My 2gp:
The worldspell NAP. It was stagerring to discover how close I was to being attacked by the Sons. I had considered the possibility, but believed all the way that our agreement had been solid. I'd like to go back to it once again. This is the wording:
Quote:[COLOR="Orange"]I will, however, agree to a Worldspell-NAP between the Sidar and the Clan of Embers.
[/COLOR]
Do we want to make a detailed agreement about the world spells or follow to the spirit of not using one's world spell to harm the other? I think the latter is OK.
And it was OK. We made the agreement on T35, before SoI had entered the scene. Now 100 turns later I learn that the deal was meant to be an anti-rush measure and 100 turns later there are no loner rushes so the deal is off. Huh?
The above wording might not have been most precise, but interpreting it in terms of "anti-rush" adds a whole new level of vagueness. What exactly is a rush? Imagine that SoI never happened, on T110 I cast ItM and attack the Clan with invisible priests+tigers making an excuse that it's no longer a rush but a fairly ponderous attack. Could I have used the excuse on T110? How about T100, or 90? When did the rush era end?
Looks like it was tought to end around T150, which brings me to another point. It's been repeated a few times that I hit the jackpot by making the WS deal. I did, but there's also the other side of the coin - from T35 until T155 (when the Clan got their first Hawks) the Clan was safe from Into the Mist, a powerful world spell (in fact the only aspect of the Sidar in which they are on par with other civs). That was what they got out of the agreement and it was quite a lot. I kept mentioning the deal every now and then and how it affected whatever I was doing so that the Clan wouldn't forget it was still there. You never seemed to complain about it, reaping the benefits ie. when I used ItM for something such meaningless as capturing Jubilee.
We had classical NAPs that's true, but would we have had them if there hadnt't been the WS NAP in the first place? Rather not. If I had to choose between the Bals and the Clan and you had told me the WS deal was off, I'd have had every reason to support Bob instead - I'd also get xp, the capture gold, maybe the axe and a few cities on top of that.
So the Clan got quite a mileage out of the deal. Without it they absolutely wouldn't have been where they were on T150. But when T150 approached and the Hawks were at hand making my part of the agreement obsolete (after 100+ turns of taking advantage of it!), then all the ded lurkers started believing that the deal was really about some ancient past, contrary to the text and spirit of the agreement and invoked a vague term such as 'rush'. For me it's a classical attempt to wriggle out of an agreement when it no longer benefits one.
But in the end Mardoc honoured the deal and for this I salute you.
I think it was a good choice not only in terms of integrity - there was a chance I would have defended agains the Sons. I managed to neutralize them after a dozen turns of an offensive war, so maybe I would've been able to do the same while defending. How the Clan would have looked then?
OK, enough about the worldspells. Things I think did right/wrong along the way:
- (OK one last time the worldspell NAP) without it I probably wouldn't have been able to win the game. Initially I'd wanted to roleplay the Sidar as a non-meddling civ, engaging in diplo only on rare occasions. Good thing I didn't, it'd have been a disaster
- siding with the Clan. I got a lot of flak from Bob for that, but I'll attribute it to being bitter after losing with a virtually invincible leader/civ. I knew before the game even started that I would engage in wars because passive xp gain was too slow to be meaningful. Staying neutral was never an option - that would mean playing a REX game with a generic civ that has rubbish traits. The choice was between siding with the Clan or with the Bals and the WS NAP with the Clan made the choice somewhat easier. I never knew how it would turn out in the end, I just judged that bunkering with my civ and hoping to get Shades the natural way was the worst choice of all.
I think the decision was good regardless of the outcome. It's not like that winning vs the Clan would make the decision brilliant and losing would make me seem an idiot. It's the same as drawing to a flush in poker - either you have made a good call or not, doesn't matter if you hit the flush in the end or not.
- hoping that Square Leg would join the fight vs the Clan after the Bals are defeated. I botched this one. I expected the Luchuirp to grow insanely powerful after being left alone for the duration of the Sidar/Clan/Bals war. I never realized how badly the Luchuirp were beaten by PZ. In the end I tried to adjust for the Luchuirp emerging too powerful after we defeat the Clan when in fact they were still recovering. I should have made it clear to SL that I was going to attack the Clan and convince him that with his aid we could succeed. Signing a defensive pact might have sufficed. Anyway, hats off to SL for recovering from such an awful position. Now that I see it first-hand it is impressive.
Going back to some of Bob's comments:
Quote:Yes, I moved my nightwatchman to a really stupid location. No, it didn’t matter. He would have died regardless before I could get him to Jubilee
He wouldn't have. Esus spawning in Ocells was bad but it was perfectly salvageable. The Nightwatch could have been shielded with puppets/skeletons and moved into Jubilee in two moves. He didn't because Bob forgot about the Sons' spell extension. There was no bad luck in it.
Quote:Iskender’s basing hawks in my territory when I knew well that he was going to declare shortly was indeed terrible
I got the Open Borders offer in-game and I accepted it. There was no diplo attached to it, no RoP agreements or anything, so I took advantage of that. Pb did the same in PBEM1, he just was articulate enough to spin it right in his thread.
It was hilarious to see the effect of the phony race for Deception I initiated. At first Bob rejected it as phony, but then somehow convinced himself it was true. Even after I'd been in FoL for dozens of turns.
Bob Wrote:4:57 PM Bobchillingworth: Iskender can't get nearly as much use out of Gibbon. But he's likely to beat me there
Told SL that Iskender is trying to race me to Deception. I asked him to talk to Iskender about maybe letting me have it; although in reality I've decided to look at other alternatives
I guess that without the phony race the Bals' beeline for Gibbon would have been much more focused.
OK, that's it. So now, where's the Axe?
