Posts: 10,045
Threads: 82
Joined: May 2012
Dammit, this doesn't have a lurker thread to comment in yet...
BRick wins the thread again and again 
Anyway. I really think players should stop quoting currently ongoing games. There are numerous examples from older games that can explain things without needing to refer back to spoiler knowledge/things that ought not be being discussed publicly (for example, PB13 had a bunch of city-gifts of varying controversy).
Erebus in the Balance - a FFH Modmod based around balancing and polishing FFH for streamlined competitive play.
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
(August 4th, 2015, 05:27)Qgqqqqq Wrote: BRick wins the thread again and again
Posts: 1,183
Threads: 11
Joined: Aug 2014
I personally don't care a lot one way or the other. I don't have a problem with city trades for any reason, though I understand why they should usually be banned. In this particular game, I think the best solution is to ban them entirely. With so many players, it is best to leave as little to "judgment" as possible.
Posts: 2,559
Threads: 18
Joined: Oct 2009
Honest question: why is there so much time spent trying to stop players from being stupid? If you're selling a city for below market value (or whatever market value is believed to be), why is that so much different than missing a tactical manuver from an opponent and losing cities that way, or running a farmer's gambit too long and losing cities before you can build military? All of these are mistakes, it's just that some are more visible and more centralized than others. Are lurkers going to start intervening when someone delays Currency without a good reason next? What about if they build Axes instead of Spears for defense?
August 4th, 2015, 12:47
(This post was last modified: August 4th, 2015, 12:47 by Krill.)
Posts: 23,441
Threads: 132
Joined: Jun 2009
General answer: effect on third parties.
More specific answer: There is a difference between a misplay and that being taken advantage of, potentially allowing a runaway civ, and purposefully throwing to aid one opponent more than another. In some instances it's considered acceptable to "throw", like when you fight a war to the death with an opponent that first attacked you, moving troops to defend against them and losing more cities to a third party. The reason is that it's due to the intent of the choice made.
Also, some people are just stupid and do get barred from games. And lurkers already intervene when it becomes obvious that one player is purposefully throwing a game.
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: 17,863
Threads: 162
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1,778
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2013
I.
Which one of us dies this time, I wonder?
Fear cuts deeper than swords.
Posts: 17,863
Threads: 162
Joined: May 2011
But I don't want to have to run a Giants theme. 
August 10th, 2015, 16:49
(This post was last modified: August 10th, 2015, 16:49 by GermanJoey.)
Posts: 5,648
Threads: 30
Joined: Mar 2014
(August 10th, 2015, 13:40)Commodore Wrote: So. Who am I playing?
If PB18 is actually over, Brick will hand out rolls once everybody makes their thread in the new PB27 forum. 
Posts: 17,863
Threads: 162
Joined: May 2011
Oh good grief. So September...
|
