be willing to forge interests in any X Settlers until X citizens had had a chance to make a bid for three tiles. Which didn't mean much considering he had just said anything he offered wasn't binding.

It obviously won't go through if you don't discuss it. You did not just "ask" about what happened with the "agreement" between X and The Asylum. You said we were stealing your tiles and using the "agreement" to keep you from being able to counter the move. That was ignoring that Jonny (The Asylum's leader) had publicly made the statement he didn't support the idea, that I had retracted my support for the deal as well pending a decision on how Settlers would be handled, that neither side had had a vote on it to decide whether or not it would be acceptable, and that The Asylum made it clear in our build orders that we would be building a Settler, not a Barracks, first.

You ignored all that so you could make an accusation that I was trying to break some sort of "deal" that had been reached.

I was trying to work something out that would be satisfactory to X and The Asylum, but as you (should) know, I'm not dictating everything. It was a possibility to discuss that I brought up. Your lack of interest in the idea killed it. It may have died anyways, it may have gone through, I don't know. I was at least willing to make an effort towards it.

I don't see what votes have to with anything, apparently the bidding rules disallow any debt building so money on hand would be the only relevant issue and the three citizens from the Asylum have a private market to generate wealth pretty much insuring they can always outbid anyone else.

On one hand you try to imply that nothing I say can make any difference, then your next statement is that what I say is law. Make up your mind...

I oppose unlimited debt bidding, yes. Does that make it a rule in the Demogame?

Votes have everything to do with it. The City can appoint shares... and how else would they do that than by voting to appoint shares (and/or voting in someone who supports appointing shares) instead of auction them?

You attack me for unfairly and unethically building a Brewery which you propose will bankrupt everyone else in the game yet you turn around and state that you are willing to aquire 3-6 tiles so you can be equal with everyone who owns 1 tile.

Please point out where I said your building a Brewery would bankrupt anyone. I never said it. I pointed out that it gives you a monopoly on the alcohol markets in X and Feudality.

You were the one who started claiming that my position (and those in The Asylum) was so strong, to distract from the issue of whether or not unlimited debt bidding could destroy this game. This is unacceptable for someone involved as heavily as you are in determining the rules for the game. You willfully discard valid arguments and concerns by throwing up smokescreens and trying to change the issue instead of dealing with it.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

I was thinking that Alpha Site would be the best choice for the city. I would like to use our second settler to try and claim the Ivory resource before the Germans get it. Seeing as that is risky venture I would like to take a pick in that Settler and let other citizens get first shot at the first one. Beta Site is my proposal for the second Settler.

[Esoteric]

I like it.

Build a Settler, dispatch to Alpha site asap.

[=OttomusCeasar=]

If we are going to pick tiles my first choice would be the shielded grassland directly west of my current tile. I think it would be 7-4 from X.

[Aidun]

I like Alphasite too. My order would be Alpha 12 > Alpha 3 > Alpha 1 > Alpha 13 > Alpha 7

I support Octavian X's proposal. The greed of Asylum's lords truely knows no boundaries.

Aidun

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Originally posted by Aidun
I support Octavian X's proposal.

What proposal would that be?

[Aidun]

Sorry, Ottomus Caesar's proposal.

Aidun

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Placed tiles picks by order of request.

If we don't get anyone else posting before the TurnChat I propose we choose the tiles marked by the dots as the rest of the City's picks.

[Esoteric]

I want a tile!!

As a citizen of X am I invested in the settler too?

I figure 'yes', so my picks in preference (from alpha site tile) would be 8 (north), 7 (nw), or 3- 2 (west of Tora's)

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Updated.