[SPOILERS] Jowy & Stampy

[Cornflakes]

I disagree on this. I could never leave that border undefended, and I was basically putting the troops to use while waiting for and opportunity to hit Bigger, although I ended up botching that against 2metra :/ All I lost to finish off Krill was a dozen Infantry and half a dozen Cannon. 3 turns of drafting/unit builds.

[Bigger]

Remind me never to play a PB with you Jowy.

hahaha

[MindyMcCready]

Think of it this way.

We keep warring: We both lose the game.
We sign white peace: I lose the game, you are still in it.
We sign peace and I get compensation: We are both still in it. (though me only barely even if I got compensation)

When you can't make any progress against me, you gain nothing by staying in war with me. If you have to keep using a ton of resources on something that isn't making you a return, you will start falling behind. What does it cost you to sign peace? Well, excluding the cities I sometimes threw in, it normally costs you nothing. You buy peace with the techs. Look at it this way: You didn't give me the techs. Did that gain you anything? Nope. It hurt me, sure, but I was already behind by then and you didn't really need to actively work against me to win the game. The others were the ones you were competing with. Is it fair that the stronger has to pay to the weaker for peace? Absolutely not! Is it the right gameplay choice? Yes! A small piece of your dignity was really the only cost for the peace. Why does this only work this way around, you might ask? It's simply because I was so close to being out of the game, falling further back every turn, that I had nothing to lose. You were still in, you had something to lose. I don't blame you for being headstrong and not accepting my unfair terms, but you would have been in a better position if you had.

As I said, AT got pretty peeved at each proposal. So that right there was a major barrier. It was AT's game not mine, and he *might* have eventually come around. I would not have and I would have continued to consult war.

I understand and understood the reasoning that you posted above on why you were making these types of offers, but it simply wasn't going to fly.

On an emotional level:
First there was the death before dishonour - so right there that was a pretty major barrior to peace.

Second, I personally consider winning the game overrated. I prefer a good, local fight. Master Commodore is a bit of an inspiration. So when you reason that we want to win the game,...well you're over-valuing that (as well as undervaluing the degree of insult).

On a rational level:

First, you've also already forced whips across every city,...so our estimation of the probablity of winning the game isn't that high.

Second, what you say makes sense at a snapshot point in time. But, the game would continue. Our odds are low but even if we ever succeeded too much you'd be an easy recruit for a dog-pile. So declaring peace would cost us.

In other words,...
We keep warring: With CGIII archers defending is low cost. You lose the game. If you're dog-piled and opportunities arise we might get back in the game.
We sign white peace: Jowy loses the game, we might have already lost the game.
We sign peace and Jowy gets compensation: Now why on earth would we want you back in the game, barely or otherwise? You attacked us,....you'll attack us again in the future. AT bent over backwards to appease you in city plants (despite my urging for more aggression) and still you attacked. Back to rational,....you exist to stab us in the back when the opportunity arises. And we've made you stronger than in the other 2 options. This is the least desirable of outcomes in terms of our relative power.

But there's more,....you were coming darn close to the definition of city gifting for spite. You could have signed peace with AT for a pittance (I think that 10g was AT's 'demand'), and then defend your cities against Bigger,....but you choose to abandon a city (or was it 2?) to Bigger while continuing to make 'offers' to AT. In other words you were demanding that we pay you to not gift your cities away.

This was pretty unethical play in my mind - if you could have defended your cities; you should have. It's no longer crystal clear in my memory so I might be a little off in stating this, but my impression at the time was that, only when it became clear that we were not going to sign such a one-sided deal did you vigorously defend against Bigger.

Lastly, we had a GG sitting around forever as AT and I debated what to do with it. At various points in the game we had a very, very high probability of razing your capital with a super fast moving galley. We had that GG around forever and it was only when it was decided to finally make a run at your capital that's when your spy spotted the galley. Having the opportunity to raze your capital, held back the peace process.

All in all, no hard feelings but I'd definately recommend against those kind of offers. I believe Rego in PB2 made the same type of offers to Athelete and that went down just was well. Also, better-late-than-never in your defense against Bigger/TT but I'd recommend sooner next time.

[Jowy]

That's bullshit. I destroyed TT's stack when he attacked Feros. And I signed white peace with you when 2M and Commodore attacked. Pretty much the only reason I kept playing for months on after I was out of it was to keep the game fair for everyone. It is really insulting to hear you accuse that I was gifting cities to other civs. I freaking defended against 4 civs at once, that's a situation where you might lose cities even when you are trying everything you can to defend against everyone. Fuck you.

