I'll open this thread for discussing our resignation from the game. I think it's worthwhile discussing how the game will proceed without us in the game because things look pretty dim for our team continuing on. We've been in discussions with the admins and from what has been discussed I'd presume we will abandon the game. Until we get a definitive answer from the admins we will not discuss why.

Some of the things that should be discussed includes what should happen to our island.

:eek:

Can I ask why the resignation? Surely there must be at least one BABE player willing to play on for the sake of sportsmanship/not ruining the game! I mean, we've got 117 turns invested so far.

I've got to believe there's some kind of explanation for this. If not getting Aug-1 confused with April-1 … then what?

As of right now there's two players willing to continue on and one based on a contingency.

We'll give a full explaination or play on once the admins tell us how they'd like to proceed.

I missed this… Until we get a definitive answer from the admins we will not discuss why.
Sorry. :blush:

I guess I'll just wait patiently.

If we have to play on without you (I certainly hope not) – our options would seem to be:
A) Declare the BABE homeland to be off limits to any colonization.
B) Turn it over to the AI (bad idea, if even possible, imo)
C) Have an Admin just click "end turn" every time the save goes to BABE till their units and cities are all eliminated.
D) Have an Admin raise every town and disband every unit on the next save, and then declare open season on the land.


Best option, in my opinion, would be D. Would make for an interesting battleground.

I agree that option D would be the best option though the game engine won't allow you to abandon your capital. There may need to be a moratorium on settling the island until everyone's prepared for this.

This is so unfortunate!!!

My guess is that razing babe lands is the best idea, if they leave the game.

I think it's premature to discuss what will happen after BABE is abandoned until it actually happens.

Can you not just select "Retire" in-game, which will effectively raze all your cities and eliminate you form the earth (like in SP)?

There's no way I'm hitting ENTER for all of your turns.

Until we get a definitive answer from the admins we will not discuss why.
As you've seen in your forum, I've given you some options. I'm not sure exactly what it is you want RM and I to do? Approve your wish to retire?

Will possibly repost later.

Can you not just select "Retire" in-game, which will effectively raze all your cities and eliminate you form the earth (like in SP)?

There's no way I'm hitting ENTER for all of your turns. I'll check on a old save because I'm not sure.


As you've seen in your forum, I've given you some options. I'm not sure exactly what it is you want RM and I to do? Approve your wish to retire?OK well if it's RM's decision we're basing this on then retiring seems to be what the majority have voted.

I'll open this thread for discussing our resignation from the game. I think it's worthwhile discussing how the game will proceed without us in the game because things look pretty dim for our team continuing on.
Ouch! :( :eek:

I expected the game to go from 5 to 4 by elimination, not by resignation.

:(

Will any of Team BABE be refugees? (It doesn't seem likely, but you never know.)

It seems we can retire by clicking "end this nightmare" as it says.


Will any of Team BABE be refugees? (It doesn't seem likely, but you never know.)I would say it's very unlikely many would continue on though I can't speak for everyone. I will say I most definitely would not.

I'm not the most active member in this thing, what happened? was babe losing the game?

I guess they think they are. :confused:

Can't wait to hear if the retire thing is an option. Though that seems rough to vote to retire if someone on the team really wants to play on.

Team BABE built the Great Lighthouse.

If they resign, it is destroyed?

(The simple answer seems to be 'Yes', but very few things in this game are as simple as they seem.)

Yes. This makes the entire game worthless though. Team babe is acting like spoiled kids. (Except for whomp because he seems to be upset about it.

This is simply ridiculous. I can't even picture a single reason why a team would resign the game and ruin the game experience for everyone. Think you are losing (hard as that is to believe)? So what! For the sake of sportsmanship I would expect you to play on and do your bloody best even if you had been reduced to a OCC on a one-tile island! If there is nothing more behind this, then you are indeed acting like spoiled children. There are no excuses for this. None.

So – since we seem to have a decision… :sad: … can someone tell me what happened?!?

From where I sit, BABE was winning (or at least had the best odds for it) – Mounted Warriors, the Great Lighthouse on a water map, Skilled team members, Agri trait for a quick start, Commercial trait to support a far-flung empire, a head start on grabbing small island colonies…
I mean I love my team, but I’d have switched every other aspect of this game with team BABE! (even if they wiley Chamnix & crew was giving my invasion dreams heartburn)

I imagine the reason for resigning *must* be something other than in-game position?

