|
As a French person I feel like it's my duty to explain strikes to you. - AdrienIer |
|
RBPB4 Lurker Thread
|
|
Culture victories are a safety valve the way I see it. If you are behind on expansion and tech, you really only need nine cities and 3-4 religions, and three cottageable locations.
Completed: SG2-Wonders or Else!; SG3-Monarch Can't Hold Me; WW3-Surviving Wolf; PBEM3-Replacement for Timmy of Khmer; PBEM11-Screwed Up Huayna Capac of Zulu; PBEM19-GES, Roland & Friends (Mansa of Egypt); SG4-Immortality Scares Me
plako seems to be doing a good job coordinating this alliance. It's probably too late though.
Civilization IV: 21 (Bismarck of Mali), 29 (Mao Zedong of Babylon), 38 (Isabella of China), 45 (Victoria of Sumeria), PB12 (Darius of Sumeria), 56 (Hammurabi of Sumeria), PB16 (Bismarck of Mali), 78 (Augustus of Byzantium), PB56 (Willem of China)
Hearthstone: ArenaDrafts Profile No longer playing Hearthstone. 
Ethical game play question.
IF, as seems to be the case, the Parkin Violation can see no way to win except by attacking now and not waiting for the expiration of existing NAPs - would it be acceptable to break NAPs? Does winning the game trump keeping to agreements? I would be interested in what the experts think. Ta. Gazzahk Wrote:Ethical game play question. I wouldn't do it. I would feel like I lost even if I won. The end. Others may reach a different conclusion.
Completed: SG2-Wonders or Else!; SG3-Monarch Can't Hold Me; WW3-Surviving Wolf; PBEM3-Replacement for Timmy of Khmer; PBEM11-Screwed Up Huayna Capac of Zulu; PBEM19-GES, Roland & Friends (Mansa of Egypt); SG4-Immortality Scares Me
I am not an expert, but honestly, I would say no. When you agree to a NAP, you make an agreement. If your opponent diplomatically out-meanevours you, then he has simply defeated you in the field of diplomacy.
If you ask me, breaking a NAP when it is your only chance to win, especially in a coalition like this, is basically saying "I will keep my agreements, but only when they suit me. If you start to actually win, I feel no need to honor them". I can understand circumstances change, but really, NAPs are entirely based on trust. If you only keep them until you feel they hinder you, you can't be trusted to keep them in the first place. Unless you, say, only do it once out of 20 games, but I still think it'd be silly.
It comes down to whether you want to win at any cost or whether you want to win within a set of constraints, whether that is play-style, obeying generally accepted rules (e.g. don't break NAPs), etc.
See PBEM17 for more details.
And on the sixth day, god created Manchester.
[SIZE="1"]Played: PBEM13 (China), PBEM17 (India) Helping out: PBEM23 (Egypt) Dedlurked: PBEM15 (Ottomans) Globally lurking: more or less everything else[/SIZE] |
.