05-06-2005 08:58									#481
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither The Lego war would have gone quite a bit differently had we known this cheese was on the table.

I can't believe you guys didn't suspect such a thing was already in place or at least that we were using you as pawns to get rid of Lego and that you'd be next. What team in their right minds would forgo the opportunity to crushingly defeat their neighbor who has 90% of their army overseas? It was SO obvious that some of us even feared that it would be a giveaway to our intentions.

You were duped big time.

Regardless of this, a written assurance on ND's behalf that they'd be neutral would have sufficed for us as ND had many chances to wipe us out before and never did and had honored all previous agreements with us. And had Trip deemed a shared victory illegal we would have probably agreed to something like "we wouldn't fight amongst ourselves until all other non-Bobian teams are destroyed first". In either case nothing would have changed for Lego or GS.

quote: Why are you whining about people not going along with your secret rules change?

Because there was no rules change. Deal with it.

	05-06-2005 09:01									#482
	Inflate your Upload Space

Btw, regarding cheesy tactics, we both honestly thought that winning by RoP-rape would be the ultimate in cheese and that we would get no respect from anyone else if the winner won that way.

And proof that other teams probably though via similar lines is that it was our main excuse regarding ND's neutrality during the Lego War. "ND would not dare to RoP-rape us because it would be the biggest slimeball tactic and they are too honorable to do that". It worked since you all bought the excuse thus indirectly implying you considered RoP-raping equally cheesy as us.

	05-06-2005 09:14									#483
	Got spare money?

Let us all agree to disagree.

I *still* say this was a game well played, and as intense and interesting as any that I know.

We, on this thread, are among the stalwarts... is there any question that we will be around for Civ4?

I throw a gauntlet down: nye has already hinted in our private forum at the next generation of Gathering Storm... let us settle our differences on the next map, the next Civilization.

(... with better defined rules! )

* Theseus throws his glass into the fireplace, and raises a cheer for all!

	05-06-2005 09:19									#484
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Master Zen I can't believe you guys didn't suspect such a thing was already in place or at least that we were using you as pawns to get rid of Lego and that you'd be next. What team in their right minds would forgo the opportunity to crushingly defeat their neighbor who has 90% of their army overseas? It was SO obvious that some of us even feared that it would be a giveaway to our intentions. You were duped big time.

Yup, you got us there. We were playing the game that we all started out in years ago.

It didn't occur to us that two teams would bastardise a project that 100s of people had sunk years into.

Congratulations, you won. I am not disputing that. What I would dispute would be the the value of what you have won.

	05-06-2005 09:24									#485
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Theseus Let us all agree to disagree. I *still* say this was a game well played, and as intense and interesting as any that I know. We, on this thread, are among the stalwarts... is there any question that we will be around for Civ4? I throw a gauntlet down: nye has already hinted in our private forum at the next generation of Gathering Storm... let us settle our differences on the next map, the next Civilization. (... with better defined rules! ) * Theseus throws his glass into the fireplace, and raises a cheer for all!

Well said T

I for one look forward for the first Civ4DG among us. I do not know if it will result in a reincarnation of these teams for various reasons though:

1 - Availability. Perhaps not everyone will be active enough then. For example, there is no GoWer right now besides myself who could conceivably take charge of the team for anything other than a temporary stretch.

2 - Reputation. Like it or not, I feel that many of the grudges will carry on from this game to the next if we repeat our teams and our lineups.

Still, I'm sure we'll find a way to make a great new serious demogame with most of us here present. Heck, maybe we should have some sort of "draft" like they do in the major leagues...

-MZ

	05-06-2005 09:27									#486
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Congratulations, you won. I am not disputing that. What I would dispute would be the the value of what you have won.

A half-victory for GoW is all I can claim.

Considering that for most of this game our odds of victory were 0%, I'm more than happy for that as is all of my team.

	05-06-2005 09:29									#487
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Master Zen Given that, I think the optimal solution for the sake of egality will be to vote for... Vox. That way I can snicker whenever you say that Vox won the PTWDG

Sounds good to Vox. But why would you be snickering?

	05-06-2005 09:36									#488
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Theseus Let us all agree to disagree. I *still* say this was a game well played, and as intense and interesting as any that I know. We, on this thread, are among the stalwarts... is there any question that we will be around for Civ4? I throw a gauntlet down: nye has already hinted in our private forum at the next generation of Gathering Storm... let us settle our differences on the next map, the next Civilization. (... with better defined rules! ) * Theseus throws his glass into the fireplace, and raises a cheer for all!

