Pitboss 18 Lurker Thread of Infinite Wisdom

[spacetyrantxenu]

No, I'm not. I said secure the borders FIRST. Then, IF enough power go attack. I didn't say attack east no matter what because obviously that would mean leaving the south exposed to BGN.

Besides, if I'm playing as Joey, what do I care about BGN attacking TBS? Supposedly there's no obligation for me to interfere. Secure the borders, my OWN borders, not somebody else's. And if enough units remain to mount an offensive, go do that. How exactly is that showing bias toward BGN or trying to have it both ways?

[spacetyrantxenu]

Hell I even threatened to gift a GA to TBS to make sure no one attacked me in the last few turns of the game. TBS paid for that first GA, what I'd have done was even worse. Doesn't make it an invalid tactic though and that would have caused outrage.

You can say what you want but you know that would have been as bad sportsmanship as anything else done in this game, or worse. And do you honestly think anyone understood that message? My assumption is that you liked playing god, but I had the luxury to read your thread. Other players didn't have that luxury, they didn't know what you were doing. It just looked really suspicious. In my opinion that would have 100% been an invalid tactic and I would have been outraged. It would have been even less defensible than what Joey did.

[Krill]

Because the positioning of a huge fucking fleet without enough units to wipe out multiple border cities requires a fucking huge amount of units to defend properly. Especially with the air force requirements.

What you're essentially demanding is that everyone sits on stacks to defend with, right? That they try to improve their position in game, that they try to win and if they can't improve score position.

Then why are you saying I did questionable things like fighting BGN, in a war he threatened, when he stopped me doing just that? You are judging players by two different standards and it's pissing me off. Players that can win can do what the fuck they want even if it hurts them, but everyone else has to keep their hands to themselves. That's fucking bullshit.

That said, yeah gifting the frigate was a troll move.

[Krill]

Hell I even threatened to gift a GA to TBS to make sure no one attacked me in the last few turns of the game. TBS paid for that first GA, what I'd have done was even worse. Doesn't make it an invalid tactic though and that would have caused outrage.

You can say what you want but you know that would have been as bad sportsmanship as anything else done in this game, or worse. And do you honestly think anyone understood that message? My assumption is that you liked playing god, but I had the luxury to read your thread. Other players didn't have that luxury, they didn't know what you were doing. It just looked really suspicious. In my opinion that would have 100% been an invalid tactic and I would have been outraged. It would have been even less defensible than what Joey did.

By that point BGN could wipe me out in about 3-5 turns, all but 7 of my cities were coastal, I didn't have enough boats to wipe out one of his naval stacks never mind the two that I could already see. Ending the game sooner so I didn't lose the cities and kept a high score position was in the best interests of my civ. Which is doing exactly what you just implied, playing to secure my position. Your position is hypocritical.

[spacetyrantxenu]

I don't see how you defending HAK's cities, or whoever else's against BGN was really necessary for your own defense, but that's fine, we can disagree. I don't understand gifting units to dtay though. What exactly had OH done to you to justify your taking action against him? I understand dtay's revenge motive. What was yours? I ask that since I was still alive at the time during the war against dtay and haven't since gone back to read that part of your or OH's thread, I could have missed some motivation. I assume you weren't just trying to screw with OH to help TBS win, but I also don't see the reason to interfere there.

And yes, that's basically what I would have done, build lots of units and pack my cities with them at the end. That's not really much different from how I normally play. It isn't a great economic strategy but I've admitted before to playing like the Sitting Bull AI. This isn't a stretch for me.

[spacetyrantxenu]

Ending the game sooner so I didn't lose the cities and kept a high score position was in the best interests of my civ. Which is doing exactly what you just implied, playing to secure my position. Your position is hypocritical.

What do you mean by ending the game sooner? If you aren't competing to win you have no business being involved in ending the game sooner, or later. That's picking sides and is exactly what I'm arguing against.

[Krill]

2 parts of gifting units to dtay. Understand the scale: I think I gifted less than a dozen paratroopers and inf.

1) I screwed dtay over by a stupid war dec that didn't help me. I thought it was the only chance to still be relevant, turns out that moment never existed and I'd never really had a chance to win the game. Still feel guilty for fucking up dtays game because if I'd war decced and immediately offered peace he may have given me a chance to attack Ruff earlier. I was trying to communicate that I didn't want to attack/backstab him.

2) I think 4 of the units I gifted in a city that had my airship in and was open to razing, and I didn't want to move the aiship due to scout coverage. That's actually why I moved a bunch of units over to protect the GA in TBS lands shortly afterwards, but none of the units were gifted; if anything happened like unit teleport or a sneak attack the GA was protected, but not TBS.

[Krill]

Ending the game sooner so I didn't lose the cities and kept a high score position was in the best interests of my civ. Which is doing exactly what you just implied, playing to secure my position. Your position is hypocritical.

What do you mean by ending the game sooner? If you aren't competing to win you have no business being involved in ending the game sooner, or later. That's picking sides and is exactly what I'm arguing against.

It's not picking sides if BGN decides to attack me. I'm not picking the side, BGN is forcing me to align with someone else. I may have the nick of Krill, but I'm not food goddamnit. It's hypocritical to expect players to aim to consolidate but to lay down and die if a game leader wants them dead.

[spacetyrantxenu]

That's not what I was talking about. Obviously you're going to fight BGN. I didn't see what you mean about ending the game earlier, though. I wasn't saying you should let bgn take your cities, clearly you shouldn't. But what's that to do with the timing of the game ending?

[GermanJoey]

No, I'm not. I said secure the borders FIRST. Then, IF enough power go attack. I didn't say attack east no matter what because obviously that would mean leaving the south exposed to BGN.

Besides, if I'm playing as Joey, what do I care about BGN attacking TBS? Supposedly there's no obligation for me to interfere. Secure the borders, my OWN borders, not somebody else's. And if enough units remain to mount an offensive, go do that. How exactly is that showing bias toward BGN or trying to have it both ways?

Do you have any idea just how many fucking units your brother had sitting outside my borders? "secure the borders then attack"... give me a break! I was never secure, not at least until he moved out to attack TBS. Keep in mind he had already invaded me once and that during the GA his production was 4x mine.

I agree with Krill. You're holding a double standard because you don't like me and because you don't have a sense of scale. The idea that missing half of one's turns, or playing them in just a few minutes and then slamming end turn, is more commendable (and that you'd thank people for this and give them kudos) than actually playing the fucking game is beyond ridiculous. Perhaps we should stop playing big FFA pitbosses and just play 1v1 PBEMs just to keep things fair? Either that or you should code up a Moral Multiplayer AI that players can set themselves to when others decide that they're no longer relevant to the game.

Your point about thinking I'd blow up about saying I shouldn't trade the artist is also bullshit considering that when Q mentioned that I let my loan repayment lapse by a single turn I canceled it with no objection... and that was on the PREVIOUS TURN FROM THE ARTIST TRADE. More smoke.