Posts: 777
Threads: 11
Joined: Apr 2012
Hello all, new guy here. I've been lurking this game for the past few months and decided to register 
Has it been considered whether Sulla will reevaluate his assumptions about Team 2 next turn? Sulla was expecting a fight to take the city next turn, what's going to happen once he sees that T2 has abandoned it wholesale?
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2012
VoiceOfUnreason Wrote:Not directly; but there are threads that discuss the fact that you can win a cultural victory in an OCC game if you have permanent alliances enabled. I don't think it goes into the implementation in as much detail as we covered here.
This...
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=251355
and...
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=171249
No 'worked example' anywhere that I have seen.
If team 2 fail AND team 1 are told/work out how culture works, how likely are they to try a CV? They seem to have plenty of commerce. I wonder how quick they could get it.
Posts: 2,879
Threads: 16
Joined: Sep 2010
Hesmyrr Wrote:I don't understand why people are bringing up arrogance here. Is there any way for Spulla to check for T2 power without significant time investment, considering other team has been pouring all their EP on them from the start? Considering tech superiority, I consider their 'probe' more legit than some of other questionable invasions that took place in past games. Moreover, they dismiss the strangeness of your former teams behaviour because of their misunderstanding. I believe it is not right for the lurker to take initiative on affecting the game, but it has nothing to do with the personages. We didn't "pour all our EP on them" though. We split it equally. They just chose not to spend any on us at all...
And really, even without graphs, making a grand invasion with just 20 units is kinda insulting.
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Obviously T-Hawk is just trolling for new forum members. Welcome guys.
I have to run.
Posts: 8,791
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
waterbat Wrote:We've got 
 . We must give kudos to T-Hawk for inviting what he surely knew would be a divisive topic, rather than just posting on his own. I don't see consensus forming, but if you do decide to let them know, I won't complain about it .
Darrell
Posts: 23,596
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
novice Wrote:Obviously T-Hawk is just trolling for new forum members. Welcome guys.
Ditto. I would find it enlightening to hear what the silent lurkers think.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,585
Threads: 43
Joined: Apr 2008
I'm conflicted because I do believe lurkers should not be intentionally changing the outcome of a game, which in this situation, it does seem to be a game changer.
That said, I've also always been more of the mindset that the community value and having active participation was/is more important than trying to create specific and nuanced "lurker rules" (no offense to those who created them). I'm okay with my opponent get a small bit of info from time to time if it means we have more active commenting in threads as a whole.
So... Whatever T-Hawk decides to do, I'm okay with it.
SideNote: I do understand that Team 1 has a lot of pride/lack of humor at times, but I think the repeated referencing to their hubris as a moral failure is excessive and uncallled for.
Posts: 1,285
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2009
I'd like to re-emphasize the fact that Sullla didn't treat the CV attempt seriously until a post that shouldn't have been posted. It seems to me that there was little chance he'd have tested how CV works in which case this whole discussion wouldn't have taken place. As such, I'd say again that lurkers should refrain from posting anything in either Team1's or Team2's threads.
Kalin
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
T-hawk Wrote:Would you want to get checkmated because you didn't know you can't castle out of check? After you had consulted a rulebook that wrongly said you could? Or would you like an observer to say so and carry on with an honestly played and understood game?
On the flip side, if I'm playing in the chess game (especially if I'm an undergo), and I DO know the rules, I think I'd be upset if I LOST the game because an observer corrected my opponent's understanding of a rule that *I* correctly figured out.
I really feel pretty strongly that lurkers should NOT get involved in these games. We're not playing
|