Any help?

Yes. This makes the entire game worthless though. Team babe is acting like spoiled kids. (Except for whomp because he seems to be upset about it.

It is often wise to wait with namecalling until you have all the facts... ;) I am sure you too will be as annoyed as our team is when the facts are fully disclosed. Telling too much early might be percieved as a game spoiler and we do not want that, but I hope you will not percieve us as "spoiled kids" when you too are aware of what we have come to realize about the game. The main thing that annoys us right now is that we have already invested so much time in the game and just cannot see ourselves investing manyfold that time on a game prior to any action in game. Hitting return for another year is not our perception of fun and putting a value on how we spend our time I would say is a pretty adult reaction.

I try and try very hard to rummage through my head for any explanation for this that would not show you as spoiled children. So far I haven't found a single one.

Even if your enthusiasm for the game isn't what it has been, I would definitely expect you to play on regardless, and do your very best about it, for everyone else's sake! Yes, valuing one's time is an adult reaction. But you knew very well when you signed up for this game what kind of time it would take.

An adult reaction. Pretty much everybody else is (possibly was) having fun. Couldn't you of at least sticken it out for the sake of others. (Crosspost.)

If this is because they were losing, yes team Babe you're acting like spoiled children. But I don't think that's the real reason.

You're also acting like spoiled children if you don't think the game is 'fun' anymore.

It can't be lack of participation, can it? You have many active members, more than some other teams...let the white dove sing...

If it's because one member not having enough time, even if it's your turnplayer you can simply switch turnplayers.

So the only option left in my head is that not even one team Babe member has enough time for this, which is in fact ridiculously unlikely, but if it'd be true then it could be the only worthwile reason to resign from the game.

Or of course the other option, that this is a joke, but then it would be such a bad and non-funny joke that I wouldn't even call it a joke.

I'd like team babe to state the real reason why they want to resign from the game. If it's anything ingame, then it would involve that you don't think it's fun or that you are going to lose or are invaded or something, which is already unlikely, but even if it'd be true you would be acting like spoiled children.

So the only real reasons should be those that don't involve revealing ingame secrets, but rather things that happened in RL. Please enlighten us with the reason you want to resign from the game!

MTDG 90210! (or maybe you guys are too young to get the reference)

After being hinted to what the real reason for this is, I can only strongly restate my initial reaction. You are nothing but childish and spoilsports. This is a great game for all the rest of us, and you are ruining it.

:rolleyes:

How lame, and egoistic if the team were to resign now.

Incredible. This is no single player game that you just don't submit because you were getting bored. :shake:

This is a multi player game, you do have some responsibility for the game and the other players and to take part in such a game is a commitment. [pissed]

A comment from Ginger Ale why he too believe the game is broken might help the situation and get people to understand we are not trying to "ruin the fun" for everyone...

I guess the responisbility should extend to every aspect of the game not only to force players to stay in a sinking ship just because they happened to sign on. Sometimes it is better to cut your losses and move on, this is such a time. Sitting around until marines hitting return is not something anyone could percieve as fun unless you have a very mediocre life... ;)

Okay, to give some context, I will post the situation, let people judge for themselves, and perhaps discuss if there is a way to amend the rules to avoid BABE's retirement. I'll try not to be too specific.

An archipelago game usually means you own your entire island that others must reach by sea. Unless an opponent owns a city/tiles on your island, they must use some form of naval transport to drop units off. By taking a unit and placing it on a tile on your island where it meets the sea, you prevent the enemy from landing units there. If you place units, (even old, obsolete ones like warriors), on every tile, you effectively create a situation that will not be solved until Marines; no units can land on your island. It is a small investment with long-term benefits for whoever builds this "fortress" - they no longer need to defend their cities, produce units, or worry until late Industrial Age, and can proceed to just build improvements and infrastructure, safe from any type of unwanted military action.

Simply, BABE felt like this created an unfair situation and was not worth essentially "waiting" until Amphibious Warfare while all the teams stayed "turtled up" on their home islands.

