 |
|
|
The last happy evening ended with a player leaving our group it seems. As far as I'm concerned, Deity is OUT. I wonder what this chapter holds 
------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.
|
|
| |
|
|
deity
|
|
So, Alexanders Horse, you use a smilie.
You try to lighten it a bit, eh?
How about a full apology to me first? Please?
Ming, are there any rules about this?
This seems completely unfair to me.
You can't just call people things like that just because you are upset about losing a few units.
You seem to be looking for a way to NOT play me.
I said if I was wrong about the unit bribe I would go back a turn. But in just about every game I've ever played, including the Tourney 2000 and other big international and diplo games,unit bribe has almost always been allowed. I would say that it is the less experienced players who require *no unit bribe* (unless it is the occasional special settings game)
I have since discovered that you DEMAND *no unit bribe* in other games that I'm not party to. You insist on game rules in a bullying way and only suggest putting things to the *vote* when it suits you.
You have behaved very badly AHorse. And very arrogantly.
I remain a part of the Aussie group unless the others don't wish to play me.
As I understand it the rules in most of our current games are:
No city bribe
No formal alliances
It's not really appropriate to vote on SIMUL/TB during war because it's not so much a game rule as part of the mechanics of play. As has been discussed in various threads SIMUL during war is completely unfair to non-hosts and slower connections. My experimentation and experiences bears this out.
BTW, you don't have to restart the game to switch to TB once war is declared. All you do is PLAY your turns in the normal turn order - the honour system 
As for honour, Alexanders Horse, you have little.
* You are an abuser beyond the bounds of reasonable humour.
* You are a bully in determing game settings on the run.
* As a host you are irresponsible.
I expect a full apology but I won't give you the pleasure of not playing you.
Alexanders Horse, I'm still in all our games. You are running scared I think
I'd prefer that finbar or Hydey hosted though....
------------------
*deity of THE DEITIANS*
aka: half-assed dieticians
icq# 8388924
|
|
| |
|
|
|
What are you doing here Deity? This thread is for people I play, which no longer includes you. And there is nothing in this thread against you, but don't push your luck.
------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Would anyone be interested in the true story of Onion Island? I was fully consulted before that sorry incident
------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Friendship doesn't come into this - I still consider Deity a friend - in spite of all the cut and thrust.
I just won't play with him again until this is sorted out
------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
finbar
|
 |
Castiglion Fiorentino, Italy
Jan 1970
time: 06:12
|
|
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Alexander's Horse on 02-07-2001 10:21 PM</font>
I can't remember the last time I had a unit bribed in this group).
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
That's the point. Apart from duels, it's never happened. Which is probably why there was never any agreement on whether it should be allowed or not. It was tossed into the melting pot of house rules at the starts of games and passed over. As you have rightly pointed out before, we have very gentlepersonly games.
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>For example we play with ai civs and I only found out last week that my co-players have been merrily bribing the cities and units of ai civs whereas I have been busting my hump duking it out with them for months 
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
As far as I'm aware, it's been long established that humans can bribe AI units and cities. They can (and will) do it us, therefore we can do it to them. The point being, that unit bribing, and turn-based for war for that matter, are not the only unresolved issues.
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>So now you can all go and have a good laugh at our expense
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
Look upon all this as high class entertainment for the prols out there. We supply the only erudite abuse on this site!
------------------
Founder, ACS Pedantry Institute
Founder, ACS Gourmet Recipe Exchange
Troll & Hydey Wrangler
Mono Rules!
#33984591
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by finbar (edited February 07, 2001).]</font>
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
War, I know its pathetic but I suspect Deity only wants to go back a turn in the hope of saving his 2 ships and 2 cara.
But cutting thru all this, I have been wargaming for nearly 30 years and when cr#p like this starts, in my experience the end is usually nigh. People who start stoppages in play for rule disputes are best avoided. They do it once, they do it again and again. There are always grey areas. Deity seems to be fairly sh*tting himself, for reasons I cannot fathom, over simult war and the rest of us I dare say are equally daunted at the prospect of having to wait for Deity to finish his war turns again (if we go back to TBS).
