Iron Civer _Coliseum D_ Thread II

[Soltz]

Turn sent

[alexman]

Doh! Of course Catapults can't unload onto marshes.

No battles and 330 sent

[smellymummy]

egypt declared war on spain

lone spanish warrior defeated by vet war chariot

salamanca razed to the ground

turn sent

[Soltz]

Originally posted by alexman
Doh! Of course Catapults can't unload onto marshes.

No battles and 330 sent

I had a feeling tearing up that road would cause you some problems

Turn sent

[alexman]

4/4 Med Infantry kills 3/3 Spearman, 2HP lost, promoted
4/4 Med Infantry kills 3/3 Spearman, no HP lost
Santiago captured, Spain capitulates.

Thanks for a good game, Soltz, and thanks for playing until the end.

340 AD sent to smellymummy, although I think we will stop the game here.

[Soltz]

Til next time!!

[smellymummy]

I’m surrendering to the dutch.

At this point the options are really limited, and personally I don’t want to continue this on for months as a one vs one game, especially with the odds I’m faced with.

Ironically though, I’d like to point out that quitting should be banned from this game. Well in my case it’s down to one on one, and by looking at the game it’s obvious who the winner is. However, early on in the game, the english civ completely surrendered, even though the player still had a fighting chance. Compared to the spanish civ, that stuck to the very end, which is very admirable... something that I believe deserves the mention of a Iron Civer.

Point is, if the english hadn’t abandoned all of their cities, things could have had turned out differently. I don’t want to condemn Trip here at all, I can completely understand why he quit, because I think I would of done the same. I’m just stating something that could of had been addressed about this game before it started, and which should be addressed for future games. Abandoning a city (or more) can make strategic sense, although abandoning everything doesn’t.

Okay, so you want to give up. That is perfectly fine. Just give it to a sub, IMO.



This was a fantastic game. Congratulations to alexman. His amazing usage of all aspects of the Civilization 3 game, gave him the upper edge he needed for victory. If we could bet on this tournament, I would bet on alexman.

And so should you

Btw, Rommel2D has to organize another tournament... at least before winter

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by smellymummy
I’m just stating something that could of had been addressed about this game before it started, and which should be addressed for future games.

Btw, Rommel2D has to organize another tournament... at least before winter

How fickle- I screw up the first one, then you want me to do another right away...

Hopefully we can get something going as part of the opening festivities of a new forum... ... ... ... ... ...

[Aqualung71]

Congrats to Alexman. See you in the final.

And as smellymummy correctly points out, you've gotta be the odds-on favourite Perhaps we should give you a handicap

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Aqualung71
And as smellymummy correctly points out, you've gotta be the odds-on favourite Perhaps we should give you a handicap

Perhaps he should be required to divulge his tricks and secrets in a AAR before allowing the finals to start? (And he wouldn't be 'handicapped', he'd be 'victoriously challenged' )

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by smellymummy
I’m surrendering to the dutch.

At this point the options are really limited, and personally I don’t want to continue this on for months as a one vs one game, especially with the odds I’m faced with.

Ironically though, I’d like to point out that quitting should be banned from this game. Well in my case it’s down to one on one, and by looking at the game it’s obvious who the winner is. However, early on in the game, the english civ completely surrendered, even though the player still had a fighting chance. Compared to the spanish civ, that stuck to the very end, which is very admirable... something that I believe deserves the mention of a Iron Civer.

Point is, if the english hadn’t abandoned all of their cities, things could have had turned out differently. I don’t want to condemn Trip here at all, I can completely understand why he quit, because I think I would of done the same. I’m just stating something that could of had been addressed about this game before it started, and which should be addressed for future games. Abandoning a city (or more) can make strategic sense, although abandoning everything doesn’t.

Okay, so you want to give up. That is perfectly fine. Just give it to a sub, IMO.

This was a fantastic game. Congratulations to alexman. His amazing usage of all aspects of the Civilization 3 game, gave him the upper edge he needed for victory. If we could bet on this tournament, I would bet on alexman.

And so should you

Btw, Rommel2D has to organize another tournament... at least before winter

It was your punishment for attacking me. Alex was going to win anyways. I was the only shot at stopping him, but I was unable to do so, especially after you interfered. After having been attacked from behind when I was already the weaker power, I would be more likely to have teamed up with Alex to help him win than to act as his "roadblock" to give you a fighting chance.

Bitterness is more than skin deep. You reap what you sow.

Any chance of getting a final shot of the map?

[alexman]

Originally posted by Trip
Any chance of getting a final shot of the map?

Here's the final save. The password is 'bigtuna'.

[smellymummy]

Originally posted by Trip

Bitterness is more than skin deep. You reap what you sow.

Any chance of getting a final shot of the map?

took you a while to come and chime in here

honestly, i never really thought that you would of abandoned all of your cities Trip.

anyway, no bitterness here! i understand completely what happened. i just wanted to point something out that seems to fit in well with the entire idea of competition. Really now, i think that in civ3, even if a player is faced with a similar situation, it doesn't necessarily reduces the probability of winning to 0%.

considering there is a pool of replacements (how they can qualify to compete in championships though, is beyond me), it seems logical to keep the game going with 4 players, since afterall the game map itself is made for 4 players. of course it's different if a player conquers another completely, however if one just quits, it can definitively be a game deciding factor.

taking all of this into account, if someone simply quits, it tips the balance of a fair tournament, don't you think?