[no players] CiVI Lurking Part II: Sophomore Slump

[suboptimal]

There was no evidence pointing to that being a bug.

I disagree (er, speaking as someone who doesn't own the game).  It appears that every other diplomatic system, especially the symmetrical declaration of friendship, prompts a diplomatic pop-up message, but these only produce a little frowny face in the corner.

I think it's a bug.  Note that when Oledavy denounced Alhambram the latter did get the pop-up diplomacy screen (see his screenshot in the first T160 post).

[Ituralde]

Did we ever definitively figure out if peace is a sufficient condition to clear the occupation penalty?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd like to come back to this as well.

From Alhambrams thread it sounds like a white Peace Treaty is enough to lift the occupation from cities. The formal cede City option just lowers your warmonger score? At least that's how I read Alhambrams thread and the screenshot of his peace deal with The Archduke did not include any cities, ceded or otherwise.

Since this has been a discussion point for house rules and bans, this should be noted by all players!

[Jabah]

Well, does not sending fake gold coins around count as circumventing the diplomacy rules a bit. You can not do that with the AI.

Not suggesting bad faith or that I do not see the excellent play there but still, do we want this in future games?
If yes, everyone should be aware of it.

From my understanding it has been done on a very regular basis in the civ4 games.
(With numerous fish for fish or iron for iron depending on what was the aim).
It could / should probably be clarified for new games / new players ?

[Old Harry]

Would someone like to update the pitboss etiquette thread for civ6 pbem? http://www.realmsbeyond.net/forums/showt...p?tid=7311

[Ichabod]

I think signaling with gold is okay in AI Diplo games.

For me, AI Diplo's definiton is: you can only propose deals that can be proposed through in game mechanics, baring use of written text. I don't think it matters if an AI actually proposes such deals when you play SP games, so it's irrelevant that AI would never propose a 6 gold for 6 gold deal or something like it.

We use the name AI Diplo for convenience sake, but the name doesn't define the meaning. If players want to ban gold signaling, that should be explicitly defined in the rules, since the general use of AI Diplo accepts such deals.

All that said, I don't know the exact rules defined for this game. Perhaps the pre-game discussion reached a different consensus.

[Rowain]

IMO gold (or general speaking trade ) -signalling is ok as long as there is no consensus to the contrary. But asking a player "Hey did you really denounce me" out of game to get some extra-info (even if it is only for clarification you get too much info) is a big no go.

[Esteon]

I finally realized why I will not be playing a game here: there's an insane amount of bad blood everywhere!

Singaboy's basic motivation after burning of Frankfurt was stopping TheArchduke, and I could perhaps understand that.

But now Woden declares Alhabram "an idiot" and even worse "now it is time to have fun. I don't care if I win, I want to destroy Russia. The bastard has been a torn in my side all game " 

What The Hell?!

a) I'm all for venting, but this is extremely uncalled for (he was preparing to attack, wasn't he?) and really insulting.
b) If your objective is not winning (with very good chances for it), but having fun by destroying another civ and giving the win to 3rd party, then I definitely would never play with you.

[AdrienIer]

b) If your objective is not winning (with very good chances for it), but having fun by destroying another civ and giving the win to 3rd party, then I definitely would never play with you.

Have you ever played MP ?

This sort of thing happens all the time, and some of the periods I had the most fun where like this ("F it, it's payback time I don't think I can win anymore and this guy has been annoying me for too long"). I've also had fun dealing with random wars decided by other players for not very logical reasons.

Basically you know you're playing against a human, and if you rub him the wrong way he may start considering that you've messed up his game beyond reason so he can do the same to you. Each decision you make modifies the chance of another player tilting and going into a righteous crusade against you. It's part of playing with humans.

[Bacchus]

Oledavy's question is a clear breach of no-diplo to me. It doesn't matter if there was a bug, it is never ok to go asking a player "Hey, did you really do X?". And if you do ever get asked that, the only response is "I am not going to comment on specific in-game actions". You can raise your concern about a bug in the thread, you can hold the turn for a while, but don't prompt people to comment on what they have or have not done. Especially if you are not sure if they've done it!

EDIT: Gold for gold and other trades are breaches, but subject to hilarious misinterpretation and other screw-ups, which is why the community hasn't clamped down on them. Examples abound, just recently in one of the Pitbosses (36?).

[MJW (ya that one)]

I feel that Woden is the favorite.
2 vs 1 is too much so Alhambram is not in first place.
Oledavy is going to be attacked by also-ran singaboy so he's not in first place.