A comment from Ginger Ale why he too believe the game is broken might help the situation and get people to understand we are not trying to "ruin the fun" for everyone...
I've read the comment from Ginger Ale, and honestly I'm quite baffled that a mod would say such a thing. This is not a broken situation - it could be seen coming from miles away, and it's a definite part of the game. If it was us, we would have done the same thing as SABER and not think twice about it. Exploit? No way. Force a way to land? Hell no. This is a very real strategic part of the game, and I can't sympathize with the Babes one bit. There would have been plenty of ways for them to avoid this situation, and if they couldn't expect this to happen then that's their fault.

EDIT: Crosspost with GA. I didn't refer to the comment in the previous post, I refer to the one that Wotan PMed me. About the above, blocking every single tile of your shoreline is a huge investment - in unit building, and unit upkeep not the least. If you manage to pull that off, then being safe until marines is the return on your investment, but you will be behind in many other areas. I don't see how that's a problem at all. This is no exploit with no cost attached - quite the opposite.

I guess the responisbility should extend to every aspect of the game not only to force players to stay in a sinking ship just because they happened to sign on. Sometimes it is better to cut your losses and move on, this is such a time.
I don't understand what you just said. What other aspects of the game are you refering to that responsibility should extend to? Sinking ship? Only in your imagination. And by "cutting your losses", which are very much your losses, you are imposing plenty more losses on everyone else.

Sitting around until marines hitting return is not something anyone could percieve as fun unless you have a very mediocre life... ;)
If sitting around until marines hitting return is the only way you can see to play this game, then you are a much more mediocre player than I thought.

If sitting around until marines hitting return is the only way you can see to play this game, then you are a much more mediocre player than I thought.
Flaming is really not called for, I made a "wink" comment in general about content in life and got this reply. This is so getting so out of proportions now I fear I regret ever joining the MTDG. The derogatives flying form all and sundry about our betrayal is not something I find amusing in a community supposed to attact people interested in spending their precious free time playing a game we all enjoy.

I have no objection to the way SABER built their defenses, we too talked about closing off part of our coastline to channel any attackers to where we wanted them to land but never considered turtling up as it is not really in the spirit of the game (as we percieve it and no intention to make any judgement on other teams values in this, so please don't flame me about it now.). But had I known beforehand that the game would have this probable outcome I would have stayed clear of it. We are currently looking at a possible date for any offensive action on land sometime around this time next year at the current progress of the game. With that in mind and no ancient, medieval or early industrial land action the game is just not possible to enjoy for a warmonger like myself.

I've read the comment from Ginger Ale, and honestly I'm quite baffled that a mod would say such a thing. This is not a broken situation - it could be seen coming from miles away, and it's a definite part of the game. If it was us, we would have done the same thing as SABER and not think twice about it. Exploit? No way. Force a way to land? Hell no. This is a very real strategic part of the game, and I can't sympathize with the Babes one bit. There would have been plenty of ways for them to avoid this situation, and if they couldn't expect this to happen then that's their fault.


I'm sorry, which comment exactly was this?

Just so you know, in team forums when I post I tend to be posting more as "individual Ginger_Ale whose comments do not reflect my official duties" rather than "administrator Ginger_Ale". If you are referring to where I said "disappointed", that was my own personal thought about the situation, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop BABE from leaving nor the other teams' wishes to play the game as is.

it's a definite part of the game. If it was us, we would have done the same thing as SABER and not think twice about it. Exploit? No way. Force a way to land? Hell no. This is a very real strategic part of the game, and I can't sympathize with the Babes one bit.

And therein lies the crux of the dilemna. Every team has this option and, if each team uses it, nothing can happen until marines. We aren't looking for sympathy, but we don't want to just waste our time until technology makes "turtling" a non-factor.

And therein lies the crux of the dilemna. Every team has this option and, if each team uses it, nothing can happen until marines. We aren't looking for sympathy, but we don't want to just waste our time until technology makes "turtling" a non-factor.

There are other ways to win besides attacking, aren't there?

This is quite funny. I totally understand BABE's point of view. They played poorly and now want out. TNT did the same thing last game (played poorly) and when I said I was through with the game I got blasted. At least the TNTers played on. The really funny part is that some of the ones who want to quit now where the same ones that blasted me when I wanted to do it.