Vox has already talked about the "next demogame" in Civ4 having a revamped Vox Controli team. And this time the team won't be so wishy-washy when going after GS....not if I have anything to say about it at least.

	05-06-2005 09:47									#489
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Rhothaerill Vox has already talked about the "next demogame" in Civ4 having a revamped Vox Controli team. And this time the team won't be so wishy-washy when going after GS....not if I have anything to say about it at least.

SLAPSLAPSLAP

Did I just read that correctly? You smacked your glove across my face?

Bastard!!

Yes, sir, I take your knavedly challenge!

(and I have a better relationship with Soren and Trip, so you are screwed)

	05-06-2005 09:49									#490
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Well, we had Soren on our team this go-round, and look where it got us.

	05-06-2005 09:53									#491
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by asleepathewheel Well, we had Soren on our team this go-round, and look where it got us.

And GWT whooped Firaxis' ass in the ISDG.

Moral of the story: Firaxis might be good at making the game, but they suck at actually playing it.

YEAH TRIP I'M TALKIN' TO YOU LOLOLOLOL OMFG!!!!!!!11!1!11!! >_<

	05-06-2005 10:02									#492
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Soren didn't actually post anything substantive-he just lurked and observed what we were doing.

Hopefully the betatesters can play with as much vigor and scrutinize cIV as much as we did this game. How many crashes and bugs? Granted, a few from the multiple patches, but there were more wrinkles than just that...

	05-06-2005 10:03									#493
	Suffering from ads?

Kudos, Trip, for the getting the job...

But, as MZ points out, we gonna be smackin' you around...

	05-06-2005 10:06									#494
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

First Trip has to see if there are any teammates from Lux left still. Not that it really matters if there aren't.

And to Theseus...I'll take that challenge.

	05-06-2005 10:29									#495
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Master Zen I can't believe you guys didn't suspect such a thing was already in place or at least that we were using you as pawns to get rid of Lego and that you'd be next. What team in their right minds would forgo the opportunity to crushingly defeat their neighbor who has 90% of their army overseas? It was SO obvious that some of us even feared that it would be a giveaway to our intentions. You were duped big time.

Don't confuse "duping" someone with having them in a corner.

We knew GoW and ND were in it for the long haul after our chat where the NAP was signed. An alliance to be the last two in the game was pretty obvious. Why do you think we sided with RP?

We knew we had to intervene on Bob to favor the small end of the 2v1, or at least be the one claiming the "1's" territory, as if GoW and ND split Bob, one of you would win. GS and Lego had a chance at that point to form the alliance to deal with GoW and ND, but we didn't get it done. After Lego sided with GoW and ND against GS, GS saw no option but to try to play 3rd fiddle and hope a rift broke out between GoW and ND. The hope was that one of you would prefer the "little guy" on another landmass as your end opponent rather than the "big guy" neighbor.

If instead GS didn't go along with GoW and ND against Lego, the view was that it would be Lego going along with GoW and ND against GS. Remember GS didn't even have Rubber. Riflemen? Not much of a choice there for us. We were obsolete without an ally. Whether there was a chance to have Lego as that ally or not I'm not sure. I wasn't there during that period, and haven't read through the threads in that timeframe.

As for whether GS considered shared victory between ND and GoW, we did discuss it once. It was dealing with a phrase in a message to GoW, and we decided to leave it out because we felt it would be insulting to even hint at as something GoW would consider. This was when GoW was still proclaiming neutrality. So if you want to know our untainted view of shared victory, that is it.

quote: Regardless of this, a written assurance on ND's behalf that they'd be neutral would have sufficed for us as ND had many chances to wipe us out before and never did and had honored all previous agreements with us. And had Trip deemed a shared victory illegal we would have probably agreed to something like "we wouldn't fight amongst ourselves until all other non-Bobian teams are destroyed first". In either case nothing would have changed for Lego or GS.

I am with you on this point. There probably wouldn't have been much difference in what happened to GS and Lego if ND and GoW had to look towards eliminating each other afterwards.

quote: Btw, regarding cheesy tactics, we both honestly thought that winning by RoP-rape would be the ultimate in cheese and that we would get no respect from anyone else if the winner won that way.

While RoP rape (forced due to not being able to cancel treaties) would definitely be cheesy (regular RoP rape is debateable, I personally have no problem with it, and find it less than useful in most cases anyways), it could be easily circumvented.

