Lux Invicta intelligence

[DeepO]

Well, I still don't see it. There has to be some kind of time pressure on both sides. Let's say we want to trade pottery for CB, while we are researching the wheel and they are researching BW. Why would there be a need to hold the game for polling? It can be done over the course of several turns, and certainly you don't need to stop the game for it.

It could be possible that you are beelining for ironworking, and thus want to trade BW now, and not next turn (as it would mean a wasted turn on research, but why would the other team need to stop their game then?

I agree, the settler idea may not be the perfect example, but it certainly is a possibility. I don't think all trades, and certainly not the long term agreements need to stop the game. There has to be some connection in the game that causes this time-pressure.

DeepO

[nbarclay]

The time pressure comes from the possibility that the civ you want to trade with might meet someone else and get what you have to offer from them instead. Also, I suspect that the psychology of PBEM games is such that the desire to "do something" would encourage teams to close a deal sooner rather than later.

Nathan

[DeepO]

Good point, however I wouldn't rush. The big downside to all of this is that everyone now suspects both Lux and demo met... if we were to meet someone, maybe we should decide to do it in between turns, instead of halting the game

DeepO

[Dominae]

Maybe we should hold up our turn long enough so that everyone thinks we're striking deals...




Dominae

[DeepO]

Maybe we should try to convince another team to do so at the same time.... it would be a very good distraction!

DeepO

[Dominae]

Maybe that's what LI and Demo did!


Dominae

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by DeepO


Maybe we should try to convince another team to do so at the same time.... it would be a very good distraction!

I hope you're keeping in mind what suggesting such trickery would do to other teams' perception of us. At the very least, the civ we propose it to would know, which is made more problematical by the fact that we don't have any clearly established allies yet.

Nathan

[DeepO]

I did think on it, but I don't consider it that dishonorable an idea. Somewhere we have to draw the line as to what is allowed as a deception, and what is not honorable anymore. This, I think, should be possible... but there is one tricky part: we need to convince the other team of this, because if they spill it to the general forum, it would all look our fault, and not theirs.

DeepO

[nbarclay]

It's not so much that I regard the trick as dishonorable as that it is definitely the sort of thing that would make anyone who hears about it (or figures it out) more wary of us. That could color future relationships in a way that is not favorable. What do we hope to gain that would be worth the risk? Indeed, are we even sure that the false perception would work in our favor rather than against us?

Nathan

[nbarclay]

By the way, earlier, we were talking about taking actions for the specific purpose of building trust. Isn't trying to trick the rest of the world a move in exactly the opposite direction from that?

Nathan

[DeepO]

You're right... it is cool, but it doesn't net us anything, and could potentially damage trust. Let's forget about it.

DeepO

[zeit]

You're right... it is cool, but it doesn't net us anything, and could potentially damage trust. Let's forget about it.

DeepO, it sounds like we are discussing the depolyment of nukes or something...

wish we had them though, we currently have only wooden warheads.

[Shiber]

If we met GoW and found one of their settlers in the open, I'd personally give them this blow. The sooner we can delay their growth the better, and besides, if we strike against GoW early, the rest of the groups might actually like us better.