RBPB4 Lurker Thread

[Krill]

Not if all of the coast, and at least one bank of every river tile, is in your culture.

[pling]

Yes.

WarlordDR would be down a settler now if Plako had played on with WarlordDR missing turns.

If you don't play terribly well & lose a war, then you lose & you and your opponent both deserve the result. If you fail to play turns when that failure hands significant advantage to your opponent in a war, then they didn't earn their victory* and you don't (appear to) care very much about the game.

*and even if the player might be quite pleased, the rest of the competition wouldn't be terribly happy to know the player had got a superior position due to someone who couldn't be bothered.

I think for me the only difference between someone "new" and a veteran player doing this, is that a vet has already shown themselves to care about the integrity of the games they play in and so I'd first assume they'd had some disaster in their offline life. But the end result would be the same if a vet missed turns like that and became un-contactable - they should be replaced, it just might be left paused a bit longer while the admin tried to contact them, because of that prior reputation.

[Gold Ergo Sum]

If the rule is going to work like Cyneheard suggests, and I have no problems with that at all, then I am going to issue a rules clarification in the Tech thread.

Cyneheard, do you want to compose the rules modification to make sure it works correctly, since you initially suggested the interpretation?

I was thinking something along these lines:

When a player at war occupies the second half of a turn-timer, he may declare war between hours 12-18 of the turn timer. The Civ who is declared on then occupies the first half of the turn-timer the following turn. If the Civ who is declared upon has yet to move during the turn of declaration, that Civ can still move their units during the second half of the turn-timer for that one turn only.

[Twinkletoes89]

One thing that may be worth considering in that scenario is something like this:

WK is free to declare war on another nation in the first 12 hours of the timer, provided the following conditions:

- On the turn before, he posts screenshots of all his units he has (and plans to create) to fight said war. These units can be moved.

- He must also designate units he has (& plans to create) that will act offensively or defensively in the current war. These cannot be moved.

- Any units which break this rule must either be deleted (serious breach) / unable to move for a certain amount of turns (medium breach) / returned to previous position by reload & player told not to move them in same way (unintended breach/1st offence)

Obviously may need a bit of tweaking, but with the insistence on spoiler threads of PB games it could be (relatively) simply incorporated.

[Cyneheard]

If the rule is going to work like Cyneheard suggests, and I have no problems with that at all, then I am going to issue a rules clarification in the Tech thread.

Cyneheard, do you want to compose the rules modification to make sure it works correctly, since you initially suggested the interpretation?

I was thinking something along these lines:

When a player at war occupies the second half of a turn-timer, he may declare war between hours 12-18 of the turn timer. The Civ who is declared on then occupies the first half of the turn-timer the following turn. If the Civ who is declared upon has yet to move during the turn of declaration, that Civ can still move their units during the second half of the turn-timer for that one turn only.

I think "6-12 hours remaining on the timer" is clearer than "hours 12-18 on the timer", but other than that it's sufficient.

TT, I think that's just too complicated. It may work, but simpler is better. We're basically interpreting WK's turn as starting when there's 12h left on the timer, instead of 24h, for the duration of the war.

[Twinkletoes89]

But isn't the whole problem for this scenario that if WK's target moves within the first 12 hours of the timer, he cannot declare and/or is at a disadvantage?

[Cyneheard]

Not if WK can declare in the 2nd half of the turn: he can declare and strike right then and there. On further reflection, I actually think WK should be able to declare at any time during his 2nd half of the turn, because his opponent may not move in the 1st half of the turn.

Here's why:
1) He can therefore always move after his opponent during his turn, and then the opponent moves before him during the next turn. So, no double-move.
2) If WK cannot declare during the last 6 hours of the turn, then it is possible that he could get double-moved: the opponent moves during the last few hours of the turn, and WK wouldn't be able to do anything for another 12 hours, in which time that scout could have moved on again; this is more true for, say, scouts, than an invading army, but it is possible that an invading army could take advantage of how WK can declare war.

IMO, preventing double moves is more important than guaranteeing that the opponent gets 18 hours to respond instead of 12.

Whatever we decide, we do need to figure out how to tell the other players about this rule decision without letting them know the specific situation. We do know who all knows of the war, since at a minimum it's Plako and Gaspar, and probably some others who Plako's told, at least.

[Krill]

Hmm, I wonder what the impact of allowing one player to declare at any point in the game has on everyone else being forced to declare in the first 6 turns?

[Cyneheard]

Also, would someone who wishes to declare war on Plako be bound by the same rules as WK wishing to declare on a 3rd party?

[Gold Ergo Sum]

Also, would someone who wishes to declare war on Plako be bound by the same rules as WK wishing to declare on a 3rd party?

And that decision would be effected right now by whether they even know there is a war.