[PB61 spoilers] vanrober lonely in a green field

[vanrober]

If i ve read good enough the ethiquete thread it clearly sais that you can let double move you to your victim. If i did understand correctly. Other wise please explain me that sentence

[civac2]

Relevant rules text:

3. The person declaring war can choose which half of the turn timer they get, so long as they didn't move after the victim on the previous turn.

4. Don't try to play after another player on a regular basis. If you are trying to prevent them getting the second half when they attack you then you're playing clock games and Krill will find your pathetic civ and crush it. If you are planning to attack them then just drop behind them one or two turns in advance (it's actually less likely to telegraph your intentions). In fact you can play before them the turn before you attack - there is no problem with letting your victim double move you.

It says you can play before them on the turn before you attack (imprecise wording, what is meant is 'declare war' in place of 'attack') You cannot do this on the turn you declare war. It is meant but never explicitly stated that you get the second half of the turn if you play after them on the turn you declare war (more imprecise wording, 'choosing the second half' = play after the victim and declare war, 'choosing the first half' = play before the victim and declare war).

[Tarkeel]

It's generally accepted that the wartime turnsplit is established on the turn of declaration. You could offer bellarch the option to double-move and take the first half, but you can't force him to do it. (IMHO)

[vanrober]

Relevant rules text:

3. The person declaring war can choose which half of the turn timer they get, so long as they didn't move after the victim on the previous turn.

4. Don't try to play after another player on a regular basis. If you are trying to prevent them getting the second half when they attack you then you're playing clock games and Krill will find your pathetic civ and crush it. If you are planning to attack them then just drop behind them one or two turns in advance (it's actually less likely to telegraph your intentions). In fact you can play before them the turn before you attack - there is no problem with letting your victim double move you.

It says you can play before them on the turn before you attack (imprecise wording, what is meant is 'declare war' in place of 'attack') You cannot do this on the turn you declare war. It is meant but never explicitly stated that you get the second half of the turn if you play after them on the turn you declare war (more imprecise wording, 'choosing the second half' = play after the victim and declare war, 'choosing the first half' = play before the victim and declare war).

In the bolded sentence i was understanding that i can choose my half as long as i dont double move and i can even allow to double move  "my victim" to get the turn of the split i want

[vanrober]

It's generally accepted that the wartime turnsplit is established on the turn of declaration. You could offer bellarch the option to double-move and take the first half, but you can't force him to do it. (IMHO)

As far as i read it clearly says its the one that dow the one that choose the turn split, it doesnt say anything of the other one liking that or not

[Tarkeel]

You chose the first half by declaring in the first half. If you want to take the second half, it's an offer.

[vanrober]

I dont see where its written that in the etiquette thread. 

It kind of say that as long as you didnt double move you can choose whatever part of the turn split. It sais that its okey to let the other doublemove you, so i see nothing wrong in what ive done

[civac2]

vanrober, please reread what I wrote above about the interpretation of the rules. You misunderstand them.

Choosing a half of the turn split = playing on that part of the turn and declaring war. That's what the phrase in the ettiquette text means. By playing before bellarch and declaring war you have chosen the first half of the turn split (by definition).

[vanrober]

I still dont understand what you mean with your comment.

First rule is dont double move to declare war. 

Second one is the one that declares war choose the turn split.

I see you want to mean that you get the part of the split you declare in that turn, but its not written anywhere and im even giving them information of the atack letting them double move me in war already, which i feel really fair. Like i have to pay a lot to get the split i want. Even when i could just camp the timer and make the game 1 day delay.

Also i did this to avoid the clock game it could be done if they wanted to declare (something i dont know yet) But still, if im not allowed to do this i would have waited them to play. Although i still cant see what i did wrong with the etiquette thread in my hand.

In the worst case im doing something not "forbidden" while giving an advantage to them, or at least i see it that way



Also i have no news of them, so i dont know if they agree or not.


What would have been the solution if we both wanted to declare after the other on turn 154?

[civac2]

The one who played last in turn 153 wins.

The rules are not clearly formulated. They also can lead to clock games. But they are meant in the way I said. It is simply assumed that everyone who reads them understand what 'choosing a half' and 'attack' means in that context.

You can absolutely make the offer but it's only an offer. If they refuse you get the first half of the turn split. However, since your war declaration was made due to an incorrect understanding of the rules you could ask for a reload or ask Ramk to change the diplomatic state to peace (not sure if possible). In this situation, that would likely not accomplish anything but it's up to you.