--Dogpilers click here-- (PB7 Player Communication Thread)

[sunrise089]

Why did you even settle that city?

Better than a captured worker?

[SevenSpirits]

If he didn't settle the city he'd just be out of the game now, and there would be no more settler anyway. Not to mention if the settler were threatened he could delete it.

[Lord Parkin]

Just in case this was serious offer . Gifting or trading of units is not allowed.

It's impossible to gift or trade in an always war game. Capturing Workers is something that happens naturally though, so I'm not sure it should be disallowed. I don't think we need to worry anyway; I'm sure TT can recognise that there is no scenario in which giving away a Worker for vague half-promises benefits him.

If we imagine a more serious scenario, e.g. where someone offers to turn an army around that would otherwise obviously destroy a civ in return for capturing some Workers, should this be allowed? One could argue that since the goal of this game is supposed to be survival at any cost, such a sacrifice could be justified. If the invading party then takes the Workers and continues to eliminate the civ anyway, that's arguably even more in the spirit of the game. Thoughts?

[Azza]

Why did you even settle that city?

In the hope that you'd get rotten luck from the RNG, I'd be able to launch some sort of counter attack.

[Lewwyn]

Mist. My thread please.

[nabaxo]

What if the eliminated civ wanted to join with their conqueror, nyaa~~?

[antisocialmunky]

It's impossible to gift or trade in an always war game. Capturing Workers is something that happens naturally though, so I'm not sure it should be disallowed. I don't think we need to worry anyway; I'm sure TT can recognise that there is no scenario in which giving away a Worker for vague half-promises benefits him.

If we imagine a more serious scenario, e.g. where someone offers to turn an army around that would otherwise obviously destroy a civ in return for capturing some Workers, should this be allowed? One could argue that since the goal of this game is supposed to be survival at any cost, such a sacrifice could be justified. If the invading party then takes the Workers and continues to eliminate the civ anyway, that's arguably even more in the spirit of the game. Thoughts?

Meh, it was worth a shot and since I haven't heard from him anyway...

[pindicator]

It's impossible to gift or trade in an always war game. Capturing Workers is something that happens naturally though, so I'm not sure it should be disallowed. I don't think we need to worry anyway; I'm sure TT can recognise that there is no scenario in which giving away a Worker for vague half-promises benefits him.

If we imagine a more serious scenario, e.g. where someone offers to turn an army around that would otherwise obviously destroy a civ in return for capturing some Workers, should this be allowed? One could argue that since the goal of this game is supposed to be survival at any cost, such a sacrifice could be justified. If the invading party then takes the Workers and continues to eliminate the civ anyway, that's arguably even more in the spirit of the game. Thoughts?

I rather like this arrangment -- i would think it should add more fun to the game. But i realize my ideas about diplomacy are a bit more 'flexible' than others' so I'll leave this out if Mist says it should be.

[yuris125]

Hey Meiz, we tried to be nice, never even approached your border, why do you want to take out our poor Warrior??

[antisocialmunky]

Elkat, TT just wasted another warrior on me:


Can you play chase the worker?