[SPOILERS] Serdoas thread

[Serdoa]

Dazed wrote back

Serdoa,

I'm sorry to hear that you feel that way. Of course the offer seems generous to you and from your stand point! I'm not saying it was an easy decision, but it's not a CLEAR decision either. If you cannot see how giving you a third city on T25 is an extremely unbalancing game decision not just for me but for all the other players as well, then you are being naive.

Accepting your offer would have improved my individual situation, but would have exponentially improved your situation. Let's not forget that you would have 3 cities while I only have 1 for 15 turns. Even if you had to tie up one city to build the settler/galley you would owed me, you still have two other cities building for your empire plus the extra income.

Only history will tell if I have fallen on my sword for no cause, but it is my firm belief that if I had simply conceded to your demands as you desired the future would look much bleaker.

I was and am still open to rearranging the time table. You clearly can raze the city any turn you want so you cannot claim that you are fearful that I will defend it from you or cost you units. If you raze the city this turn it only proves that you are unwilling to pursue any further negotiations that would not give you exactly what you want.

Which brings me to my final point. YOU have been the aggressor in this entire situation. I will not accept responsibility or allow you to paint me as having done something to deserve your aggression. To suggest that I should not have settled in the location I did is to make the claim that somehow becuase of your city settlement you also have exclusive rights to the coastal site as well.

Might is going to allow you to raze my city, but might does not make right! (Cliche, woot!)

I do not hold any hard feelings against you personally, but the Narnian Empire will not forget the actions of our northern neighbors.

Dazed

And my answer

Dazed,

you will probably have already seen that your axe and warrior are dead. Your two warriors which are on the way to my 2nd city should better back-off or they will be killed as well. I do not think that you want to be down to 0 military force.

Regarding your thoughts on my offer: Yes, it would improve my situation in comparison to the others. But maybe you should not look at my situation or at the situation of the others but at your own situation?

You can still gift me the city and receive a settler by turn 35. The galley will not be included in the offer anymore and there will be no reparations for your forces, but one warrior will be gifted together with the settler.

Take it and at least be at turn 37 up on city count with all others or leave it - I do not care anymore.

Kind regards,
Serdoa

So, the offer is worse then before, but at least he will have another settler. I am pretty sure he still won't take it. But if he does, I will try to make sure that scooter is killing the settler or that I have chariots by that time and can take the cap - but do not tell Dazed

[Serdoa]

And another message to SleepingMoogle

Hi SleepingMoogle,

I haven't talked to you in the last days and I think you have already grapsed that the reason is mainly my war with Dazed. To also give you some information on it: Dazed and I unfortunately could not find an agreement for the land to my south, so we both tried to settle there quickly and as he is Cre, I could not let his city, which was only the minimum distance away from mine, stay there without doing anything against it. He will lose it next turn or the turn after.

As I myself hate it when I do not know whats happening somewhere else and why, I hope you find this information useful. If you would like to know more, you can always ask me.

Other then that: I am now also waiting for the final book

Kind regards,
Serdoa

Basically only telling him a little bit so that he does not feel left outside and also to maybe get at least a +1 diplo-bonus. SleepingMoogle is the only one which I have not talked about that war till now so he might get on Dazeds side - though I do not think he will really do anything. But if I can get him to not think to bad about me, later dealings will be easier.

[Serdoa]

T25 - Demos

I worked through them and looked at the graph for Ottos soldier points and know now that the soldier points are as follows:

HRE down to 18000
Inca up to 23000
Maya at 26000
Ottos at 20000
India at 42000

Maya has therefore received a tech worth 4000 soldier points last turn - TW. From the graph I know that Ottos had the same increase as India, that was 2000 points, so only Hunting last turn, no warrior. That means that Inca either received a tech worth 2000 points last turn or build another Quechua. That would be there 5th. That is possible and might make sense for fogbusting. But it can also be a tech but that would have to be Hunting or AH. He researched 4 turns for it - Hunting would be possible, AH would need really much overflow.

I probably will ask scooter directly if I can't figure it out in the next few turns.

[Bobchillingworth]

Just posting to say that this has been a very interesting read so far- thanks for making an otherwise dreadful day at the office go by a bit more quickly

[Serdoa]

Thanks Bob

I have unfortunately always so many things on my mind that most of the time I am not able to really structure it well in a post. But if at least everyone got some ideas about whats going on and is happy with it, I will not mind anymore.

