[SPOILERS] Fire and Blood: Nyles Standish and Zalson watch the world burn

[Zalson]

Let's saddle up some axes. And maybe some horses.

That is probably the best way to proceed.

PM looked fine.

[GermanJoey]

Nice double move. Motherfucker. For reference, this was the situation at the beginning of T46:




I knew he had some fucking bullshit up his sleeve when he took the second half of the turn timer; you can't really double move if you take the first half.

He double moved his warriors to defend his settler. I don't know why you would do the double move and not just settle, unless you did something retarded like move your settler in such a way that it needed two moves to get there (that settler was on the tile south of the cows when I played T45, so he could have moved to the plains tile west of the cows and been able to settle when he did the double move; since he didn't do that I guess he moved to another square in the fog).

I'm gonna ask for a reload, inform the offending party of his transgression via PM (in more polite language than used here), and regardless of how any of that goes, destroy dcodea.

I don't understand the issue that would require a reload. What opportunity would you have if he had not double-moved? His settler is out of range of your warrior and he has 2 warriors to defend against your 1. If you are not in a turnsplit and there is no settling race, he has no obligation to keep to a turnsplit.

[NylesStandish]

I don't understand the issue that would require a reload. What opportunity would you have if he had not double-moved? His settler is out of range of your warrior and he has 2 warriors to defend against your 1. If you are not in a turnsplit and there is no settling race, he has no obligation to keep to a turnsplit.

dcodea was acting as if there was a turnsplit for the past couple of turns. He played last, then took the trouble of logging out and waiting until I had finished a turn before playing himself (this was T45 or so).

If he had just moved the warriors, I would have moved my warrior north to try to intercept the path of the settler. Once my warrior was on the silk hill, he would either:

A. Move his settler and a warrior onto the forest west of the sheep anyway and risk being attacked by my warrior (I'd only have 9% or so odds, but it's still a chance)
B. Wait a turn for the second warrior to get there before moving the settler onto the tile

So he gained an advantage (albeit a small one) by avoiding the small risk of losing the settler to my warrior, or by avoiding the extra turn he would had to have spent to avoid that small risk. It's very minor, but it is an advantage, and the fact that he intentionally dropped behind me in turn order a few turns ago makes it feel deliberate.

[ReallyEvilMuffin]

Nice double move. Motherfucker. For reference, this was the situation at the beginning of T46:




I knew he had some fucking bullshit up his sleeve when he took the second half of the turn timer; you can't really double move if you take the first half.

He double moved his warriors to defend his settler. I don't know why you would do the double move and not just settle, unless you did something retarded like move your settler in such a way that it needed two moves to get there (that settler was on the tile south of the cows when I played T45, so he could have moved to the plains tile west of the cows and been able to settle when he did the double move; since he didn't do that I guess he moved to another square in the fog).

I'm gonna ask for a reload, inform the offending party of his transgression via PM (in more polite language than used here), and regardless of how any of that goes, destroy dcodea.

I'm not sure you need a reload here. I think you wouldn't have been able to do anything about what he has done. He moved his warriors in such a way that you could not have hit him, and you couldn't get to that square before him and block him from it, neither are you planning to settle that area. What would you have done had you played inbetween him?

[NylesStandish]

2240BC: Dcodea plays first, I play second.

2200BC: Dcodea logs in, then logs out, then plays about an hour after I do, ends turn then logs out.

2160BC: Reload turn, I popped in to take a look around and then to pause the game. After the reload, dcodea plays an hour after me

2120BC: Plays before me

Maybe he was keeping a turn split with somebody else and it's just a huge coincidence, but it looks like he was intentionally playing after me and switched it up on the last turn.

[NylesStandish]

I'm not sure you need a reload here. I think you wouldn't have been able to do anything about what he has done. He moved his warriors in such a way that you could not have hit him, and you couldn't get to that square before him and block him from it, neither are you planning to settle that area. What would you have done had you played inbetween him?

I answered that in my reply to GermanJoey. Basically he avoided either delaying the settlement a turn or putting the settler at (small) risk of being hit.

It's exceedingly minor I'm starting to agree with you guys and thinking I should just ignore it and play on for convenience's sake, but it does make a small difference.

[NylesStandish]

So I sent this PM to dcodea after he responded:

I guess I'm not sure what you mean? I lost the race to a hill where I had my warrior standing - you founded two tiles away, so I redirected my settler north. I'll try to always move after you but I wasn't aware I was in another race north as well. But I won't object to any reload, whatever is decided is fine by me.

Sorry if I wasn't perfectly clear. I was going to move my warrior on the forest hill north if your warriors moved north T46 and he would have been able to threaten the tile your settler is on now if you hadn't double moved, which would either mean you would have to move the warrior and settler there and risk getting hit before you founded the city or wait a turn for your other warrior to get there to be extra safe.



Basically, this will be the situation at the beginning of T48, but if you had moved everything the same way but not double moved, I would be going first and my warrior would have a chance to attack before you played your turn. You'd either have to risk the possibility of me attacking or wait a turn for your second warrior, which would mean founding the city a turn later. In the big scheme of things it wouldn't mean much but I think moving twice there gave you a small advantage.

