[PB37 SPOILER] Coeurva, Bacchus -- Cyrus of Carthage

[Bacchus]

Why can't he refrain from double-moving on any turn where he's moving a settler or attack force, instead of maintaining a split always and forever as long as you're neighbors?

The way I integrated RB's experience is that once a turn split is established, sides stick to it, until either it's obviously irrelevant, or until one side explicitly checks in and says "I'm going to play out of turn split, is that ok?". And yeah, neighbours with a difficult border can stay in a turn split for dozens of turns without any war or other tangible issue actually arising. I really thought (actually, I still think) that observing a turn split on a basis of a reasonable risk of turn order mattering is the norm, not waiting for a specific, definitely ocurring event that will certainly make it matter. This is just for general discussion now, for further RB interaction, not regarding our specific issue which is resolved.

[Coeurva]

Here's Savant's replies, each received after I had sent our respective letter:

Okay, understood -- I'll return to the original split.

Well, I agree that the situation is unclear.
I didn't want to force a reload, which is why I agreed.
Do you mind if we ask Mardoc to arbitrate? I'm not 100% sure of the double-move rules since I haven't played a PB game before.

So yeah, I shouldn't have said "reload". That's why I've made a point of highlighting that I don't want to force him into anything, and that Mardoc said a reload wasn't warranted here.

Okay, Krill just rolled the turn sooner than I thought, and I'm still not sure how we should resolve this.

Would you object to me just logging into take a look around? I won't actually touch any units until we have this resolved.

If I don't hear from you within a few hours, I'll take that as a no.

Sounds like he wants to take a look at what we whipped / moved inside Whitehall (a galley and a chariot that can strike at his city/worker).

I think we should allow his request, if we can trust him not to move any units (I would -- it's not like with CML, who double-moved dtay and us once each before I insisted on no log-ins) -- so that he sees our point about a turn-split being justified.

Of course, he's also looking for knowledge to base his decision on. Obviously, he won't claim second half after seeing the situation, if he can avoid it at all.

If Savant goes first on T79, he can save his worker, but not if he goes second as he did from T70-T77 and "should have" (in our opinion) on T78. That's why I think it's a big deal, but I can also understand that Savant thought the turn-split was over, because, as noted, I've lost track of the situation myself.

[Bacchus]

Well, here we are, Mardoc, we now have an object-level situation.

Savant should log in, I trust him too.

[Mardoc]

not regarding our specific issue which is resolved.

Oh, is it?  I would certainly prefer not to get involved if you've come to a mutually agreeable solution. I'm still trying to catch up, haven't heard his position yet.

I can agree that it's generally a good idea to play in such a way that your neighbors aren't worried even though it might not be strictly required.

[Coeurva]

Hi Savant,

Bacchus and I both agree to let you take a look in-game if you don't move any units; we trust you.

Cheers,
Coeur

[Mardoc]

To see if I understand it right: no double moves (settlers or invasions) have occurred so far. You're annoyed with Dark Savant for switching halves without notice, and would prefer the first half. If Dark Savant was already moving reinforcements to his city, then this might prevent it from falling; if he wasn't then there's no difference. Yuris is on the first half compared to you, you're currently on second half compared to both Dark Savant and Yuris, and you'd be ok with maintaining that split going forward? Alternately, you could switch back, but that would delay your invasion by a turn to make the invasion not happen on the double-move turn?

[Coeurva]

Savant did not double-move us with units.

If Dark Savant was already moving reinforcements to his city, then this might prevent it from falling; if he wasn't then there's no difference.

The difference is that we can't snipe the worker on T79, which is on the corn 6 of his city -- assuming he'd also move it there if he played T78 second.

We can load the chariot inside Whitehall onto the galley on this turn (T79), move the galley 98, and jump the chariot onto his undefended worker. But only if he plays second. If he plays first, he spots the galley inside Whitehall and will probably run his worker to safety. (Hypothetically. Whether we actually snipe his worker at all is another matter. But the threat matters as well. It's actually the only point where our borders touch at all, so it's obviously a zone of mutual caution. I mean, our cities are three tiles apart.)

Apart from that, I think you're right. If Dark Savant actually has no reinforcements in the vicinity, then all that changes is his warrior gains 5% fortify. Not worth the argument.

you're currently on second half compared to both Dark Savant and Yuris, and you'd be ok with maintaining that split going forward?

Yes. I'm also fine with changing back to first half vs. Savant, as you've noted.

Alternately, you could switch back, but that would delay your invasion by a turn to make the invasion not happen on the double-move turn?

Probably. Unless your opinion is that Savant shouldn't have ended the turn split in the first place, precisely to allow us this opportunity now and not 1t later, which is what might have allowed him to found this city without risking a raze.

This is why I think him playing two turns directly after one another might have given him an advantage -- because it made our galley attack illegal by the double-move rules, even if he had not moved any units at all. Possibly, that's what he's considering now as well.

I think he should have taken care -- if he was omniscient. I think, however, that Savant acted in good faith and genuinely didn't think about the possibility of a galley strike (I've been surprised myself that we got the opportunity) or a settler race, which is why I'm fine with playing second from here.

[Bacchus]

Cross-posted with Coeurva.

Not quite, there is a difference RIGHT NOW of who goes first, because if it's us, we can kill a worker. If it's not us, that worker should not have been able to work a farm for a turn. Basically there are a whole bunch of things on the theatre where tempo matters. One possible one is our upcoming settle of the island. We were in a turn split, we are still in a turn split, we need to decide whether Savant can just arbitrarily say "you know what guys, I'm gonna unilaterally swap halves now, and gain a tempo".

[Mardoc]

We can load the chariot inside Whitehall onto the galley on this turn (T79), move the galley 98, and jump the chariot onto his undefended worker. But only if he plays second.

Pretty sure this isn't true. Loading the chariot will use up all its movement points, which means it can't also attack this turn. You couldn't load it last turn, because the galley didn't exist then.

Because of that, I don't think you're losing anything to take the second half starting now, since you can't attack immediately. Any further moves will be alternating order. Second half lines up with your other turn splits, so it's what I'm going to recommend for the sake of not slowing the pace of this game any further. Also, conventional wisdom says second half is generally preferred during war, because you can adjust your builds based on the latest information, so I think you'll appreciate it in the long run.

Edit: Am I missing anything else that would make this approach a problem for you?

[Coeurva]

You're right. I was thinking that there was a difference between loading units onto a boat and moving them onto the boat. But there isn't. Only when unloading there is a distinction (units disembarking from a galley inside a city can move on the same turn).

Damn.

EDIT: My final word on this matter is that Savant is well within his right to choose any turn split he wants here, that we still want to request one for the immediate future, due to the border situation, and that I was wrong about pretty much everything else. In particular, he did absolutely nothing I have a problem with.