And so it begins

[notyoueither]

I can see Trip's POV.

Unfortunately, I haven't seen a single one of these things that didn't run afoul of cheesey deals between teams. It seems to be the nature of the beast(s).

However, did we really try to talk to GoW about a team up vs ND, or at least try to set up a three way build off?

Diplomacy was always our Achilles heel, and I think the spear has just found the soft spot.

[notyoueither]

That being said, I wouldn't wish to have been on any other team but this one.

We pulled off a few miracles, and truely exceeded our natural potential from the map. A long string of players, and many others put a lot into this, and I don't think we need feel let down by the undoing.

I find it far healthier to view these things for the joy of the journey and those with whom I share it, rather than of the arriving at the destination wherever that may be.

[Aeson]

Do you disagree with the very fact that they want a joint victory, or the effect that it has had upon the game - I suspect the latter (along with the majority of GS), from your recent posts.

The very fact that they want a joint victory (that is not an in-game victory condition). If there had been a joint victory type that everyone was made aware of before the game started, I'd have no problem with it. Modifying or creating victory conditions mid-game is not acceptable though.

You say that there would have been no difference at all, but you are wrong. If I had know that shared victory were an option, I can guarantee you I would have never have joined (or of course rejoined). Anything I've affected in this game is different. I suspect at least some other people would have done the same. Anything they have affected in this game is different.

Certainly team's diplomacy with each other would have been different. It would be most imperative to make the "shared victory" alliance with 3 other civs ASAP to guarantee yourself a place on the majority "team". That would have been the game. Stupid.

If you want, we can start up a FFA PTWDG III with shared victory as a published possibility. I'll give you good odds if you want to bet against a massive rush to form shared victory pacts...

[notyoueither]

Why not everyone just unite on turn one and say 'yay! we won!'?

It's absurd, and the height of cheese.

Our own diplomatic shortcomings notwithstanding, what this boils down to is that both ND and GoW have lost their nerve. The end is so close they can taste it. Like a cheap whore they seek an easy trick. Team up as one and two to pummel number three into oblivion and then declare that they won, yay!

How hard was that?

[DeepO]

Whether they declare victory after or before a war against us doesn't change a thing either. The outcome is certain... right after the Lego war, we were talking that if GoW and ND would team up, the game could stop at that exact moment. So, all they did is let us play on for a couple of months, just for the fun of nuking some of our cities. Great.

I agree... they are chickens to quit right now. OTOH, I can understand them as the game is growing old, and opportunity dicitates that they can officially 'win' by teaming up, instead of just quiting and losing for sure.

DeepO

[alva]

Originally posted by Aeson
The shared victory is cheese. Can't believe MZ would go for something like that. It's UN cheese^2.

Hehe, I posted something like that in the public thread.

(don't worry I edited it when I read the second post in this thread )