RB Pitboss #2 [SPOILERS] - Peter of Byzantium

[darrelljs]

Wouldn't swapping off Pottery to AH make sense? I still think slinging HBR makes more sense than IW.

Well it depends on what we have in our capital. Let's switch to AH as you say, if Horse pops up then go for HBR. If not, take a shot at IW.

Darrell

[regoarrarr]

Okay - how's this

Athlete,

Oh come off your high horse. Talking about "misclicks" due to "remoting in" causing warriors to "accidentally" move near our lands. And "not coordinating with the wishes of your teammate" while building a road towards our lands. "I thought I was trying to get trade routes!" Not to mention the whole pretending to negotiate in good faith while chopping out a chariot army.

You can talk about that being "just diplomacy" or whatever but I personally find it *quite* lame.

If you want to come by Athens, bring it on. Otherwise I suggest you start figuring out what concessions you are prepared to offer for peace.

That might seem a bit backwards, but look at it from our perspective. You have essentially hamstrung if not eliminated our chances of winning this game. However, we have the ability to make sure that YOU don't win either. How easy do you think it will be to win if you have a team nipping at your heels, while 7 other teams are growing un-encumbered?

The way I see it, the only reason we would not do that, would be if we can feel like we at least have a *chance* to win. Otherwise, we'll both be spending a YEAR playing a game neither of us have a chance at winning. Doesn't sound like much fun to me....

[darrelljs]

This group has some exceptionally skilled players. If anyone can turn it around, you guys can.

Well, there's always time travel and settling Paris one tile W, but thanks for the compliment . We're definitely in "annoy mode" for the duration.

You know, I've played 6 no limit hold 'em tournaments this year. I've got three first place and one second place finish, which is pretty good. I was also the first player eliminated twice . I prefer it that way; I like to play aggressive and take chances early, build up a nice stack, then go into "math mode". Conservative players don't win often; they might not get eliminated early, but without taking chances they don't have the insurance to ride out the inevitable bad beats. I think MP CIV (at least this type of game) is similar.

Now, grabbing the Deer was not the percentage play to build that early chip stack; the risk/reward made it a bad gamble. The problem was (for me at least) not putting ourselves in their head until after the fact, and by then it was too late. Its pretty obvious they needed to attack. It still could have worked out; they could have lacked a strategic resource, or the will to use it. But against competent players the odds were decidely poor. Putting Paris 1W would have locked the Copper down almost immediately and we'd still have a front line Holy City and The Oracle. I really feel quite stupid .

Darrell

[regoarrarr]

Okay I sent the message above but took out the part about getting off his high horse. Guess we'll see how that goes...

[Maniac Marshall]

Okay - how's this

It would have been more fun if you sent them the original one

You could have always claimed that you meant to send the modified draft that you made, but that you accessed your email remotely, causing you to "misclick."

Of course, your teammates could have then feigned ignorance of the whole affair...

I'm kidding, of course.

Keep your head up. While you've been crippled, and it looks rather bleak, it's still early and a lot of things can yet happen.

[regoarrarr]

It would have been more fun if you sent them the original one

You could have always claimed that you meant to send the modified draft that you made, but that you accessed your email remotely, causing you to "misclick."

Of course, your teammates could have then feigned ignorance of the whole affair...

Woah a blast from the past!

And that would be hilarious indeed.

[sunrise089]

Well, there's always time travel and settling Paris one tile W, but thanks for the compliment . We're definitely in "annoy mode" for the duration.

You know, I've played 6 no limit hold 'em tournaments this year. I've got three first place and one second place finish, which is pretty good. I was also the first player eliminated twice . I prefer it that way; I like to play aggressive and take chances early, build up a nice stack, then go into "math mode". Conservative players don't win often; they might not get eliminated early, but without taking chances they don't have the insurance to ride out the inevitable bad beats. I think MP CIV (at least this type of game) is similar.

Now, grabbing the Deer was not the percentage play to build that early chip stack; the risk/reward made it a bad gamble. The problem was (for me at least) not putting ourselves in their head until after the fact, and by then it was too late. Its pretty obvious they needed to attack. It still could have worked out; they could have lacked a strategic resource, or the will to use it. But against competent players the odds were decidely poor. Putting Paris 1W would have locked the Copper down almost immediately and we'd still have a front line Holy City and The Oracle. I really feel quite stupid .

Darrell

Far be it from me to give poker advice to a pro, but my understanding of tournament play is this (taken from craps tournaments, but I assume poker tournaments are similar):

*In non-tournament play you want to play conservative to maximize your return but minimize your risk of ruin.

*In tournaments the rules favor much more aggressive play because small profits are not enough to advance.

*In ladder civ MP, where the goal is basically to advance to the highest rank possible (and thinks like "have fun" and "learn about the game") you likewise want to play conservative because winning 3/5 of your games will allow your rank to steadily rise, and in 1v1v1... style games the penalty for dieing and getting last place is much higher than the benefit of getting 1st over 2nd.

*In long standalone MP civ the goal is simply to win, and the conservative play is likely to only give you 1/x chance of winning, where x is the number of other teams playing conservatively (for example, that would be 9 team in RBP1; everyone except Krill (successful hyper-expansion) and sunrise (unsuccessful religious strategy)).

Therefore I think settling 1W was still the wrong play, at least ex ante. We wanted the high-variance play, and brother did we get it

[sunrise089]

New turn played. Kalin was logged in and was talking to me about how our Control-a's would have to dual...I explained how you can't control-a a unit battle, but only after I clicked end turn and moved everything before he can react

1) Spiros moved SW to keep exploring.

2) Worker at Paris moved W NW to try to make it back to Athens in a few turns. He cannot be captured this turn.

3) 2nd warrior at Paris moved 1W across river forcing Athlete, etc to attack across a river or move off their road.

4) Worker that could be captures 1W of our cap moved into into the forest 2E of our cap.

5) Forest chop finished, and I 1pop slaved an archer. We will get 1 archer next turn to defend versus a warrior and a 2nd archer the following turn (I hope).

Finally Kalin asked us to agree to a turn order.

[antisocialmunky]

Don't get too depressed rego, these things happen. Atleast make sure Kalin and athlete don't win the game. Hold on and then throw their shading diplomacy and slowed down techrate back at their faces.

We're all rooting for you.

[newbie]

I very much admire the philosophical approach you are now taking (pretty understandable that this wasn't the immediate reaction to the setback). And I also admire that you are now (after some understandable emotional reactions) looking for revenge in the game rather than revenge towards real-life people.

Those of you who are able to read the threads for pitboss 1 might want to look at MH's reasons for becoming so disenchanted from the game (nothing much to do with in-game stuff, so it isn't spoilerish to mention it. But IMO it was an upsetting result of a bad separation between in-game stuff and interpersonal upset between players, which we hopefully don't want to repeat unnecessarily). For those of you able to read PBEM spoilers, then I really admired how the players could remain on very good terms in real life, whilst viciously and systematically plotting and backstabbing in game. This is the approach to take! Be vicious in-game, but remember in the process that you are dealing with real people. And I think that (after your initial shock/reaction) that this is what you are already going towards.