[SPOILERS] PBEM17 Lurker thread

[SevenSpirits]

What I'm most perplexed about is why many folks (or at least the ones that have posted) seem to feel that the problem is largely about the reloading. From my perspective, gifting a city for the sole purpose of preventing an opponent's victory is unambiguously cheating. The reloading is just a small dollop of foul icing on top. It doesn't matter whether there was a reload or not, gifting that city was cheating either way IMHO.

It seems bizarre that there are so many rules and expectations about not gifting cities for other reasons, e.g. to prevent an enemy from taking a city that they were about to capture/raze, or to allow an ally to gain use of the MoM for a Golden Age. And yet when it comes to gifting a city to directly determine the outcome of the game, no one seems particularly up in arms? Very strange.

I think it's because everyone would rather live in a world where the AP victory doesn't work, even though they're too lazy to ban it.

[MJW (ya that one)]

I'll take a guess on what happened. Darrelljs just reloaded with no justifaction to it. He ended his turn by sending the first save. The reload is clearlly invaild. So ether Dave wins or this game was a "no contest". I think Novice + Spaceman should take most of the blame for requsting the second save. Darrelljs's orginal plan was to just not give the winning save to dave. This is not throwing over the chess board. It is more like leaving the chess board and allowing your clock to expire which has happened: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1132699

The AP is so cheap and nonsenseical that is deseves to be mocked somewhat but this is not the way to do it (reload cheating). Darrelljs first plan would be a good way to do it. I have to point out though if Darrelljs was really angry he would have not sent any save in the first place for a while. Novice+Spaceman would have then contacted him with the trick. Also the AP win is so cheap that city gifting has to be allowed if the AP win is allowed.

I really do not have any stance on anyone in this game. All I saw was Gaspar's post trashing this game and the posts about the re-loading.

[MJW (ya that one)]

Well it looks like Darrelljs just forgot to gift the city if you read the newest uberant. So this is just like taking back a move whitch is unacceptable. Because Novice+spaceman did not get any spoiler information that would change their actions the obvious thing to do would be to reload to the beginning of their turn if the game where to go on from here.

There was a lot of BS in this game but back-stabbing and everything else does not invalidate it. So ether dave wins by forfeit or the game goes on. I hope the game goes on for over a turn so I get to see how dave/shootthemoon reacts when their empire they spent months building is brutally, unstoppable burned to the ground.

[SevenSpirits]

Well it looks like Darrelljs just forgot to gift the city if you read the newest uberant. So this is just like taking back a move whitch is unacceptable. Because Novice+spaceman did not get any spoiler information that would change their actions the obvious thing to do would be to reload to the beginning of their turn if the game where to go on from here.

There was a lot of BS in this game but back-stabbing and everything else does not invalidate it. So ether dave wins by forfeit or the game goes on. I hope the game goes on for over a turn so I get to see how dave/shootthemoon reacts when their empire they spent months building is brutally, unstoppable burned to the ground.

He didn't forget. It didn't occur to him at all.

[MJW (ya that one)]

In chatting with Darrell (also a chat I posted), I learnt that he had a save from just before ending turn. That was crucial since he had done so much warring during the turn. Darrell posted his comments about the oversight that led him to send the save on the first time without gifting a city (which is as cheesy as an AP victory in a way, but there you go). He thought it was a joke. I hinted in a roundabout way (Darrell got it) that he might resend the EOT save but having gifted Russia. Which he did. He then left it to us to decide what to do.

[SevenSpirits]

Yeah, oversight. As in, it didn't occur to him to gift the city.

novice: so if Shoot votes for Dave in this turn's AP election, the game's over, right?
Darrell: how man cities iwth the AP religion do you have?
novice: 5 or 6
Darrell: maybe I should have gifted you my one

[fluffyflyingpig]

I am unsure how much more of a farce this game could be at this point, but I can't wait to find out! Too bad the fireworks are going to have to end soon.

[MJW (ya that one)]

Yeah, oversight. As in, it didn't occur to him to gift the city.

I guess spaceman does not understand what has happend. This is even worse. This does not change anything else.

I think there would be an agruement if it where not for the ending of PB1. Due to that you just have to give Dave the win IF the game were not to go on from here.

[Lord Parkin]

Is the AP victory cheap when exploited to its maximum potential? Hell yes. Is it cheap when attempted at this very late stage of a game? Nowhere near as much, IMHO.

I'm not a fan of the AP victory by any means, but I think at this late point in the game it's pretty much equivalent to a UN victory - except for the mechanics. Unless an AP victory is blatantly disallowed in a game, it's always one of those things you have to keep a wary eye out for. Apparently everyone in this game managed to forget about it though - not only Dave, but Nospace and Darrell as well.

Dave may have effectively arrived at his sudden chance at victory by blind luck, but Nospace and Darrell can't blame anyone but themselves for not noticing the danger well in advance and taking legal countermeasures. The AP victory may be unpopular and disliked by many, but unless you make a rule against it in advance then you have to be prepared for the possibility and plan with that in mind.

What irks me a little is that there seems to be a bit of a double standard surrounding city gifting rules. Think for a minute - if one player gifted a city to another solely to enable the AP victory, would that be considered fair? I think not. How about gifting a city solely to disable the AP victory? Some people seem to shrug over that. But it's the exact same concept - both are as bad as each other, and neither should be allowed.

[Twinkletoes89]

I think the likely reason about the lack of outcry over gifting is that they did at least pay a large sum of gold for it, it wasn't just given away.