Sticks and Stones, Namers and Flamers

[Rubychaser]

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

Many here will know the above from childhood. Others may have just read this for the first time. I was listening to my young cousins singing this the other morning and thought of this game. A game that is supposedly being played by adults, not that any outsider would really be able to tell.

Much as been said by many people on many teams in the way the Horde has played this game. I am a proud member of this team and feel that much trash has been made of my team.

My understanding of a democracy game is that you play in teams, not single players, and in that you play to win. Our team formed a strategy, and played it to this day. Whether you like that or not is your own decision. You must consider that in a game of six teams none have matched the Horde in its diplomatic strategy.

Otherwise why have you all not allied against us. It is said four nations stand against us, Bards, Desolators, Lost Boys, and Babylon. Yet four on one failed time and again. What then of just one team standing up to us? Still did not happen. Now after all the "experienced" players have thrown out the names, and played in the flames you talking of quitting. How bizzare!!!

The game also revolves around the game mechanics, and moving units, building up towns and such. If all the various open forum posts have distracted you from making good moves, then the Horde sure is bad! I do not believe that you lot are not up to the challenge of running a nation. There are many players of the game here.

Could be your teams have had too many chiefs, not enough indians.

We come back to the case in hand - The Horde is a Mongol Nation. I am unsure if any of you have read the history of the Mongols, they were not easy on diplomacy. In this our team took a stance at the beginning of the game, and held it. As a team we have been both led by a despotic dictator, Pad, and we have also led him. I say this clearly, Pad has led this team in many ways, and forged us into a cohesive fighting unit.

Our biggest detractors are the Babylonians. Yet so far they have only run from us. Will Babylon quit now?

I challenge any other team here, or anywhere in Apolyton to come and play us one on one.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

Bring on the stcks and stones, spears and swords.

[Omnistar]

I think when the forums are opened, people will see the sophisticated organization of the Horde. Corporal spirit, Cohesion, drive, intensity of thought, well measured statistics, graphical assessments and a number of real life tools that for example military intelligence organizations, investment banks and other high end competitive entities apply for surviving in their respective habitats.

Foul play is not the reason we are strong, it is something much much more existential.

Maybe future teams will leave this game behind, and look on their internal composition before they gang up on us as a default maneuver, that would be much much more interesting.

[Golden Bear]

I think that almost all of us would say, and some of have said already, that the Horde team played a solid game and used its skills to great effect.

Your certain victory in this game is indeed a testament to your game playing skills.

Personally, I think in this post-Ming era, we should no longer bring up the memories of any past enmities or expressions of such.

Enjoy your success - and don't worry if anybody else does not express their joy over it. Be proud of your job and leave it be there.

Let's leave it there. Please!

[Rubychaser]

I will now share a well said expression from the council of the Blood Oath Horde, "it ain't over yet!"

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Not by a long stroke

[Beta]

I was chatting with Paddy last night, and I will say now publicly what I told him.

The Horde's strategy in this game has been nothing short of brilliant, and it has been brilliantly implemented, both in-game (ie the moves and builds, etc) and out-of-game (ie the diplomacy). I sincerely congratulate you as team. I also acknowledge how 'tight' your team is, and how you have stayed true to the spirit of the Mongol historical theme.



However, the line between roleplay and non-roleplay has been blurred by many, not just the Horde. This also results in personal relations which existed between folks prior to this game getting seriously frayed when those relations are relied on for diplomacy in this game. It comes down to a matter of the two individuals involved seeing the dialogue differently - person #1 is thinking how can I, as a member of team ABC, get person #2, of XYZ to buy into this deal, knowing that it is strictly game-related diplomacy. Person #2 is thinking, hey , this is my good pal #1, I know I can trust him. Hence - hard feelings when things go sideways later.

A number of us learned this in past games (Beta holds his hand high here) and that there is never a perfect delineation of roleplay and non-roleplay in demo games. I think the Horde team has many new members to demo games, so this may not be readily apparent to you, although this game has been a pretty severe proving ground for all involved. I guess what I am trying to say is - yes, it is just a game, and no, it is much more than that - both at the same time. It is a game that by definition, involves personal relations, and emotions, and feelings. We all need to be aware of that, and be aware of crossing a line which is admittedly very grey.

The flame fest in the Woe Unto thee Babylon thread was a demonstration of the emotions, and some of the hard feelings which have been created by this game. And yes - we all need to move past that. Or Ming will do it for us.

On the point of Babylon being a main antagonist - it is true. But we only parted ways when you broke the initial treaty. And yes, we, and I in particular, have spent the better part of tis game trying to get others to wake up and smell the roses. Alas, with the Horde blowing so much smoke, no one even got a whiff of a rose. Again, I tip my hat to the horde.

And yes, the rumours of other teams possibly exiting are real. From my perspective, this has nothing to do with poor sportsmanship. It would simply be a recognition that the game has reached a point where the conclusion is foregone. Why play it out to be crushed, and have it 'gloated' over in public, because although to you it may be roleplay, those on the receiving end will see it as gloating. And those who know me know I am no quitter. We strove to keep Vox alive in the ptwdg1, hoping something would break at the end (and it did - that shameful shared victory which robbed us of any chance at enjoying the end game), and ptwdg2, where Team Monkey (basically me) is now a two city island, but still scheming. So, I am not a quitter by any stretch of the imagination, but sooner or later one has to ask whether there is any possibility of pulling a rabbit out a hat. I suspect most pben games probably end up when one or more teams concede.

But - I for one - am not ready to do that yet. I still have my hand deep in my black hat, looking for something white and furry.

Game on. And group hug.

[conmcb25]

We wont be opening our threads to the public.

I don't think any private threads should be opened.

Simple as that

[Rubychaser]

Lord Beta of Babylon

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Nice speech beta thank you for your kind words.

Yes you are correct many of us are new to demo games and learning fast

While i cant accept that we are so so bad as some see us, i do accept that we ....some of us have taken things wrong at times and been misunderstood at times.

This can hopefully be avoided in future team games with some sort of code of roleplay, that is being discussed in the new civ 4 demo game forum.

Lets hope so.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Originally posted by conmcb25
We wont be opening our threads to the public.

I don't think any private threads should be opened.

Simple as that

Oh dear that is a shame was looking forward to having a good read

[Ljube]

Beta

[Omnistar]

Well, I agree that it is not wise to have out of game regular friends conduct diplomatic relations in game, and make diplomatic relations as formal as possible by having diplomats that has not chatted much before. That will reduce that friction to a major degree, and in many ways solve the problem. I observe hurt feelings, as people leverage out of game relations to leverage in game relations.

[PLATO]

Thank you Lord Beta. Kind words are always welcomed.

[Moonbars]

Originally posted by Omnistar
Foul play is not the reason we are strong, it is something much much more existential.

...

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Ah Moonbars good to see you back up to your old tricks !

Can I ask what is it exactly you are trying to do here ?