Also of late, when Deity plays we get less play in. First we get the Deity, "am I free to play tonight" fan dance (this take on average half an hour), then we get the Deity "let's haggle over which game we play" shemozzle (another half an hour); and now we starting to get the Deity "I don't like the rules" stoppages in play
I really wonder if its worth the effort frankly. If Deity doesn't show up we can normally get a game up in 5-10 minutes and we've had no stoppages in play that I can recall.
------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Atomic Dogg
|
|
Adelaide, Australia
Oct 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
I'll use every dirty trick in the book against the ai.......death to the infidel!! Jihad on their unworthy asses!!
as far as i knew, unit bribing was out...if only because nobody had done it to me for all the time i have played in this group (which hasn't been a very long time.)
Perhaps we should carve the house rules into a couple of stone tablets for future refference....only then can we truly seperate the sinners from the rightious...
------------
-Atomic Dogg is Lowang
-Where did i leave my bible?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Atomic Dogg on 02-08-2001 12:11 AM</font>
as far as i knew, unit bribing was out...
------------
-Atomic Dogg is Lowang
-Where did i leave my bible?
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
Thank you Lowang.
Next witnesss! The prosecution calls Hydey!
------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
deity
|
|
I can honsetly say that, like finbar, I thought the only two rules agreed on that deviate from the normal game were No Alliance and No City Bribe of humans.
To get the Aussie group up again we need a vote to set rules for all our games in progress.
I vote for the above rules. They are standard throughout much of 1x1x civland.
As for SIMUL, well ALL our current games were started before we knew about SIMUL. I was the one that saved the TBS saves as SIMUL saves so that we could speed up our games. I have strssed all along that SIMUL during war is absurd and you miss out on all the fun by trying to cover so many areas of activity. So, as for ground rules ALL our current games that I am in were set up as TBS!
But, for the sake of the group I'll accept the vote on all these points.
Thanks for your efforts War4
If diplo-bribing of units is dis-allowed by this vote I'm happy in that particular game to go back a turn and disband the caras I lost if they still exist.
And allow AH to attack with that Chariot if he so desires.
Can't say fairer than that eh?
I guess the 5 regular Aussies are the ones to vote:
finbar
AHorse
Lowang
Hydey
deity
Also, I must suggest that this is a vote for what YOU want, not what you thought you were told was the rule.
As for scared AH, hmmmmm, try getting out of this
You are trying to avoid playing me now but I really want to keep playing you.... no matter what 
------------------
*deity of THE DEITIANS*
aka: half-assed dieticians
icq# 8388924
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by deity (edited February 08, 2001).]</font>
|
|
| |
|
|
|
deity
|
|
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Alexander's Horse on 02-08-2001 12:57 AM</font>
Thank you Lowang.
Next witnesss! The prosecution calls Hydey!
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
Lowang was new to the group and was TOLD by SOMEONE that unit bribing was out.
Let's have a fresh democratic vote to clear the confusion as per my above post.
------------------
*deity of THE DEITIANS*
aka: half-assed dieticians
icq# 8388924
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
SuperSneak
|
 |
In the land of the one-eyed
Jun 2000
time: 21:12
|
|
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by finbar on 02-08-2001 07:46 PM</font>
Only ******* idiots split infinitives.
How's that for hostility?
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
Not hostile at all. Merely antiquated, pedantic and hide-bound.
When discussing the English language, a "split infinitive" is commonly thought of as adverbs placed between the word 'to' and the verb. Thus the infinitive is thought of as the construct 'to' plus a verb. Further, the grammar gurus encourage us to think of "split infinitives" as a bad thing. The reason being that in Latin, the infinitive is a single word, so by definition cannot be split. And English grammar gurus like English grammar to follow Latin rules (hence also another silly rule about not using a preposition to end a sentence with).
