An interesting development: GS gifted Inchon to RP for 1 turn

[Master Zen]

I was chatting with Zargon a few minutes ago when he mentioned something we were totally unaware about. Bascially, during the 10 BC - 10 AD turns GS gifted Inchon to the RP then got it back.

Yes, you heard me right, how is it that we never noticed? Simple. On 10 BC GS apparently gifted Inchon to RP, RP accepted it. After RP's 10 BC turn the city was shown in RP colors but RP apparently gifted it back on the same turn. When GS got the save back on 10 AD they accepted and the city turned GS again. We never saw the change because the turned passed us by during the "acceptance" phase. Only Lego and Vox saw it.

Now the question, why did GS and RP do this? Probably as part of the agreement they might have had. Assuming Inchon was full of GS troops, the switch transfered those tropps back to Eye of the Storm. Is there a GS flotilla waiting in the south? That would have cut transportation by various turns.

No other theories really come to mind. It is my belief that GS has a powerful invasion force in the south which might enter action sooner than we think...

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

I am of the opinion that the GS navy has already landing a large force on Bob.

[Hot_Enamel]

Then we need to step up the aggression level with GS.

"Attack our allies, we will attack them, and land forces in their north."

[UnOrthOdOx]

Some of my ministers elsewhere are a bit Gabby....shall we say?

GS has landed troops in RP territory.


Also. I would like to say something here.

Gifting of cities in order to warp units to the capitol can be seen as absolutely NOTHING but an exploit of the game's mechanics. I personally feel gifting of cities to block our advance is as well. This is despicable, and I therefore PISS on GS and their 'code of honor'. What good is keeping your word on deals when you cannot even respect the spirit of the game and play it in a way it is intended. This is a far worse crime IMO than any potential for breaking a deal.

I propose we PUBLICLY decry the above and state something similar publicly.

Roleplay, Gathering Storm:

Yes, we may have involved in questionable politics, but we have at the very least respected the GAME and not sought to take advantage of game mechanics in such a deplorable way. Doing so may very well win you the upcomming battles, but there will be no honor in that victory, for it will have been achieved through the most deplorable means possible.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
Roleplay, Gathering Storm:

Yes, we may have involved in questionable politics, but we have at the very least respected the GAME and not sought to take advantage of game mechanics in such a deplorable way. Doing so may very well win you the upcomming battles, but there will be no honor in that victory, for it will have been achieved through the most deplorable means possible.

I support the statement above and do not see how it violates existing treaties.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

In fact, since I have been making comments in the main forum to the effect that we considered them our allies. Perhaps we should include a comment along the lines:

"We have recently become aware that one of the teams, and unfortunately one we considered our ally, has been cheating by using game mechanics to TEMPORARILY gift cities to other teams for the purpose of mass transporting troops faster to get them into battle. We denounce such cheating and will have no further alliances/dealings with Gathering Storm."

[Hot_Enamel]

Hmm .. no ... thats too far GF.

There were no rules agreed to at the start of this game.
Therefore I insist we do not call them cheats.

Call them dishonourable & abusers of the game mechanics ... but not cheaters.

Please remember this is a game, and within the game mechanics, if you gift a city, your units transfer back to your capital. This is not a flaw in the game..it was programmed that way. GS have not cheated..they are simply expoiting a valid programming funtion that is available to us all.