Still, if anyone has questions about anything, ask. I still need some more posts to get first in post count

[Serdoa]

I tried to verify my assumption that Dazed has only 3 hammers in his new city and ... I think I did something wrong.

My understanding is that the formula for the calculation is the following:

(Sabotage Production * (Their EP + 100)) / (Investigate City * 3)

If I use that for turn 23:

(19 * (20+100)) / (264*3)
2280 / 792 = 2.8

Turn 25 I got

(19 * (24+100)) / (270*3) = 2.9

As his city produces per turn at least one hammer (by the center tile) it should have increased.

Can somebody (T-Hawk?) answer me two, hopefully, simple questions:

1.) Is the formula correct?
2.) Is the number calculated the total number of hammers in the build or is it the produced number of hammers?

edit: I looked into Sulllas PB2 thread but it is not exactly stated what he gets calculated. And Apolyton is down, so I cannot look at the old thread :/

[athlete4life10]

I tried to verify my assumption that Dazed has only 3 hammers in his new city and ... I think I did something wrong.

My understanding is that the formula for the calculation is the following:

(Sabotage Production * (Their EP + 100)) / (Investigate City * 3)

If I use that for turn 23:

(19 * (20+100)) / (264*3)
2280 / 792 = 2.8

Turn 25 I got

(19 * (24+100)) / (270*3) = 2.9

As his city produces per turn at least one hammer (by the center tile) it should have increased.

Can somebody (T-Hawk?) answer me two, hopefully, simple questions:

1.) Is the formula correct?
2.) Is the number calculated the total number of hammers in the build or is it the produced number of hammers?

edit: I looked into Sulllas PB2 thread but it is not exactly stated what he gets calculated. And Apolyton is down, so I cannot look at the old thread :/

Hey what about my thread!

Here's what T-Hawk posted for us:

Right here, I worked out all this in the Apolyton DG. The sabotage cost is 6 * hammers, but also includes all the espionage cost modifers. You have at least the distance factor driving the cost somewhere above the base 6 * hammers, so it's actually less than 187 hammers.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showpost.php?...tcount=200

TheirEP = Their Espionage Point count against us
SabotageCost = Cost shown for the Sabotage Production mission
InvestigateCost = Cost shown for the Investigate City mission

Hammers = (SabotageCost * (TheirEP + 100)) / (3 * InvestigateCost)

[T-hawk]

Wow, somebody inflicted some massive anarchy on Apolyton indeed. I found the formula in a post of mine here on RB, and you have it right. http://www.realmsbeyond.net/forums/showp...tcount=489 -- Nice ninja work there, Athlete.

2.) Is the number calculated the total number of hammers in the build or is it the produced number of hammers?

The number is the total number of hammers in the box. Like if the production box shows "Worker 3/40", it comes to 3.

The simple explanation if the number didn't go up is that the city changed to a different build order last turn, pausing the previous build at 3 hammers. (Not a spoiler, I don't remember reading anything on it from Dazed's thread.) The 2.8 or 2.9 is probably just rounding artifacts from dividing the low numbers.

Or as Athlete says, a turn of anarchy could explain it.

[athlete4life10]

If I use that for turn 23:

(19 * (20+100)) / (264*3)
2280 / 792 = 2.8

Turn 25 I got

(19 * (24+100)) / (270*3) = 2.9

Your math is right if you have your figures correct and in the proper order.

2.) Is the number calculated the total number of hammers in the build or is it the produced number of hammers?

edit: I looked into Sulllas PB2 thread but it is not exactly stated what he gets calculated. And Apolyton is down, so I cannot look at the old thread :/

Answer to #2 is the figure you receive = the hammers invested in the build.

/edit - We've mutually Ninja'd each other...

[athlete4life10]

The simple explanation if the number didn't go up is that the city changed to a different build order last turn, pausing the previous build at 3 hammers. (Not a spoiler, I don't remember reading anything on it from Dazed's thread.) The 2.8 or 2.9 is probably just rounding artifacts from dividing the low numbers.

This could also be that he had a turn of anarchy I would think right?