RBP2 Lurker Discussion Thread - No Players!

[Jowy]

Except that gifting cities is a normal gameplay mechanic that wasn't disabled or banned, while double-moving is a technical loophole caused by the pitboss format, however we all agreed that double-moves should be forbidden and so we banned them.

It's not really a big deal in the end though, Athlete most likely wouldn't even have declared and so the outcome would have been the same. But it would still be nice if all the players would atleast attempt to play in good faith instead of looking for loopholes and abusing them.

[scooter]

Except that gifting cities is a normal gameplay mechanic that wasn't disabled or banned, while double-moving is a technical loophole caused by the pitboss format, however we all agreed that double-moves should be forbidden and so we banned them.

You guys only banned double-moves in case of war or settling cities, otherwise anyone who ends turn and plays the next turn would be double-moving. So technically they broke nothing, although I sort of rolled my eyes when I saw it. I don't see it as a huge deal - if one of the players wants to raise it as an issue then that's on them.

[zakalwe]

Seems to me like Spullla's main motivation for doing the GM double-move may have been the sweet irony of using a trade mission to Athlete to upgrade troops for conquering him. After all, they do carry a grudge against him at this point (at least in-game). As such, I think their move was more aimed at screwing him over in particular than it was at gaining an advantage over the other players in general.

I wonder if Gao with its Temple of Artemis could have been a good destination as well? Or is it too close to their capital? Anyone know the mechanics here? I wasn't convinced that Sullla had all the details right -- he only mentioned city size and distance as relevant factors.

In terms of playing "dishonourably" or "in bad faith" I certainly don't think Spullla are the worst offenders. Either way, I think the bottom line is that everybody has respected the rules, but they are always subject to interpretation and you cannot expect everybody to agree on their "intent" or "spirit" or what they say "between the lines". Also, there aren't many true allies in this game, and the players will take any advantage they can get. Everybody is looking out for #1 and playing to win (however unrealistic it might be), which IMHO is a good thing.

TBH I am much more shocked by the way certain civs have treated their "allies" and "honored" their deals than I am by the overall attitude to the rules. Besides, there is usually a large gray area between "exploiting the rules" and just being clever, thinking of tactics that others haven't considered.

[Twinkletoes89]

If all double moves were banned Jowy, then all those times you played 2 turns at once because of the small window you can play in, would have been breaking the rules! Slaze has done similar and so have some others iirc.

Now, double moves in war are the only ones banned, and as Spullla and Athlete are at peace, they have not technically broken a rule.

And (agreeing with zakalwe) - there is a difference between exploiting the rules and being ingenious, and I do think this was done more to 'make a point' than anything else.

[T-hawk]

Sullla's posted in the past that clock games and movement shenanigans are just a normal part of multiplayer. I tend to agree. IMO it wasn't in bad faith, there are no rules about double moves in peacetime. These things happen and it is not worth the price of legislation and bureaucracy to address it.

[Rowain]

some comments:

a) As HRE built the HE only after they obtained a 10 XP unit by their own they are completly within the rules.

b) Doublemove rules only apply to wartime and settlers so the GM-move by India is completly legit.

c) Gifting cities is allowed. But the gifting of lots of cities to harm a conquerer is very bad sportsmanship and not in the spirit of the game.

d) Ottomans attack against Inca when he has the unfriendly 500pound gorilla India on his other border was an absolute stupid decission and deserves huge punishment (quite the same as certain second city )

e) It is very amusing how Sullla rails against clock-plays and not ending turns if it is a discomfort to him but plays them himself if he gets a benefit from it.

[Jowy]

Sullla's posted in the past that clock games and movement shenanigans are just a normal part of multiplayer.

Offtopic a bit, but I would love it if we just dropped the double-moving and war split rules. They're too much trouble for what it's worth. If your enemy can double-move then so can you. Of course there's the argument that those who sit on their computers all day have an advantage over those who can't, but in reality they already have a much bigger advantage because of how much time they can spend on the game.

[darrelljs]

Offtopic a bit, but I would love it if we just dropped the double-moving and war split rules. They're too much trouble for what it's worth.

+1. I said as much in the current PB3 arguement.

Darrell

[Krill]

+1. I said as much in the current PB3 arguement.

Darrell

...I've always said this. I'm just annoyed it has taken 3 attempts for people to accept as much.

[sunrise089]

...I've always said this. I'm just annoyed it has taken 3 attempts for people to accept as much.

+3.

In my eight-hour "no rules" pitboss game we played on Epic + an oversized map. I think this gets things halfway right. Epic is actually bad for double-moves I think since the defender can't respond quickly, but I think a big map gives a lot more of a cushion.