[LURKERS] Sweet 16: Civ Party Fun Time and Philosophical Debate

[Catwalk]

But what if you punish yourself more by punishing them for stealing your workers?

[mackoti]

Doesnt mater anymore at that point.I mentaly decide dont win the game and go for the revenge.Thats to way i function in civ, first i want to win when i see thats not doable i suffer a litle bit(i like to win) and i found new objectives, in this case would be to wreck havok in my 'worker 'naper'', after i can have loads of fun playing defence see pb4 or pb23 or destroying someones else chanse,which destroyed mine, and i find this very legit.

When you gave up on winning you can't be punishing yourself you can have loads of fun even if you loose.Actualy were games were i felt very good casue i had no chanse to win.I always put to much presure on me when is about winning i try to not do that but i cant help, thast one of the reasons i pla just 1 game right now...Is just agame in the end.

Edit
becasue of that i love dules very much nothing changes in the time playing a duel, you need to kill or be killed by same oponent.

[Gavagai]

To be frank I'm quite surprised that people here are so inclined to act from motivations like vengeance, get mad at people for stealing workers, etc. I would call it unprofessianal attitude if this attitude wasn't expressed by much better players than myself. Because, really, your neighbor is supposed to harass you during the early and be completely annoying, this is an integral part of this game. If he invests in it too much in it and starts to harm himself, this is another thing, of course.

[Gavagai]

We were discussing if there is a good argument against attacks of these kind, not whether I have any problems. So far, I don't see how argument "it will make them love you" can be convincing for reasons Machiavelly pointed out.

What I am pointing out is that you have complained a lot about these "unpredictable" actions by the team you attacked. I think that if you are ignoring the effects that your own actions have, you probably shouldn't complain about anything that other people do.

I find your absolute rules to be ridiculous. "You should pay no heed to how your actions influence your opponents." "It's not possible to fully understand your opponent's decisionmaking process, so you should ignore it entirely." "Subjugation is always superior to manipulation." "There is no reason not to seek out opportunities to attack people and take them." This is not a good way to make decisions. Good decisions are made by weighing outcomes.

The premises and logic are very lacking, too. I don't even know where to start on it. I guess I don't care. Enjoy your philosophy.

A classic post of a person who feels he is losing an argument and looking for comfortable way out.

[Oxyphenbutazone]

So one neighbor is supposed to harass the other, but the reciprocal action is unsportsmanlike? Why is attacking without a cause, beyond the very short term gain of workers, completely rational, but attacking with a clear casus belli wrong?

[NobleHelium]

Whatever dude. Keep doing what you're doing. When you get into an ancient war every game, keep complaining that everyone else is acting bizarrely.

[Old Harry]

A classic post of a person who feels he is losing an argument and looking for comfortable way out is to resort to generalities and not address the issues raised in Seven's previous post.

FTFY

(By the way Mackoti, I wasn't saying that you play any different, just that from experience there's not much point trying to ruin your game...)

[Gavagai]

So one neighbor is supposed to harass the other, but the reciprocal action is unsportsmanlike? Why is attacking without a cause, beyond the very short term gain of workers, completely rational, but attacking with a clear casus belli wrong?

For the record, it was never my claim that Gaspar's actions were unsportsmanlike. It was a claim made by some lurkers. My claim was that their actions were stupid, they started a lose-lose scenario. They acted with duel mentality in a game which wasn't a duel.
Retaliation makes no sense in a no-diplo game. You can't communicate that you are retaliating and that you act this way because and only because of previous actions of your rival. Without this possibility retaliation is useless. But I think I already made my point extensively enough both here and in my own thread. It is pretty clear that audience disagrees with it and is actually becoming rather irritated for some reason. So, I think, I better quit this discussion.

[Gaspar]

Mackoti - I apologize to you as well.

The rest of this is isn't interesting, in the same way that yelling at a brick wall isn't interesting.

[Fintourist]

Hmm, my two cents without really knowing about the details of current game:

If Gavagai thought that stealing 2 workers will with 100 % likelihood be accepted and not revenged that's obviously a mistake. However, I think it's reasonable to be disappointed/angry/whatever when a revenge of certain magnitude follows, because there are as many different reactions as there are players. Some players might make revenge as the sole purpose of their game, some don't.. Sometimes you get away with it, sometimes you pay for it..

And just for the clarity, I would also like join the others before and state that regardless of the game situation if anybody ever steals a worker from me or steals a nice city site or something else mean, I will start a grudge war that will last the whole game!! So don't dare to do it, right..