You were intentionally playing after me on T45 and T46, so from my perspective it looked like you intentionally double moved for the advantage I described in the last paragraphs. If, as it now seems, you didn't have the advantage I described in mind when you made the move, you didn't really do anything wrong by double moving.

BTW, you didn't have to play after me on those turns, and definitely don't have to do it always. Since you didn't think there was a settler race, the only reason you would have to do so would have been if you wanted to go to war with me or thought I was going to war with you. If you thought I was going to war with you, then you should have kept playing before me, since I logged out after ending T43 to play T44 after you and the attacker is supposed to get to choose which half of the turn timer he gets. I wasn't attacking, I was doing that because I ended T43 after you and I knew there was a settling race for the area where your warrior was and I didn't want to double move my settler and be a jerk.

GermanJoey and REM looked at the situation in my thread and didn't think it called for a reload, in fact neither of them immediately saw what I was talking about either, so it's understandable that you wouldn't see it either. I shouldn't have asked for a reload; it doesn't really make enough of a difference to make everyone who played after you replay their turns.

Sorry for making a big deal out of this.

I don't think I revealed too much; he already knows all of the tiles and units in that little area and should have been considering the possibility that an opponent might want to snipe a settler.

I wasn't going to go into the whole explanation of turn etiquette, but I was horrified after he said "I'll try to always move after you" so I felt I had to say something. I hope I didn't mislead or confuse him.

I feel kind of bad about getting so mad at a new player over something so minor and I hope I haven't sent the message that RB is a place where we get pissy and pedantic over every little thing.

Still going to take him down, though.

[GermanJoey]

I don't think this warrants a reload, sorry Nyles. If you had other military units in the area it might have been a different story, but if we reload all I can see happening is the turn playing out exactly as before.

[ReallyEvilMuffin]

So I sent this PM to dcodea after he responded:

I guess I'm not sure what you mean? I lost the race to a hill where I had my warrior standing - you founded two tiles away, so I redirected my settler north. I'll try to always move after you but I wasn't aware I was in another race north as well. But I won't object to any reload, whatever is decided is fine by me.

Sorry if I wasn't perfectly clear. I was going to move my warrior on the forest hill north if your warriors moved north T46 and he would have been able to threaten the tile your settler is on now if you hadn't double moved, which would either mean you would have to move the warrior and settler there and risk getting hit before you founded the city or wait a turn for your other warrior to get there to be extra safe.



Basically, this will be the situation at the beginning of T48, but if you had moved everything the same way but not double moved, I would be going first and my warrior would have a chance to attack before you played your turn. You'd either have to risk the possibility of me attacking or wait a turn for your second warrior, which would mean founding the city a turn later. In the big scheme of things it wouldn't mean much but I think moving twice there gave you a small advantage.

You were intentionally playing after me on T45 and T46, so from my perspective it looked like you intentionally double moved for the advantage I described in the last paragraphs. If, as it now seems, you didn't have the advantage I described in mind when you made the move, you didn't really do anything wrong by double moving.

BTW, you didn't have to play after me on those turns, and definitely don't have to do it always. Since you didn't think there was a settler race, the only reason you would have to do so would have been if you wanted to go to war with me or thought I was going to war with you. If you thought I was going to war with you, then you should have kept playing before me, since I logged out after ending T43 to play T44 after you and the attacker is supposed to get to choose which half of the turn timer he gets. I wasn't attacking, I was doing that because I ended T43 after you and I knew there was a settling race for the area where your warrior was and I didn't want to double move my settler and be a jerk.

GermanJoey and REM looked at the situation in my thread and didn't think it called for a reload, in fact neither of them immediately saw what I was talking about either, so it's understandable that you wouldn't see it either. I shouldn't have asked for a reload; it doesn't really make enough of a difference to make everyone who played after you replay their turns.

Sorry for making a big deal out of this.

I don't think I revealed too much; he already knows all of the tiles and units in that little area and should have been considering the possibility that an opponent might want to snipe a settler.

I wasn't going to go into the whole explanation of turn etiquette, but I was horrified after he said "I'll try to always move after you" so I felt I had to say something. I hope I didn't mislead or confuse him.

I feel kind of bad about getting so mad at a new player over something so minor and I hope I haven't sent the message that RB is a place where we get pissy and pedantic over every little thing.

Still going to take him down, though.

In a duel, a 10% chance to take a settler could be a good shout. In a FFA, you probably create a pissed off neighbour who will devote their weakened position to hurting you. Maybe that's why GJ and I could not see what you were thinking of doing instantly. You've got a tight border there now though which I'm sure one of you will be able to exploit.

[Zalson]

I was a little under the weather on the weekend but I think you did find to patch things up. You probably could have said I'm deleting all our units and declaring war on pindicator and dcodea both and I would have said "Sounds great." So you're welcome for my excellent contribution there.