Game Discussion IV

[notyoueither]

The deal was made before GoW attacked the first city (maybe ND too, I can't remember exactly, but I think so).

RP would support us, and they accepted 'vassalage'. That made me uncomfortable. I did not want to negotiate any treaty that RP would later resent. I was planning on winning the war, not on resettling RP on Stormia.

I'm pretty sure this all happened before a shot was fired.

The chance of them winning through and triggering a victory of their own was left open (intentionally by myself). It never occured to me to offer them, or anyone else, 'shared victory'. If it had, I would have beat a path to vondrack's door in less time than it took to say Jack Splat and instead of Lego knights fending us off, you would maybe have seen them doing a Pac Man from the other side.

However, all of that being said, the RP treaty was secret. I demanded that it be so. I therefore have to withdraw some of my belligerence and eat it with a dash of crow.

Still, I do not concede the point that 'shared victory' has any place in these games. Win it yourselves, or don't bother showing up to play.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Master Zen
So even if you had the chance to win by UN vote you would not have triggered it?

There was discussion that it should be by conquest or space ship, or anything but the UN.

It was decided we would not seek the UN victory.

That would have been a laugh. GS winning a diplomatic victory.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Master Zen
So even if you had the chance to win by UN vote you would not have triggered it?

Yep.

There actually was a chance we could have "won" by UN. Terribly cheesey type of thing that might not have worked, and could have backfired of course. The way I could see it working was if we offered Vox and RP a chance to be the UN victor in return for an agreement that the 3 of us would vote for one of us 3. Flip a coin (or whatever) to determine who the 3 of us would vote for. Then gift enough cities to the "winner" so they'd be on the ballot the turn before the UN completes.

It was deemed extreme cheese.

[Master Zen]

And that, my friends, is why GS lost.

Too many things were deemed too cheesy, too dishonorable, too unchivalrious by GS and it greatly limited not only your diplomacy but your overall game strategy, and hence, your shots at winning. At least from my perspective.

In a DG you have to be the biggest, baddest, motherf*cker of all to hope to win. GoW would not have gotten to where we got - considering our plethora of early-game limitations - if it wasn't for this mentality. Apolyton's continental success in the ISDG was also because of this.

I remember in the ISDG precisely how nye (a GSer) thought that coercing CDG into helping us get to the medieval era was wrong. I remember blatantly (and secretly) dealing with CDG against consular wishes to we could get those techs. And we got them. And with them we were able to use Med. Infs instead of Swordsmen against GCA who we crushed to obtain continental hegemony (and who btw, we blatantly backstabbed to achieve it).

Unpredictability is an awsome weapon for those willing to wield it.

-MZ

[Master Zen]

Btw, the SPDG ended in a UN victory. No-one thought that was cheesy.

[Aeson]

Too many things were deemed too cheesy, too dishonorable, too unchivalrious by GS and it greatly limited not only your diplomacy but your overall game strategy, and hence, your shots at winning. At least from my perspective.

It's all about what we think our best interests are. To me there are a lot of things worse than losing a game.

GS tried it's best to win by means we found acceptable. I'm sure every other team did the same, though the level of "acceptable" certainly varies from person to person, team to team. While GS drew the line at the UN (among other things), other teams drew the line somewhere too. Even GoW.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Master Zen
I remember in the ISDG precisely how nye (a GSer) thought that coercing CDG into helping us get to the medieval era was wrong. I remember blatantly (and secretly) dealing with CDG against consular wishes to we could get those techs. And we got them. And with them we were able to use Med. Infs instead of Swordsmen against GCA who we crushed to obtain continental hegemony (and who btw, we blatantly backstabbed to achieve it).

I call bull****, and since our forum is locked this is the closest our oppo is gonna get to our 'shame'.

We were using a single player on a vanquished team to keep the flame alive for long enough to get us the tech we needed, and you wanted so badly you skirted the wishes of the Consuls. It came to a head because the other members of that team asked that the team be extinguished so they could join other teams. But not before you got that precious tech.

It was bull**** then, and it is bull**** now. I didn't raise a big fuss at the time because we were a team. But don't go around trying to paint your exploits as something to be emulated. Lucky has an once of credibility from others due to **** like what we pulled that you arranged.