There are two problems with this. Firstly, if the "infinitive" should not be split, then surely neither should, say, the future tense. After all, the future tense form of a verb in Latin is one word, while it is two in English --- as it involves the auxiliary verb "will" or "shall". ((I) shall go = (ego) ibo in Latin). Yet I for one have never heard complaints about "I shall boldly go" constituting a "split future" therefore a bad thing.
Secondly, the infinitive does not actually need the 'to'. It is frequently used without the 'to' in standard English, as exemplified in any of these constructs:--
I help build the house.
He can be a star.
God must be omnipotent.
I shall build a house.
I do not build.
where the form of the verb 'be' or 'build' in the above examples is the infinitive. (The future tense is the construct 'shall'/'will' + infinitive.) The word 'to' thus has a similar relationship to the infinitive of a verb, to that of the word 'the' before a noun. But no-one considers the word 'the' to be part of the noun. Sir Ernest Gowers, writing in 1954, is quoted originally in The Complete Plain Words, thus:--
"The well-known [...] rule against splitting an infinitive means that
nothing must come between 'to' and the infinitive. It is a bad name, as was
pointed out by Jespersen [...] 'because we have many infinitives without
_to_, as "I made him go". _To_ therefore is no more an essential part of the
infinitive than the definite article is an essential part of a substantive,
and no one would think of calling _the good man_ a split substantive.' It is
a bad rule too; it increases the difficulty of writing clearly [...]."
...like spurious rules about prepositions not ending sentences. One of the things which annoys me is people clumsily rearranging their sentences to avoid pseudo-errors like "split infinitives". Often the "split infinitive" construct is the most natural and sensible one (eg "to sexually assault her" is more natural than "to assault her sexually" and certainly more natural than "sexually to assault her" , so even if the rule against them was valid, it would still be a bad rule.
Why the misinformation?
I suppose, the grammar gurus got confused about the use of the infinitive with 'to', and the single-word infinitive in Latin (and French and Spanish). 'Amare' often is best translated as 'to like'. But 'possum amare' is 'I can like'. As demonstrated above, the infinitive in English can occur without 'to'.
At the end of the day, the rule against "split infinitives" is a totally artificial rule, invented by some 16th-Century grammar guru who was trying to be clever.
So you see, Fin, a movement toward a more natural language pattern takes priority over your inane picking at trite and hackneyed usage of said language.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious, though.
I knew you were good for something.
------------------
Bring it!
"How ridiculous and how strange, to be surprised by anything that happens in life." Marcus Aurelius (Meditations)
Chief Revealer of Personal Foibles
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Hey Sneak, why do you work in a factory?
------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
SuperSneak
|
|
In the land of the one-eyed
Jun 2000
time: 21:12
|
|
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by finbar on 02-10-2001 06:15 AM</font>
"Firstly" is considered inferior to "first" in this context, Sneak, even if you're following it later with a "secondly".
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
By whom?
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>
Oh, and it's very poor form - especially for a writer - not to source information you lift. 
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
Firstly, you don't consider the Internet a viable source.
Second, I didn't have my MLA handbook on me in order to properly site that idiot.
Moreover, I don't care.
Heretofore, you have been a royal pain in the ass, so I was just having some fun. (How's that for ugly word usage? I'll bet it's like fingernails on a chalkboard).
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>
Hey Sneak, why do you work in a factory?
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
The same reason you're a faceless drone for the government: my genius is unappreciated in my time.
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>
He works in a factory to earn money.
why else would he work
<img src=/forums/"/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
You guys are just so clever aren't you? Then Hydey waltzes in and proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt that his WISDOM is worth more than your "intelligence" or "cleverness" any day.
Thank you, nephew.
------------------
Bring it!
"How ridiculous and how strange, to be surprised by anything that happens in life." Marcus Aurelius (Meditations)
Chief Revealer of Personal Foibles
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-02-2001 02:13
and he was the host IIRC 
|