Gandhi of France II - Assuming Direct Control

[oledavy]

[SIZE="7"]Turn 88[/SIZE]

I missed that Commodore either had machinery or feudalism. At any rate, last turn, he researched the other one of the pair, and can now research Guilds.

Shit is about to hit the fan. I have nothing remotely capable of fending off Knights. Hopefully he does stick it to Gaspar, but if he doesn't, I will be in serious trouble.

So, I got on the telephones and started putting out calls:










I'll type up a full explanation of the meaning behind, and why I sent each one later. In the meantime, to sate my curiosity, I'd like to see if anyone can decipher all four.


In ended my open borders with Mistabod this turn to evict their warrior who would have seen me staging my army 1E of Palaven.

Provided they don't improve the garrison in the interim, I invade next turn, and hopefully raze the city on t89.

End Turn

[oledavy]

It occurs to me, I really should have put a lump sum of ~20 gold in my offer to NoGas.

[Catwalk]

I'll venture a guess:

I'm guessing you're trying to type something? Starting letters in the proposal to Commodore read CH GASPER. Guessing that has something to do with him hitting Gaspar. The message to Mistabod reads HIT HRE, with HRE = Holy Roman Empire aka Commodore.

Am I on the right track? Also, got a screenshot of your planned offensive against Mistabod?

[scooter]

My stab at it:

Deal to Commodore is obviously a request to hit Gaspar with Knights. Cities spell "GASPER", which, close enough. Copper + Horses I'm assuming was chosen in the absence of Iron + Horse which is what is required for Knights.

The Deal to Gaspar is a note that Commodore is about at Knights and is able to one-move Cathedral with Knights. Life will suck for Gaspar. So you're warning him while simultaneously nudging Commodore to go for it.

Yuris just looks like a cooperation thing and also a Knights reference. Can't think of anything additional.

Mistabod one is the most difficult one, though I've GOT to think it's something Phract-related. WAIT. Duh. Resources and cities in order spell "Hit HRE". Nicely done on that one.

[oledavy]

You're both pretty much right.

The message to Commodore is inquiring whether or not he's going to hit "Gasper" with Knights. I'm hoping he'll send some sort of affirmation this turn. Of course, he could just lie and then hit me, but I don't really think Commodore would do that. If he does not send any sort of affirmation, then I'll start getting worried. Either way, I'm researching military techs next.

I'm sure NoGas are already aware of the threat posed by Commodore. However, suggesting that the city of Cathedral is about to come under assault from Knights may suggest to them I have inside knowledge that they don't - that Commodore revealed his countdown to me. This is why I should have offered them gold as well to signify the start of a countdown; and continued offering it on successive turns. What does this accomplish? Well, in seeing Commodore preparing to attack, they begin building a military. Commodore sees their power spike, assumes they're also gearing up to attack him, and mobilizes even faster. Basically, I'm trying to put them in an economically wasteful arms race. Of course, Commodore could simply escape the loop and attack me, while NoGas attacks Yuri. I'm just counting on all the emnity those two have built up already this game to carry them into war.

The message to Yuri's is intended to be "You're at war with Mistabod, I'm about to be at war with Mistabod (1 turn) - Let's hit them from both sides at once."

I'm hoping this will urge him to attack, so that Mistabod are facing two invasions at once and are more susceptible to damage. I should have really included Yuri's iron in the deal.

The final offer, to Mistabod, is an effort to sow a bit of confusion. Last turn, I got OB with NoGas, so I not longer need them with the Byzantines. Furthermore, I didn't want them to see me positioning my troops. However, I didn't want them to take closing borders as a hostile act, so I mocked up this message. If they're able to decipher it, it should leave them slightly confused as to my intent, which is what I need.

[SevenSpirits]

I feel I should bring this up, but not in the public thread where it would notify people that you're trying to communicate by initials:

Is communicating by initials legal? I think it isn't. Of course I can't say this definitively since the settings are just "AI diplo with banter thread". But I would interpret AI diplo to mean "no out-of game communication (except in the banter thread), and no textual communication in-game". The latter would cover renaming units and cities to convey messages to certain players as well as encoding text as elaborate trade offers. While it's not my game, I don't see the point of an AI diplo rule if you're allowed to convey text by coded trade offers. It seems equivalent to e.g. banning out-of-game communication unless it's in morse code.

[oledavy]

I feel I should bring this up, but not in the public thread where it would notify people that you're trying to communicate by initials:

Is communicating by initials legal? I think it isn't. Of course I can't say this definitively since the settings are just "AI diplo with banter thread". But I would interpret AI diplo to mean "no out-of game communication (except in the banter thread), and no textual communication in-game". The latter would cover renaming units and cities to convey messages to certain players as well as encoding text as elaborate trade offers. While it's not my game, I don't see the point of an AI diplo rule if you're allowed to convey text by coded trade offers. It seems equivalent to e.g. banning out-of-game communication unless it's in morse code.

I really appreciate decision not to raise this in the public player thread.

For my part, I believe that attempting to communicate the way I am is permissible. The point of AI diplo as I understand it, is to limit the was that players can cooperate in game - making complex plans, trades, or agreements unworkable. I don't see trying to communicate through initials a gross violation of that - as long as someone is not naming their cities in a blatant fashion ("NAP?" "War with X?" etc.). Furthermore, you have no certainty the message will actually go through.

That being said, we do need to decide where to draw the line. We've long established that units should not be flagrantly named in AW, or AI diplo. Do we need to ban this as well?

[Krill]

That's well over the line Dave.

[thestick]

I think you went too far. 'X will attack Y with Z' is a pretty big dose of information, well over AI Diplo lines.

[fluffyflyingpig]

Eh. I thought it was entertaining and within prior AI diplo game rules. If renaming cities and units is over the line, spelling things with initials may be toeing it.