Simply declare war before entering enemy territory. No more RoP. Problem solved. Then a few Settlers would have had pretty much the exact same effect. I think all but 3 of ND's cities were reachable by "rolling Tank" from GoW with just 3 Settlers.

	05-06-2005 11:09									#496
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Aeson Don't confuse "duping" someone with having them in a corner. We knew GoW and ND were in it for the long haul after our chat where the NAP was signed. An alliance to be the last two in the game was pretty obvious. Why do you think we sided with RP?

So obvious that we didn't even have that planned back then...

quote: We knew we had to intervene on Bob to favor the small end of the 2v1, or at least be the one claiming the "1's" territory, as if GoW and ND split Bob, one of you would win. GS and Lego had a chance at that point to form the alliance to deal with GoW and ND, but we didn't get it done. After Lego sided with GoW and ND against GS, GS saw no option but to try to play 3rd fiddle and hope a rift broke out between GoW and ND. The hope was that one of you would prefer the "little guy" on another landmass as your end opponent rather than the "big guy" neighbor.

We were too afraid that the "little guy" was a team which pulled a lot of "big things". Seriously, GS's performance was totally unproportionate to your size. Then again there was a notable lack of crack Civ3 players on the other teams. Many of us learned along the way and via other demo games like the ISDG (I can't emphasize how much that game helped me with GoW) though admittedly many of us did have (and still have) much more MP/PBEM exprience than the GSers - probably our only offset against your SP skills. I blame that and nothing else for GS's sometimes too-rigid foreign policy (as if you were dealing with the AI and not human opponents), and your lack of consideration of not-in-the-book alternatives since they are all too commonplace in PBEM games and MP.

Likewise another aspect where perhaps my view of this game differed than yours was that to me, this game doesn't prove anything definitive and thus I didn't see the need for there to be a sole undisputed leader. As more than one Apolytoner could have said, perhaps our greatest rival in Civ-dom is precisely the German Webring. One would think that therefore we had everything to prove Apolyton's superiority if we struck at ND in the end. But would it really prove anything? First of all, my team never considered itself "Apolytonian". We were GoW and GoW alone ruled our loyalties. Likewise, beating ND would prove nothing since GWT already beat us in the ISDG, a game which ultimately has more validity in terms of team vs team considerations. Thus, we had no qualms in sharing a victory with our inter-team rivals.

Heck, I'm kinda glad we had the chance to bond so closely with people from another site who on top of that were from a different country and had a different language. Who else am I going to e-mail now to practice my crappy knowledge of the german language? Demogame considerations aside, it was an unprecedented social experiment as far as online gaming is concerned and I'm damn proud to have been a part of it.

Then again there's the fact that there's a PTWDG II and PTWDG III and a plethora of other competitions. It would be very arrogant of us to say we're the "best" just because we won this one. The thriving popularity of demogaming means that this was only the equivalent of the first season. New story next one. Plus, we have Civ4 to see who's the best, and a better chance to continue this healthy rivalry not only amongst ourselves but amongst others I cannot think of.

Start practicing.

quote: If instead GS didn't go along with GoW and ND against Lego, the view was that it would be Lego going along with GoW and ND against GS. Remember GS didn't even have Rubber. Riflemen? Not much of a choice there for us. We were obsolete without an ally. Whether there was a chance to have Lego as that ally or not I'm not sure. I wasn't there during that period, and haven't read through the threads in that timeframe.

I doubt any of us would have considered an alliance with Lego at that stage. They were just too powerful. Heck, they STILL have the biggest score in the game right now!

quote: As for whether GS considered shared victory between ND and GoW, we did discuss it once. It was dealing with a phrase in a message to GoW, and we decided to leave it out because we felt it would be insulting to even hint at as something GoW would consider. This was when GoW was still proclaiming neutrality. So if you want to know our untainted view of shared victory, that is it.

That's what I never understood about GS, why you witheld many things that if I were in your shoes I would have definitely considered. It would not have been insulting to us, heck, it would be a bit frightening since we'd be like "oh sh*t, they know". Likewise I never understood why you never approached us for an alliance against ND. What was the worst thing that could've happened? We'd say no. I'd think that in your position I'd have risked many things since of the final three you had the lesser odds of winning. Same with RP's uranium. For the record, ND wanted to get at you since various turns before the war actually started and it was only after I persuading them otherwise that they backed down. When it became obvious your reluctance to keep that Uranium tile (the first hint was your acceptance of my Lego-split map, despite handing you the Uranium - which I had no choice since keeping it on our side would look real crooked - I placed the border conveniently where an ND city could target it with artillery) they decided to strike RP.