I do see where you are coming from. Having a big army that will be obsolete by the time you get to use it (probably even if you upgrade it) must put a serious damper on things. I am surprised that you didn't see it coming, given the calibre of your players, but perhaps not soon enough to make a switch to plan B worthwhile. I'm sure that you understand other people's frustrations, and tried to rescue this as best as you could.

Thinking outside the box - If they modded the game to give privateers lethal bombard on land units - that could make things interesting. (but I don't even know if that could be done!)

Okay, to give some context, I will post the situation, let people judge for themselves, and perhaps discuss if there is a way to amend the rules to avoid BABE's retirement. I'll try not to be too specific.

An archipelago game usually means you own your entire island that others must reach by sea. Unless an opponent owns a city/tiles on your island, they must use some form of naval transport to drop units off. By taking a unit and placing it on a tile on your island where it meets the sea, you prevent the enemy from landing units there. If you place units, (even old, obsolete ones like warriors), on every tile, you effectively create a situation that will not be solved until Marines; no units can land on your island. It is a small investment with long-term benefits for whoever builds this "fortress" - they no longer need to defend their cities, produce units, or worry until late Industrial Age, and can proceed to just build improvements and infrastructure, safe from any type of unwanted military action.

Simply, BABE felt like this created an unfair situation and was not worth essentially "waiting" until Amphibious Warfare while all the teams stayed "turtled up" on their home islands.


Can't you win by spaceship or culture? I asked my team to win by spaceship before we even saw the start save. Of course, I'm no "star" player like Wotan.

This reminds me very much of his attitude in the SGOTM 11, one of his team made a really bad go of their turns and he quit. And please, I'm just restating the fact wotan, I don't have a tenth of the awards you've won, so I know you play to win, unfortunately you don't want to risk losing by keeping up with a game where winning isn't assured. Either stick with the AI or play with kindergarteners. And again, I apologize if my comments here insulted you or anyone on Babe or any mod or any other player.

My last comment is rather silly but: Since Chamnix is the one that foiled your easy victory plans, he should get to inherit your land and units. :lol: :p

Flaming is really not called for, I made a "wink" comment in general about content in life and got this reply. This is so getting so out of proportions now I fear I regret ever joining the MTDG. The derogatives flying form all and sundry about our betrayal is not something I find amusing in a community supposed to attact people interested in spending their precious free time playing a game we all enjoy.
I appologize. My comment was phrased in a way that was flame-ish in nature, and I understand that you were upset by it. My only defense is that I am really upset and disappointed at this whole situation, and sometimes say things that I later regret. As I now do. I know you are not a mediocre player, which makes this situation even harder to accept.

Flaming aside, what I was trying to say was that I think you have too narrow a perspective. Why would sitting around until marines be the only way to play the game? We are not planning to invade anyone even after marines come, but that doesn't mean that we just sit around pressing enter.

I'm sorry, which comment exactly was this?
This is a situation unfortunately I didn't foresee and am a bit disappointed by. My initial reaction was to let Saber continue their blockade - they really haven't broken a rule, and as Rik said, if they want to spend those resources then we can't stop them. The problem this brings up is that if every team does this, because there is no way around it until marines (and by then teams could have fortresses/barricades, better defenders like infantry, etc.) it eliminates warfare and most team-to-team interaction for a long time to come.

Because of this I'm in favor of somehow mandating a way to make landings from sea possible (perhaps by saying that a certain X number of tiles on the mainlands must be empty). I'll see what RegentMan has to say though, too.
Just so you know, in team forums when I post I tend to be posting more as "individual Ginger_Ale whose comments do not reflect my official duties" rather than "administrator Ginger_Ale". If you are referring to where I said "disappointed", that was my own personal thought about the situation, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop BABE from leaving nor the other teams' wishes to play the game as is.
Maybe you should have made this clear when you posted it then. It's very hard to keep your moderatorship out of any issues that regard game play, and the above comment sounds very much like you are planning to make an official ruling. How is that not the "administrator Ginger_Ale" speaking?