[Twinkletoes89]

I have to say that I really respected your play in this game Jowy, you kept going for a long time despite low odds of really challenging and kept up stern resistance when attacked. I was expecting a much easier ride when I attacked you early but you showed enough strength for me to quickly back off before getting the whole stack wiped out.

Reading your thread, it shows how hard you tried all the way through, and while some of your diplo stuff was different to what I would have done, I understood your reasoning for it.

Good job, and for the time I was in the game, you were a good opponent

[MindyMcCready]

I think that you did an excellent job defending at all other points. And I really mean that. It's not easy to stick in a game and defend your best for such a long haul when you know you're out. I don't want that period of 5 turns to detract too much from the game you played, but I'm going to state my case anyway.

When you lost Rannoch,....well you had a 10 gpt deal on the table that AT had offered to you. You knew TT was coming for you but you didn't even counter offer from a 10gpt deal? I really don't think that you needed to lose Rannoch to either AT (offering peace) or TT (you wiped out his stack a few turns later)

Here's the peace offer AT sent to you before you lost Rannoch:

Offered Jowy peace for 10 gpt. Doubt he'll take it, but maybe. I don't think we could get 200 and 20 gpt.

And then there's your own posts like the one below that makes it hard to not conclude that you're enjoying your status as kingmaker. It's not impossible to read this post and conclude that we needed to pay you to defend against TT.

AT might have really fucked up.
He threw so many units at me, and now TT is going to reap all the rewards.

If he had taken peace when I was ready to offer it, then I would have defended vs TT and most likely both sides would have suffered huge casualties. Then he could march against me with his 19 units that he didn't throw at me, plus any he got ready in those 10 turns of peace, plus the units he has right now in the actual game. That'd be enough to wipe me out and capture my cities. He made the right decision if he didn't know about TT's attack, but if he did, then he made a huge mistake. Actually, scratch that, it's a huge mistake even if he didn't know, because there are spies in the game which he should have used. Same goes for me btw, if only I had built that spy a few turns earlier I would have known about TT's stack before attacking AT!

The above post wasn't a one-off that can be easily misread. You posted a similar message again below. It sure sounds to me that you'd prefer to give up Feros and Virmie than take a reasonable peace deal from AT. AT's a builder more than a figher,...it would have cost you almost nothing to make peace. Having said that, you did appear to change your mind and then vigorously defend Feros once it became clear that AT wasn't biting at those offers - but that came later. From where I stand, at that point at least, it seems clear to me that we were being asked to pay you to defend those cities.

Also Cornflakes is helping me out with trades (or just getting whatever he can from his techs before I'm out of the game).
I really don't understand AT.. He gave Rannoch to TT, and now he is giving him Feros and Virmire. And AT gets nothing.
What's the point of invading if he gives TT all my cities? After this is over he'll be surrounded by two powerful civs.

Sent another peace offer to AT. Let's see if he's playing to win.
If he accepts I will be able to give TT hell.

And here's an example of the peace offer:

Can someone tell me what this means?



I mean - why, in god's name, does he think it's reasonable for me to PAY him for peace? Clearly, he does, or he wouldn';t have offered.

And here's another 'peace offer' after TT has taken Rannoch.
TT's marching towards Feros
You have a 10 gpt starting point of negotiations from AT.
You have absolutely no ability to attack or threaten ALF due to CGIII LBs.

ok - trade offers:



obviously, no. clearly, he has a different view of this war than I do.

It was immediately after AT rejected this offer you posted below:

I read that as a clear shift in your defense strategy away from abandoning cities to TT. From that point forward your defense was commendable and unquestionable.

AT still refuses peace.
I've decided to split my forces.

We lost the war, but maybe we can win a battle!

I don't want you to be too pissed at me, but I also don't feel that my statement earlier was unfounded or indefensible.

[AutomatedTeller]

So, I get, now, why you made the offers you did. At the time, I didn't, and I still think they were a little odd - I've never, ever, seen anyone ask for things for when they were LOSING.

I really was confused by the peace offers, though - I saw literally no reason to take them until I was stupid and threw away a stack attacking one of your core cities.

I should have just let things be, I think. Certainly, the 2nd attempt to attack was devastating, since I wasn't paying attention to CF who was building up a huge amount of espionage points against me and basically took me out.

In a full diplo game, you could have explained your offers and maybe made me understand. it wasn't a full diplo game, alas, and I didn't understand what you were doing.