Everything went to hell when you got Uranium. It was this fact, that you weren't even willing to attempt to ally with us against ND, that made us think that you'd have used those nukes against us without fliniching if you had the chance. In our eyes that meant only one thing - you had to go, you had to go soon, and you had to go by whatever means necessary.

quote: While RoP rape (forced due to not being able to cancel treaties) would definitely be cheesy (regular RoP rape is debateable, I personally have no problem with it, and find it less than useful in most cases anyways), it could be easily circumvented. Simply declare war before entering enemy territory. No more RoP. Problem solved. Then a few Settlers would have had pretty much the exact same effect. I think all but 3 of ND's cities were reachable by "rolling Tank" from GoW with just 3 Settlers.

Yeah, believe it or not GoW never lied to you about that RoP. It automatically renewed itself as did most of our trade deals with others (and for some reason we did not suffer the "diplo bug" until much later than the other teams). Still, my bloodthirsty teammates would have never allowed us not to RoP-rape since that would have kind of been warmongerly orgasmic.

What'd be fun though once the game is "officially" over to test out a respective invasion of the other just for posterity's sake.

	05-06-2005 11:17									#497
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Master Zen I doubt any of us would have considered an alliance with Lego at that stage. They were just too powerful. Heck, they STILL have the biggest score in the game right now!

Had it been in the rules, we would have taken a locked alliance with Lego in a showdown of Bob vs non-Bob, in a New York Minute.

That would have been a game! It would have been glorious. However, we were deprived of that game by the secrecy that surrounded GoW's and ND's introduction of the locked alliance to this game.

	05-06-2005 11:22									#498
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Rhothaerill Vox has already talked about the "next demogame" in Civ4 having a revamped Vox Controli team. And this time the team won't be so wishy-washy when going after GS....not if I have anything to say about it at least.

Maybe this time my computer won't generate a map where we are sharing a small land mass with no sp, rubber, or uranium.

	05-06-2005 11:30									#499
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Maybe this time my computer won't generate a map where we are sharing a small land mass with no sp, rubber, or uranium.

Or maybe next time we'll have someone create a map for us. I hate random map PBEMs (as evidenced by one of the ones I'm in right now where my capital was 4 tiles away from someone else's capital, and 4 or so tiles to the coastline in the other three directions).

Other than that game and the PTWDG, all the PBEMs and demogames I play have had a mapmaker so that everyone has a fair shot (in most cases; ISDG not being one of them ).

	05-06-2005 11:32									#500
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Had it been in the rules, we would have taken a locked alliance with Lego in a showdown of Bob vs non-Bob, in a New York Minute. That would have been a game! It would have been glorious. However, we were deprived of that game by the secrecy that surrounded GoW's and ND's introduction of the locked alliance to this game.

Coming as a no surprise at all, I'd say, the Tiger says exactly what I posted some time ago in the "shared victory announcement"thread. A war-to-end-all-wars between Bob and non-Bob would probably have been something to remember. Pity we did not have it. Oh, well... what happened, cannot be unhappened...

I am following this thread, but feel I have nothing else to post. I have made my point of view clear elsewhere.

And personally... MZ, I believe you have zero chance to make some of us change their mind and look more favourably at the shared victory in this game. Call it sore loserism, if you wish... there must be a number of sore losers around, then... Likewise, I can see that none of those not exactly happy about how it all ended are going to make you change your mind. But I myself am far from speaking about sore winnerism...

Thus, I believe this discussion is pointless.

What I believe we could agree upon for next time, if there is any next time, that we should make it a rule that two or more teams can share the victory (I would welcome such a rule, as it significantly cuts on the "cutthroatness" of Civ3). Furthermore, such a locked alliance would have to be made public immediately after being arranged.

Sounds good?

	05-06-2005 11:36									#501
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by vondrack What I believe we could agree upon for next time, if there is any next time, that we should make it a rule that two or more teams can share the victory (I would welcome such a rule, as it significantly cuts on the "cutthroatness" of Civ3). Furthermore, such a locked alliance would have to be made public immediately after being arranged. Sounds good?

No need vond, Civ4 will come with cooperative victories possible from the start.

However I would truly disagree on making it public from the start as it would sometimes defeat the entire purpose of it. GoW and ND would NEVER have allied that way if we would have been forced to make it public since it would have likely resulted in a Lego/GS alliance to destroy us.