And therein lies the crux of the dilemna. Every team has this option and, if each team uses it, nothing can happen until marines. We aren't looking for sympathy, but we don't want to just waste our time until technology makes "turtling" a non-factor.
If every team uses this, it would mean a huge toll on the resources for every team, which means that the team that doesn't use it (which would be you in this hypothetical case) would have a large edge since you could divert your resources to other things. That said, it's rather unbelievable that every team would do such a thing, specifically for the huge drains on economy that comes with it. The thing is that you have very much put yourselves in this situation. SABER has felt as if they would be your target for the past I dunno, 50 turns? They have turtled up, which has taken them quite a lot of time and effort, because they knew you were coming! It's not as if it's a surprise attack. And it's not like it won't cost them to do so, they are falling behind by quite a bit. You still have plenty of options (just don't take this as an invitation to attack us ;)).

Thinking outside the box - If they modded the game to give privateers lethal bombard on land units - that could make things interesting. (but I don't even know if that could be done!)

Or let everyone build Berserks.


Game Mod
To be clear, BABE is not asking for a game mod. It was an idea mentioned by RFHolloway, as quoted above. It is a good idea but it needs further discussion.

I don't like the idea of modding the game to suit one team's preferred playing style. We all jumped into this blindly, taking our chances with a customized map. Do we now also mod the game to make space ship parts cheaper, lower the cost on the UN and increase the cultural points per turn of temples and libraries? :nono: Uh, er, I don't think so.

:lol: I have to give you a :goodjob: Marsden, I know I am competitive. And probably a bit undiplomatic at times. But it is not really Wotan against the world here, the overwhelming majority on BABE voted to drop the game I think 3 players could think about continuing but with certain conditions for a later revaluation. I guess this is another issue with Civ3 and why it is percieved as the weakest installment of the Civ franchise. To many things are not really good in Civ3, but I can still enjoy it though I tend to percieve Civ4 as a better game. I am however still learning in Civ4 so have nowhere near the skills of the best players there.

I think I underestimated the time aspect of a MTDG, if warmongering it could be played in a year or so but if you start thinking of going to Space I guess an end date is basically set somewhere at the end of this decade. I appologise to everyone I might have offended by putting my own value on time so much higher than many of you think I should, but just building infrastructure and researching until Modern times or just prior to it seems such a waste of what I could possibly do with my time, like really getting down to learn Civ4. ;) I hope I did not force the rest of BABe into voting to retire, if so I apologise for this too. They did not know what they did and hopefully the rest of the community can bring them back on the straight and narrow now. and once again, SABER did nothing wrong but maybe having iven some mods to a few units would have been a good idea. Like amphib to Archers and Longbowmen and Lethal Bombard to Privateers as suggested by others previously. They say hindsight is 20/20 and this sure is a situation where this rings very true. ANd it should have been done prior to starting the game not in midgame.

Disclaimer: Everything in this post is written with a bit of flippant flair and I hope it can be read with this in mind.

@Niklas: I too have a tendecy to speak before I have connected the brain at times, many edited posts come to mind. :lol: No offense taken just wanted to try to calm down the discussion.

Thanks for that post. I'm sorry I singled you out, but you are the turn player and I think it's safe to assume a dominant player on the team, not just along for the ride IOW. I also regret if you felt attacked, as that was not my intention. I also post without thinking it through at times.

:joke: Except for the last bit about SABER inheriting BABE lands and territories, I'm serious about that :mischief:


Actually, on fourth thought I can actually sympathise and see how this could be terribly disappointing to you. Having a well defined and undoubtedly well tuned plan of action and then not being able to implement it is frustrating. However, I strongly urge you or any of the rest of BABE to continue. You certainly don't have to be worried about being attacked yourselves if everyone else is just trying to survive your potential assault.

Or let everyone build Berserks.


Game Mod
To be clear, BABE is not asking for a game mod. It was an idea mentioned by RFHolloway, as quoted above. It is a good idea but it needs further discussion.



Just to be clear - I was looking for a change that was relatively small, would open up the strategy again (i.e. make some conflict profitable before Marines) but was in the future, so that people had time to react to the new strategy aspects. But again not a request, but trying to explore options.

I oppose any mods done to the game at this point. What CB says rings very true - we all signed up blindly, and the situation is the same for everyone.