[Master Zen]

Our line was very badly drawn... kinda zig-zaggy...

But I respect the playstyle you chose. I am simply offering my critique since I would've played rather differerently in your shoes.

Which begs the question...

... what would have happened if I had joined GS as originally planned? Would my playstyle clash so tremendously with yours that i'd have ended up being an outcast or would GS diplomacy have adapted to my own?

That's one heckuva "what if".

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by notyoueither
I call bull****, and since our forum is locked this is the closest our oppo is gonna get to our 'shame'.

That's my whole point. What shame? That we outsmarted everyone else? That we got what we wanted at all costs using every possible diplomatic trick in the book? What did you want out of your team nye, a bunch of mindless drones playing everything by the book when the stakes were so high?

We were using a single player on a vanquished team to keep the flame alive for long enough to get us the tech we needed, and you wanted so badly you skirted the wishes of the Consuls. It came to a head because the other members of that team asked that the team be extinguished so they could join other teams. But not before you got that precious tech.

You didn't want that tech. You thought it was cheesy and unethical to leech CDG that way. I didn't. Neither did Trip (my partner in crime as he negotiated the CFC part of the deal while I did the same to CDG). We got not what we wanted, but what was best for the team. How would we have faired against GCA with only swordsmen? That was not shame, that was our finest friggin hour of diplomacy.

It was bull**** then, and it is bull**** now. I didn't raise a big fuss at the time because we were a team. But don't go around trying to paint your exploits as something to be emulated. Lucky has an once of credibility from others due to **** like what we pulled that you arranged.

You didn't raze any fuzz because suddenly you had an army of nice shiny Med Infs. Same reason you don't call b*ll**** when things happen when they benefit you. It's only when they don't (like in this game, or in this retrospective look at the ISDG) that you start whining.

Likewise our entire FAM agreed that backstabbing GCA was our only hope of victory in the long run. Sure it would come at a price (a price we paid in our dealings with GWT) but the benfits far outstripped the cost. We had the entire continent under our control or under the control of a long-term ally. And that was accomplished by no-body else other than the FAM and Trip, our war leader.

You should be goddamn grateful that our unconventionality, our willingness to take risky decisions, and our vision of doing things not by the book got us so far. And I find it utterly pathetic that you choose to express your displeasure now, when it suits the purpose of your argument in this debate, instead of then, when you had everything to benefit from it and knew it.

-MZ

[notyoueither]

I didn't raise a fuss because I didn't want to tear the team apart.

[Aeson]

There were a few things that happened that weren't concensus (public posts, and dealing with the NAP mostly), but most of our decisions probably wouldn't have been any different if a(nother) dissenting voice were added. Certainly how we accomplished things could have changed with your input, but what we were trying to accomplish probably wouldn't have too often.

The end of the game... well no one wanted or had time to be turn player after the Lego war, and the entire team was somewhat resigned to let someone (which ended up me) run amok. I didn't want anything to do with diplomacy, and so we had no diplomacy for the most part. So you could have left your mark then if we hadn't driven you insane yet.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by notyoueither
I didn't raise a fuss because I didn't want to tear the team apart.

Or because such actions benefitted the team so much that it was better to keep quiet?

You're not the kind of guy to keep quiet when things piss you off nye, I only know you too well.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Aeson
The end of the game... well no one wanted or had time to be turn player after the Lego war, and the entire team was somewhat resigned to let someone (which ended up me) run amok. I didn't want anything to do with diplomacy, and so we had no diplomacy for the most part. So you could have left your mark then if we hadn't driven you insane yet.

Heh, I'd probably been locked in some asylum in Elipolis or someplace far far far from EotS.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Master Zen


Or because such actions benefitted the team so much that it was better to keep quiet?

You're not the kind of guy to keep quiet when things piss you off nye, I only know you too well.

Take me at my word, or don't. Your choice.

Let's see you do it again.

[Jon Miller]

this is interesting and all, but isn't there a better thread for some of these posts?

btw, just should say that game behavior matters (Although it shouldn't), people learn about opponents and get expectations based on them based upon previous expereince...

Jon Miller