	05-06-2005 11:47									#502
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

If you want to play a team game, set them up from the start. Take C3C, add eight teams and put them all into four locked alliances. Than have at 'er.

Other than that, you are circumventing the intent of the game.

If your subterfuge is accepted, what keeps the next game going? It starts with 8 teams and they all agree to shared victory. The game is won in 3950 BC. Yaay! We won!

But what did the win mean?

	05-06-2005 11:58									#503
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Consider this, MZ.

What happens is ND and Lego get on this 'shared victory' crap?

They were one and two in real and potential power for a long time. What if in future the leading teams decide not to compete with each other and instead 'share victory' after squashing all the bugs?

Do you want to spend two years playing a game to be greeted with the message that too bad, so sad the two biggest kids on the block have decided to 'share victory' and take everyone else out?

It is absurd. It is the death of games such as this. Consider well whether you think you and ND did a good thing when you came up with the formula to be able to ignore the possibility of the back stab.

	05-06-2005 12:05									#504
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

What effect will this have on the finals of the C3CISDG?

How does anyone know the rules under which Apolyton is playing?

Maybe it would be better for two small teams to gang up and crush us early so they don't have to face something like this later. What the hell, maybe two small teams in the BCs should sign such a pact and go to town on everyone else. Why not?

	05-06-2005 12:12									#505
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither If you want to play a team game, set them up from the start. Take C3C, add eight teams and put them all into four locked alliances. Than have at 'er. Other than that, you are circumventing the intent of the game. If your subterfuge is accepted, what keeps the next game going? It starts with 8 teams and they all agree to shared victory. The game is won in 3950 BC. Yaay! We won! But what did the win mean?

That is not only so ridiculous but also so unlikely that I can't honestly think you really believe it would happen that way.

	05-06-2005 12:12									#506
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Why not?

	05-06-2005 12:16									#507
	Got spare money?

What it boils down to is that your nerve failed.

You were so afraid of ND backstabbing you, and vice-versa, you cooked up a condition under which neither of you had to worry about it anymore.

Only one problem. You failed to tell the rest of us. The rest of us continued to play under the one team wins all assumption. All of us had to worry about backstabs.

And you think we are dupes? We didn't know the ****ing rules had been changed!

	05-06-2005 12:17									#508
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Consider this, MZ. What happens is ND and Lego get on this 'shared victory' crap? They were one and two in real and potential power for a long time. What if in future the leading teams decide not to compete with each other and instead 'share victory' after squashing all the bugs? Do you want to spend two years playing a game to be greeted with the message that too bad, so sad the two biggest kids on the block have decided to 'share victory' and take everyone else out? It is absurd. It is the death of games such as this. Consider well whether you think you and ND did a good thing when you came up with the formula to be able to ignore the possibility of the back stab.

If ND and Lego in the process of such a thing crushed everyone else I would have no grounds to complain. What strikes me as so odd about this whole controversy is that the ones who have anything to lose about the decision is GoW and ND because neither of us can now claim a sole victory (a tradeoff we thought was worth it). Yet everyone else is whining except us

	05-06-2005 12:21									#509
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither What it boils down to is that your nerve failed. You were so afraid of ND backstabbing you, and vice-versa, you cooked up a condition under which neither of you had to worry about it anymore.

You are 100% correct. And I have stated this fact more than once in this thread already.

quote: Only one problem. You failed to tell the rest of us. The rest of us continued to play under the one team wins all assumption. All of us had to worry about backstabs.

Why should we have told everybody else? Spoil the plan? Get GS and Lego to ally against a united Bob? Give us some credit, at least we're not stupid.

quote: And you think we are dupes? We didn't know the ****ing rules had been changed!

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD NO RULES WERE CHANGED!!! We chose to ally because we otherwise though we couldn't win this game! You never thought it because you had NO-ONE to ally with at such a level as well as the fact that you were too proud to accept anything else than full victory. We weren't.

Is that so hard to understand? Because frankly I'm getting a bit ****ing tired of repeating it for the umpteenth time.

-MZ

	05-06-2005 12:21									#510
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Master Zen If ND and Lego in the process of such a thing crushed everyone else I would have no grounds to complain. What strikes me as so odd about this whole controversy is that the ones who have anything to lose about the decision is GoW and ND because neither of us can now claim a sole victory (a tradeoff we thought was worth it). Yet everyone else is whining except us

I admit you won. I am not whining. I am discussing the nature of your win.

I will not whine about your win so long as you never, ever, mention it as an accomplishment other than taking first place in a cheese contest.