It seems clear that Wotan is a lost cause. I think his actions are egoistic and narrow-minded, and I'm quite disappointed, but there seems no point in trying to persuade him to continue. But I very much hope that there will be others on the BABE team who will step out from the shadow of Wotan and continue to spread their Babely goodness to the rest of the world. :D

Please, Babes, don't give this up. Please, pretty please! :please:

Flaming aside, what I was trying to say was that I think you have too narrow a perspective. Why would sitting around until marines be the only way to play the game? We are not planning to invade anyone even after marines come, but that doesn't mean that we just sit around pressing enter.I think team babe has quite a few warmongers in the team (myself included). If I would have been told that this game would be a space race, I would have not ever joined. For me C3C means warmongering (being from the grumpy AW groups that's not a surprise). It's ok to go for space, but to not fight for the main part of the game is dull and nothing I want to be involved in. For example, I would have never gone for the Iro's knowing this is such a map as the UU is totally useless in this case.

Message to all:
Don't flame and discuss this in an adult way.

Although I am the mapmaker, this is a discussion on in-game elements and thus Ginger's and Regent's responsibility. Breaking forum-rules via -for example flaming or namecalling- is mine.

----

And now that this is made clear I'll give you my Point of View.
This map (like the previous one) still has some secrets, surprises and treats for you all. If sufficient teams dislike the turtling team(s) than it should not be difficult to get to marines soon enough. Besides that, there are so many coastal-tiles for each continent that to own sufficient blockaders will harm a Civ more than it will gain in protection. Especially if those blockaders need to be strong enough to withstand Marines. Turtling in isn't going to win a team the game. Aggressiveness and Cooperation (Diplomacy) is.

My specific task as mapmaker was to make a map that prevented a MTDG 1 scenario: fighting too early and in that way deciding the winner too early on. To accomplish that I gave all teams security till ships could travel seatiles safely. An incidental suicide-galley should work, but no mass invasions early. The risk of boredom via turtling is reduced in aspects of the map-design. Giving up because of fear of boredom is a sign of shortsightedness and a bit disrespectful to my qualities as mapmaker. :(

:agree: I agree completely with every single word that our beloved map making deity said.

Boy how did I miss this for so long? It would be a shame for a team to retire and I would hate to see it as that takes a lot of the fun out for everyone else too.

I have been trying to figure out a way to be anything but scathing of BABE, but I cannot.

The map isn't broken. You guys made a strategic decision to wait to invade until you have an overwhelming force (at least, I'm assuming that's what happened), as opposed to plopping a set of spears on a mountain somewhere to make sure you have a landing spot, or sending a few MW to attack 20 turns earlier or something.

Your strategy didn't work.

I, frankly, have been expecting to hear about war starting for about a month now and have not been able to figure out what the hell was taking you guys so long.

And now you guys are quitting, cause something went wrong?

I know a bunch of BABES and I like them. This screws up the game, big time.

There are other ways to win besides attacking, aren't there?

This is quite funny. I totally understand BABE's point of view. They played poorly and now want out. TNT did the same thing last game (played poorly) and when I said I was through with the game I got blasted.

Firstly we haven't played poorly and are in no danger from losing like you were. Secondly you quit without notice to anyone including your teammates, were as we have not quit yet but have come out and told everyone of our current feelings about the progress of the game in the hope of getting some adult discussions going and maybe even finding a solution that makes everyone happy. Do you need me to go on donsig?

As for some of the posts i find it interesting that some of the people accusing us of being childish are acting in that same manner.

@ Rik no one is accusing the map of being boring, i think its fantastic. What is boring is there being a way of enforcing a status quo for a long period of time meaning that their is only one way to play the game. On top of that it doesn't encourage diplomacy too much.

@Wotan, you had no influence on my feelings for one, just happen to have similar one to you, and you know i've not been backwards in disagreeing with you in certain issues;) .

@Saber in general, i really do not see how this helps you. Given the large amount of troops you have produced tells me this would not have been a one side fight by any means. Sure by avoiding a fight insures you can't lose, but does it not insure you can't win either? Had you fought and won would it not leave you in a better position then this does. I'm sure you guys are smart enough to have worked out that a unseen landing could only happen at certain points of the island and that anywhere else gives you time to react and redeploy. We were not looking for a walkover but a good fight were the best team wins.

