 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Moonbars
|
 |
Glasgow
Aug 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
I am happy to adhear to them if everybody else is - But:
I think 2a, 3a and 3b make things rather complex.
For instance, if my enemy discovers map making, but my ally and myself do not have it, I could be sneaky and start exchanging detailed info with my ally, because the rule doesn't say *I* have to have map making, just that it has been discovered.
"a)They shall not make cooperative research, development, or combat plans until an embassy is established between them and an alliance formally declared. "
Players could twist this as well. How should I formally declare an alliance? If I say to my friend, "let's attack Beta, for he is smelly!" then have i not formally declared an alliance? doesn't say I have to tell anybody else about it.
These rules are also very very hard to enforce or prevent, or detect if two parties play it carefully, so why make it more complex? Why play with some rules that introduce extra exploits?
I would vote against accepting 3a and 3b, but if we play with them then I would suggest we add an additional rule, which is covered in the pre-amble to the rules but bears repeating:
"Players shall play in the spirit of the rules!"
On combat reports, I vote in favour!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
sabrewolf
|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002
time: 06:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Moonbars
I am happy to adhear to them if everybody else is - But:
I think 2a, 3a and 3b make things rather complex.
For instance, if my enemy discovers map making, but my ally and myself do not have it, I could be sneaky and start exchanging detailed info with my ally, because the rule doesn't say *I* have to have map making, just that it has been discovered.
"a)They shall not make cooperative research, development, or combat plans until an embassy is established between them and an alliance formally declared. "
Players could twist this as well. How should I formally declare an alliance? If I say to my friend, "let's attack Beta, for he is smelly!" then have i not formally declared an alliance? doesn't say I have to tell anybody else about it.
These rules are also very very hard to enforce or prevent, or detect if two parties play it carefully, so why make it more complex? Why play with some rules that introduce extra exploits?
I would vote against accepting 3a and 3b, but if we play with them then I would suggest we add an additional rule, which is covered in the pre-amble to the rules but bears repeating:
On combat reports, I vote in favour! |
of course everything can be bent to one's own needs. no one knows if 2 players are secretly mailing to each other and "optimizing" their reseach effort. but imagine you're the one left out and stuck next to two who are allied, one researching and the other one pumping out units... you would't like that, and none of the others would like that.
that's why my opinion is, don't do to others what you wouldn't want them to do to you.
quote:
"Players shall play in the spirit of the rules!" |
which is about similar ot what i mean 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Andydog
|
 |
London
Jan 2001
time: 05:35
|
|
Moonbars, I think that if we let common sense prevail, and play in the spirit of the rules, we won’t have any problems. 
quote:
Originally posted by Moonbars
For instance, if my enemy discovers map making, but my ally and myself do not have it, I could be sneaky and start exchanging detailed info with my ally, because the rule doesn't say *I* have to have map making, just that it has been discovered. |
Imagine you don’t know the secrets of map making. You’ve never seen a map, nobody has ever explained the concepts of an ‘aerial view’, ‘latitude’, ‘longitude’, ‘scale’, etc, so when you receive the map it looks like a bunch of lines on some parchment – you don’t know how to relate these lines to your surroundings – it’s therefore totally meaningless.
The intention of the rule is clearly that you BOTH have had to have learnt map making before you discuss anything relating to geography. Nit-picking the precise wording of the rules goes against the spirit of them.
quote:
"a)They shall not make cooperative research, development, or combat plans until an embassy is established between them and an alliance formally declared. "
Players could twist this as well. How should I formally declare an alliance? If I say to my friend, "let's attack Beta, for he is smelly!" then have i not formally declared an alliance? doesn't say I have to tell anybody else about it. |
If we again look at what the rule is intended to prevent, then there can be no loopholes in its interpretation.
The idea is that any alliance you have with someone is common knowledge so that the others can adjust their strategy as they see necessary – so that they have a chance at keeping the game balanced. For example, if two people are researching different paths and swapping techs without the others knowing, then the others could suddenly find themselves out of the game. You wouldn’t like that if it were you; you’d probably feel cheated because you weren’t given the opportunity to counter the strategy. This is what the rule is attempting to prevent and I therefore we should interpret the wording as such.
I’m currently in many games where the only rule is ‘no contact until you meet in the game, and then anything goes’, and that works fine. This is a tournament however, and the rules are there to determine who is truly the best civ player. I’d therefore vote to keep 3a and 3b. And certainly I’d pledge to play within the spirit of the rules.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
sabrewolf
|
|
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002
time: 06:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Andydog
I think we're all in Europe - myself and Mickeyj are in London, you are in Switzerland, and Moonbars is in Glasglow? (I’m a New Zealander btw, not to be confused with those dodgy Australians! )
I'm available from 9am GMT tomorrow for some quick fire turns. During weekdays, I'm generally available from 8pm GMT to midnight GMT. |
sorry, didn't mean to offend you.
i get mixed up with all the flags with the union jack in a corner
i was born in london (enfield, to be precise), but never lived there..
so anyway.. great! we may get some days with multiple turns in! thursday is usually bad for me, otherwise it depends on social events.
what do you people think about following:
no only post your our confirmation here and the combat results, but also some stuff like saying when we're available, etc. everything else (maps and other secrets) of course not.
?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-04-2004 11:52
I'm happy with everything there. 
|