Posts: 3,043
Threads: 49
Joined: Mar 2004
It does seem to be sliding down the slippery slope toward turning the game into a farce, IMHO.
Posts: 2,698
Threads: 14
Joined: Apr 2011
*shrug* That's really on the cheap side, but then again no one seemed to care when Elkad pulled his 'I'm losing the war, so I'll declare on another two players' cheese.
Posts: 5,455
Threads: 18
Joined: Jul 2011
(July 27th, 2015, 15:43)Krill Wrote: I'm sorry but that's bullshit.
Yup.
(July 27th, 2015, 22:35)ipecac Wrote: *shrug* That's really on the cheap side, but then again no one seemed to care when Elkad pulled his 'I'm losing the war, so I'll declare on another two players' cheese.
Did Elkad then evacuate his cities and allow his opponents to waltz in free? This kind of stuff has no place in these games.
Posts: 2,698
Threads: 14
Joined: Apr 2011
(July 28th, 2015, 09:06)Boldly Going Nowhere Wrote: Did Elkad then evacuate his cities and allow his opponents to waltz in free? This kind of stuff has no place in these games.
As far as I can tell from Comm's thread, the plan was to 'since I'm losing in a war with Tasunke I'll declare on my two neighbours and leave token defense in cities close to them'. IMO it's one thing to prioritise defending against one opponent when being dogpiled, and it's another to actively invite dogpiling like this.
Posts: 488
Threads: 7
Joined: Jan 2013
(July 27th, 2015, 16:23)Zed-F Wrote: It does seem to be sliding down the slippery slope toward turning the game into a farce, IMHO.
"seem to be"
Posts: 7,752
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
I'm not sure there was anything ill-intended from Elkad, I imagine the thought process went something like:
I'm losing the war vs. Tasunke. In order to have a chance of defending myself against him I have to pull units from my borders with Commodore & Donovan. If I do that, they will overrun me from the sides with the stacks I can see massing nearby. If I don't do that, Tasunke comes up the middle and splits my forces and I get eaten anyway. I'm not going to survive this. Who don't I like most / who has caused me most harm? Tasunke.
The declarations against Commodore and Donovan maybe got them involved a couple of turns before they would otherwise have done, which in turn made sure Tasunke benefited less from the conquest. As for emptying out cities, from Donovan's thread there were still defenders there, but not numerous or of the best quality - those had been diverted South and East. A tactical decision, and IMO a valid one.
Of course all of the above is third-hand supposition based on snippets of accounts from the neighbours, but I guess Elkad will be in soon enough to speak for himself...
Posts: 23,585
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
War decs mean nothing and are irrelevant to pretty much everything. Moving units is the important bit, but yeah, that's why Tasunke shouldn't have forced further war with Elkad, it's not Elkads fault in that reaction to defend the most immediate threat.
The selling the cities IMO should be reloaded, or the cities returned for the same gold value. Everything else is a farce, and that's why city trading is bullshit.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 2,698
Threads: 14
Joined: Apr 2011
(July 28th, 2015, 13:26)Dreylin Wrote: I'm not sure there was anything ill-intended from Elkad There likely wasn't anything ill-intended from HAK either.
Quote:The declarations against Commodore and Donovan maybe got them involved a couple of turns before they would otherwise have done, which in turn made sure Tasunke benefited less from the conquest. As for emptying out cities, from Donovan's thread there were still defenders there, but not numerous or of the best quality - those had been diverted South and East.
(July 28th, 2015, 14:49)Krill Wrote: War decs mean nothing and are irrelevant to pretty much everything. Moving units is the important bit, The war decs signal that 'Come and get my cities and I'm going to put minimal resistance in your way, so come invade with virtual impunity'.
I don't see any significant difference between this and the pseudo-city gifts/trades conducted by letting a city be captured.
Posts: 7,752
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
Soooo, if I'm reading things right:
Commodtay will finish their Taj EoT160 naturally.
HAK is looking at the following for Taj EoT160 as well:
Stay in Buraeu, Whip for 5pop
Leave Buraeu, Whip for 7pop
He states that losing Marble costs them the ability to whip, but isn't that the same -50% as switching from Bureau? He's making the decision this turn, and seems to be going for the conservative "if I don't get Taj, these are the civics I want" approach. Thing is, I think that if he loses Taj to Commodtay then there goes the game (and I think he secretly knows it too), so he should be going all-out for it - go big, or go home.
Also, he's clearly aware of the potential for a Marble cut and seems to be playing second in the turns at the moment, but it doesn't sound like he's considered mobilising a workforce into a position to reconnect (or maybe that's just not possible).
Either way, we're heading for an RNG showdown with #1 for disconnection of Marble, then maybe #2 coinflip.
I'm kinda rooting for HAK just because of the promised "damnit Elkad" naming scheme. 
Posts: 23,585
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
Fuck espionage.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
|