I'm shocked to see people behaving this way - on both sides of the issue, honestly :rolleyes:

I don't have much to add, as Rik Meleet summarized my thoughts better than I could have.

BABE should not resign just because their strategy appears (in this brief snapshot of time) to not be working. Situations are dynamic, and just because things aren't going the way expected doesn't mean that things won't change for the better or worse. Giving up at the first sign of an obstacle isn't exactly adult behavior. That said, maybe they shouldn't be allowed to continue after all - what's going to happen when Gong beats them to Leonardo's? :lol:

Would BABE have thrown in the towel if FREE built the Great Lighthouse?

I really doubt that BABE would have left a few tiles open for invaders to land if they saw a Council flotilla heading their way - that's simply disingenuous. In which case, for them to now throw up their hands and exclaim "not fair, no fun" rings hollow.

Guys, please - look at your strategic position from further back, and you'll see that you definitely have strong advantages over the other teams right now, irrespective of being able to make landfall on Saber's continent or not. Let's get back into the game, and keep our workers working :whipped:

@Saber in general, i really do not see how this helps you. Given the large amount of troops you have produced tells me this would not have been a one side fight by any means. Sure by avoiding a fight insures you can't lose, but does it not insure you can't win either? Had you fought and won would it not leave you in a better position then this does. I'm sure you guys are smart enough to have worked out that a unseen landing could only happen at certain points of the island and that anywhere else gives you time to react and redeploy. We were not looking for a walkover but a good fight were the best team wins.

yeah, nice try, but everyone involved in this game knows there is more than one way to win at civ. Just cause we took away one option for you doesn't mean you should quit. You chose your strategy and we responded with what you see. Now you can either continue the game like men and try to find an alternative path to victory, or you can quit the game like cowards...And it appears you made your choice.

Now you can either continue the game like men and try to find an alternative path to victory, or you can quit the game like cowards...And it appears you made your choice.

I could argue that your tactics are those of cowards.

What is team SABER going to do? Just allow you to land and make the game in your favour. No serious player would want that to happen for their team, so we choose the strategy that would mean that our survival would be as long as possible. That is what any team would do. Do you want us to lie down and allow you free entry to our lands?

Would BABE have thrown in the towel if FREE built the Great Lighthouse?
Err.. no, thats a natural part of the game, this isn't

I really doubt that BABE would have left a few tiles open for invaders to land if they saw a Council flotilla heading their way - that's simply disingenuous. In which case, for them to now throw up their hands and exclaim "not fair, no fun" rings hollow.

Yes we would have, again its a natural part of the game. If we saw a anyones flotilla coming we would have tried to fight them off instead of finding a way to avoid the issue.

This is quite funny. I totally understand BABE's point of view. They played poorly and now want out. TNT did the same thing last game (played poorly) and when I said I was through with the game I got blasted. At least the TNTers played on. The really funny part is that some of the ones who want to quit now where the same ones that blasted me when I wanted to do it.

That whole statement proves how you don't understand our point of view as you draw similarities where there are none.

I'm not going to comment which way i voted but the petty name calling is really not helping the issue either way.

I could argue that your tactics are those of cowards.

At least we're committed to finish what we started and signed up for- MTDG II. The same can't be said for BABE.

What is team SABER going to do? Just allow you to land and make the game in your favour. No serious player would want that to happen for their team, so we choose the strategy that would mean that our survival would be as long as possible. That is what any team would do. Do you want us to lie down and allow you free entry to our lands?

I don't see how you came to that conclusion from my statement. My issue is that this is an exploit of a flaw in the game. So if we found an exploit that gave us 40gpt would it be ok for us to use?

At least we're committed to finish what we started and signed up for- MTDG II. The same can't be said for BABE.

Had this issue been brought up before the game and accepted as an allowed strategy i wouldn't have signed up in the first place

@Saber in general, i really do not see how this helps you. Given the large amount of troops you have produced tells me this would not have been a one side fight by any means. Sure by avoiding a fight insures you can't lose, but does it not insure you can't win either? Had you fought and won would it not leave you in a better position then this does. I'm sure you guys are smart enough to have worked out that a unseen landing could only happen at certain points of the island and that anywhere else gives you time to react and redeploy. We were not looking for a walkover but a good fight were the best team wins.

