[PB64] Amicalola Gets To Heaven with Tarkeel and Ljubljana

[Tarkeel]

I can think of 3 cases as precedent for this ruling.

PB58 Serdoa double moves ruff.
PB58 AT double moves Tarkeel.
PB61 Josh double moves Bellarch.

All these cases were decided in favor of the person who double moved.

This one is a little messier, but the rules have to be consistent. Now Nauf has agreed to a coin flip, but mind he hates it. I know you also hate it, but to get this game going again would you reconsider.

I think you need to re-read the settling race between AT and me. Yes, there are similarities; it's a settling race in the post-war period where you can't use threat to clobber the other settling party. However, it's not resettling burned cities from the war, but pushing out into never-before-settled territory, and other factors (such as another reloading influencing when I could play). I did explicitly ask for a coin flip, but was told that's not in the rules we are playing by.

I've only seen this situation from Amica's reports, but for me it's obvious that etiquette thread supports Amica's actions so reload shouldn't be granted. If a pair of workers on a hill is the precedent we want to set for settler races, then there's going to be a lot of turnsplits going forward.

[Amicalola]

Thankyou Tarkeel, I appreciate that. It doesn't improve my disposition that multiple people have messaged me privately to agree with me. Well, it's lovely that they have, and I appreciate it - it just has the unfortunate side effect of making the in-game decision feel even worse. I feel like I should keep my threads honest like I've always tried, before I take a break for a while. So wallow in self-indulgence with me for a minute longer, if you will.

I get grumpy about civ games somewhat regularly, but usually I bounce back semi-quickly. I even enjoyed most of PB56, for as much as I complained at the time. Well, maybe that's still coming, but honestly I don't know this time. In-game, things aren't actually going that badly - I'm about to launch a Serfdom-GA, and that's fun enough that I should be excited even if it's all going to end in tears. But I'm not. I'm not really angry either; just sort of dejected.  

Ultimately, in the wake of this, I don't expect to play in another RB game again. I'll keep lurking, I just won't be signing up for more games myself. Partly that's because the precedent this decision sets, whether Naufragar/lurkers know it or not, is a bad direction for the health and fun of these games. It's also slightly because I have less time nowadays. But mostly, it's more personal than that. I used to say that the lows of PitBoss were the worst of any game I'd played, but that the highs (the best of any game I'd played) made up for it. Well, I guess my position has swapped. The highs from these games are still the best I've experienced in a video game. But the lows are worse, and I don't think the highs are worth it. This one is particularly bad, because I feel so confidently that I'm in the right both legally and ethically, and it's completely out of my control. But more importantly, I get the feeling that even if I'd won the argument, I'd still feel pretty shitty about it, because I'd know that Naufragar was feeling dejected instead, and I like Naufragar. Maybe this was just lose-lose all along.  

There's such a thing as too sucked in, and PB is the ultimate example. For lots of people, not just me. It's an inherent problem: to beat the other people who are addicted, you have to get addicted yourself (which, at this point, I most certainly am). Most competitive games have that problem, but in Civ4 it's just so extreme, and having a public thread probably makes it even worse. Deep down, I think that's what has me so dejected, rather than the decision itself. These games, over the last couple of years, have become a small part of my identity. I've made some great, genuine friends playing Civ here. My life's changed a lot, but there's been a PB or two in the background pretty constantly. And it's sad to lose that. But I'm pretty sure that they're inherently somewhat unhealthy, and ticking time bombs at best. Civ4 is so much fun! ...until it really, really isn't.

[Charriu]

I can absolutely relate to that

[Mjmd]

Which part of the etiquette thread Tarkeel? Most people agree there SHOULD be a rule for post war splits, but as far as I can tell there isn't one. Again, 100% plan to change that.

[Mjmd]

Maybe this was just lose-lose all along.  

You'll find when you go in the lurker thread what has been fairly described as "rules lawyering" by me. I solemnly swear there was no ill intent on my part. I felt it was a situation where each side had valid points, which is what made it so hard. In situations like that I think communities have to follow the current rules, which I get felt really bad from your end. But I also didn't see how we could go to Nauf and say "the current rules support you, but too bad". Most of my argument was without trying to judge if the double move was intentional or not as I truly don't believe lurkers should be asked to do that. However, if I had to, I truly think Nauf was probably just pyft. T189 he logged on 7 hours after gav rolled the turn. I don't think he was watching the turn or even caring when he got the notification. IE I think it was honestly just a crappy situation overall where both sides got really into the game and what then happened in it. Which as you said is definitely something civ4 multiplayer is really good at doing.

As stated I've posted to add / change the rules that caused this for whatever that is worth. 

Anyways, still rooting for you. Hope you can have some more fun.

[Amicalola]

T200 - Amicalola Stops Sulking, Probably
Business is booming. 



I am pretty bemused by the last 10 turns. Naufragar had an amazing opportunity to ruin us with Galleons, about a three turn window. He mostly wasted it, then declared war on the turn I unlocked Astronomy. By the time his Galleons were in position, we already had some of our own ready to defend. Then he signed a white peace.

And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the window to deal with us is tick, tick, ticking away. Our demos are obviously GA-Boosted:


We also adopted Mercantilism this turn, after this image was taken. But I get the feeling that even when it runs out in three turns, we're significantly ahead of the rest. Either way, we'll probably find out soon. I do need to decide whether we want Serfdom or Slavery long term - it's a tricky call.

[thestick]

So what's the plan, no matter how vague? If nauf's window to deal with you all is ticking away, what happens next?

[Magic Science]

Just kill someone already. It's Turn 200, for crying out loud!

[Amicalola]

Oop, sorry everyone, busy few days. 

So what's the plan, no matter how vague? If nauf's window to deal with you all is ticking away, what happens next?

The plan is generally to use Serfdom to establish tech parity, then a tech lead, over Naufragar. However, I suspect I made the wrong choice here - if Naufragar makes a committed effort, he can probably whip enough units to cripple me with a few razes.  

Just kill someone already. It's Turn 200, for crying out loud!

Serfdom = No Killing People.  Just ask poor Ginger.  

Interestingly, Ginger offered me 100gpt to stop trading with SD/Commodore, plus Gems, Ivory, Iron, Copper and Horse. Of those resources, Copper was my only duplicate. I had to think for a long time here. Obviously, those resources (and my other deals) are quite helpful; it totals +5 happiness in most major cities, for example. But 100gpt is a lot. Ultimately, I did not take the deal because I think it would likely provoke retaliation from at least Superdeath, and also because it felt a little bit intangibly weird. I did offer Ginger my source of Iron for free, though.

[Amicalola]

Last turn I made the (poor, unthinking, rash) decision to spend 550 gold upgrading 5 caravels to frigates near Naufragar's nearby naval stack. But he didn't move his own stack away, so we were able to kill 3 Frigates, 3 Galleons, 1 Privateer and Caravel, for the cost of 3 Frigates and 1 Galleon (we should have lost 2+2, so relatively standard luck). So that was cool.  I suppose he thought the 10% coastal bonus would be worth more than it was in reality.   

I'm sorry, I'm still a bit burnt out (on life itself, I think, not civ), so despite not-sulking I still haven't been reporting, and I haven't been playing very well; a bit autopilot, I suppose. PB66 has suffered similarly. I think one of my strengths in civ is creative solutions to problems, so that's a bit of a shame. Anyway, by the time I realised I wanted to do this turn I'd already rolled it. But next turn I'll try to get a real report up.