Gavagai's spoiler thread

[Gavagai]

From my point of view it doesn't matter how far their second city from their capital, it's a distance between my capital and their second city what matters. It is 7 tiles. Their city immediately screwed up my dot map and blocked a large chank of land away from me. Of course, it is an aggressive settling from my point of view. By comparison, Beryllium was 8 tiles from their capital and I wouldn't have planted it as my second city precisely because I realize that such plant needs to be heavily protected. Instead I settled my second and third cities in a completely different directions where they weren't threatened and required no units for defence. When I settled Beryllium I already had two chariots at hand and sentries in the area. Also by that point I scouted Gaspar's horses and was certain that I won't face chariots myself.
What I'm talking about is that it wasn't just lack of protection for workers, their play in general was wreckless. Did they expect to found Buddhism in my face and protect it with the sheer strength of their supposed hatred for early war? Of course, the moment I saw this city I started to look for possibilities to put a pressure on it. If I settled Beryllium as my second, defended it with a warrior and got it charioted I would consider it a perfectly fair play on their side. Yet somehow similar actions on my part filled them with rage. I say, if you hate early war - don't provoke it.

[Gavagai]

By the way, Seven settled four cities this turn.

[Lewwyn]

I really think you need to go back and look at your post. From your perspective it was aggressive, blah, blah, blah. And then you're surprised when they go all in against you as a result?

By the way, Seven settled four cities this turn.

Well yeah, that's why NobleGaspar played reckless. Go big or it doesn't matter against Seven.

[WilliamLP]

By the way, in this contex all their noble (ouch, pun unintented) rage because of a worker steal looks rather hypocritical. Do they really think that they are entitled to pink dot me and I'm not supposed to defend myself from aggressive settling? And can I expect that a guy who settles aggresively towards me somehow "hates early war"? If you hate early war, why ask for it?

I'm being careful not to criticize your actual play of stealing the workers! It's an extremely defensible move both in the game and for a reputation play. (You don't want to be the guy who people know they don't have to defend against at all and can make stupid moves on.)

That's a whole separate issue than whether your reasoning about human behavior was or is sound, or whether such a thing is possible. Even if you reject it for any number of reasons, you didn't give the impression that you gave serious consideration to the idea of showing you could have stolen the workers by revealing the chariot and then not doing it.

Also:

it's a distance between my capital and their second city what matters. It is 7 tiles.

We're talking about Plame Affair, which is 8 tiles from your capital, and 4 tiles from theirs? If that is a pink dot that needs to be punished you're going to be finding yourself in a lot of ancient warfare.

[Gavagai]

Even if you reject it for any number of reasons, you didn't give the impression that you gave serious consideration to the idea of showing you could have stolen the workers by revealing the chariot and then not doing it

Look, I have just spared their city in the midst of a hot war after they burnt a city of my own. What was their response to this gesture? Well, they are pillaging my cottages, stealing my forests and I'm pretty sure that they will be at my throat right after the peace is over. I'm sorry to say it but to assume that they would have been moved by the fact that I hadn't stolen their workers is outright stupid, in my opinion.

From your perspective it was aggressive, blah, blah, blah. And then you're surprised when they go all in against you as a result?

But it was aggressive. What wouldn't be aggressive is settling first a couple of excellent city spots to the east and to the west from their capital. Like, you know, I did. When you put a city in the contested territory - yes, you are starting a conflict whether you like it or not. And it is perfectly OK to start a conflict. What is not OK is to start it with no scouting and no units to back you up. And then feel offended when you get called on it.
(And I was ready to give up this territory - provided they cover their push into it with adequate military. Which they didn't do.)

We're talking about Plame Affair, which is 8 tiles from your capital, and 4 tiles from theirs? If that is a pink dot that needs to be punished you're going to be finding yourself in a lot of ancient warfare

It is 7 tiles. And I don't say that I'm going to attack every city planted like this I say that I feel entitled to attack it if it is badly defended. Just defend your land and I will be a peaceful neighbor.

[WilliamLP]

It is 7 tiles.

8.

[Gavagai]

It is 7 tiles.

8.

You are right about this one.

[Lewwyn]

Just to be clear, I would have taken their workers with delight. At no point have I said it was a bad decision. I'm just trying to show you that it was aggressive and it had consequences. 2 workers? Totally worth it.

[mackoti]

Just to be clear, I would have taken their workers with delight. At no point have I said it was a bad decision. I'm just trying to show you that it was aggressive and it had consequences. 2 workers? Totally worth it.

I wouldnt, so there you see both side are good but have diferent payments.And yeah Lewwyn is agresiv,but i think you are same Gavagai(not only from this game) so people need to react.

[Gavagai]

OK, I feel I need to explain my position regarding Plame Affair and why it was aggressive.



First, I want to reiterate that distance from their capital is absolutely irrelevant. It may be relevant for a degenerate "settling agreement" in a full-diplo game or for any other lousy context in which the concept of "fair distribution of land" has meaning.
What is relevant here is whether Gaspar crossed my vital interests, defined objectively.
And yes, he did. In the early game your sphere of interests is the first ring of cities around your capital. You want to settle them in optimal locations. If you are not allowed to do so, you won't have a healthy core and may have serious problems later.
Now, Plame Affair invades into this sphere. A city which is now Neon was originally planned to be settled 1SE. There it would be able to share sheep and claim pigs and would be a much stronger city.
This means that by his very first city Gaspar screwed up my dot map and forced me to settle suboptimally. He further continued to do so by founding Buddhism in this city and stripping me of any hope to contest Pigs.
Now, I don't say that he shouldn't have done. On the contrary, it was a good play and an absolutely right call. He had skirmishers which gave him an ability to cover aggressive settling, it was the right thing to exploit this early advantage. What I say is that from my perspective this was the moment when our conflict started. I was actually going to chicken out of this conflict and to surender this territory; but still, I felt my interests jeopardized and was ready to restore the integrity of my first ring by military force provided that I would be given an opportunity to do so. Was it an aggressive play? I still don't understand how it was more aggressive then their settling. It was them who initially invaded into my interest sphere, not me.
And yes, Neon settled 1SE would be an aggressive plant on my side either. And would it be defended by a warrior, a chariot raid on their part would be completely justified. I would be upset but would never had an idea that it was an "agression" on their part which deserves an eternal revenge. I would just say that I overextended myself and got punished for it.
I agree that my interests didn't suffer much, with land so lush one less pig isn't such a big deal. But that is precisely why I never was going to build a real army to take Plame Affair. I only used units which I had anyway and did it only because the area was unprotected. As I said earlier, just a couple of sentry warriors would be enough for me to cancel my plan.