Unfortunately, there is more than 1 design flaw in Civ 3. I'm at risk of posting spoilerish information here, and I hope my teammates won't condemn me for it, but...

Since your boats are so spread out, we could easily permit you to land just 4 units and slaughter them, and we have discussed that possibility. However, it is obvious that you know a landing party of 4 in a spot of our choosing would get slaughtered, so why spread your boats out so far?

It occurred to us that your plan might be to try to land 1 unit without declaring war which would leave us 2 poor choices. We could let that unit sit there while you then brought as many reinforcements as your boats could carry, or we could declare war on you giving you war happiness. In that case, you could then carry on your merry way and enjoy +25% happiness for the remainder of the game, while we would be powerless to stop that.

Call me paranoid if you will, but in the ruleset discussion you will find this quote:


Do we also want something about declaring war for purposes of giving war happiness, or is that simply another tradable good?

with a reminder here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=4824985&postcount=105). Not a single person spoke in favor of forbidding any sort of exploitation of war happiness, so we have to assume that you would not be above using the lack of a rule in your favor.

In short, given all the circumstances, we made a decision of what we felt would give us the best chance of winning the game. You may disagree and think we made a poor decision, but we will play on and live with the consequences.

I don't see how you came to that conclusion from my statement. My issue is that this is an exploit of a flaw in the game. So if we found an exploit that gave us 40gpt would it be ok for us to use?

I don't see how this is an exploit. In reality, if a civilization had enough troops to blockade their coast, that method of defense would work. Think about how hard it was for the Allies to land on Normandy - even with so many more troops. The defense via blockade is legit.

An exploit would be something like if placing a road on coastal tiles would prevent invasions. Strategic placement of troops is NOT an exploit.

Unfortunately, there is more than 1 design flaw in Civ 3. I'm at risk of posting spoilerish activity here, and I hope my teammates won't condemn me for it, but...

Since your boats are so spread out, we could easily permit you to land just 4 units and slaughter them, and we have discussed that possibility. However, it is obvious that you know a landing party of 4 in a spot of our choosing would get slaughtered, so why spread your boats out so far?

It occurred to us that your plan might be to try to land 1 unit without declaring war which would leave us 2 poor choices. We could let that unit sit there while you then brought as many reinforcements as your boats could carry, or we could declare war on you giving you war happiness. In that case, you could then carry on your merry way and enjoy +25% happiness for the remainder of the game, while we would be powerless to stop that.

Call me paranoid if you will, but in the ruleset discussion you will find this quote:



with a reminder here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=4824985&postcount=105). Not a single person spoke in favor of forbidding any sort of exploitation of war happiness, so we have to assume that you would not be above using the lack of a rule in your favor.

In short, given all the circumstances, we made a decision of what we felt would give us the best chance of winning the game. You may disagree and think we made a poor decision, but we will play on and live with the consequences.


Without being spolierish myself we spread them out to confirm you had actually covered the whole coast.

As for your concerns about us using possible expoilts thats fair enough and i see your point of view in that. Call me naive but i wouldn't consider doing that because it would be unfair and if my team would consider doing such a thing i would be the first to protest

I don't see how this is an exploit. In reality, if a civilization had enough troops to blockade their coast, that method of defense would work. Think about how hard it was for the Allies to land on Normandy - even with so many more troops. The defense via blockade is legit.

An exploit would be something like if placing a road on coastal tiles would prevent invasions. Strategic placement of troops is NOT an exploit.

But according to civ3 they would even be able to attempt a landing even if the germans were only armed with clubs and sticks. I agree it should be easy but it shouldn't be impossible either

I don't see how you came to that conclusion from my statement. My issue is that this is an exploit of a flaw in the game. So if we found an exploit that gave us 40gpt would it be ok for us to use?

It is called tactics. If you know that you are going to be attacked. you do the best to defend yourself as best as you can.

Personally I wasn't aware that this exploit was even allowed. Like RobiD said, if I had know that blocking any landing is allowed, I would have never joined the game in the first place.

If you guys think, we are chicken, that's fine. I say that our Team did very well and is in a very strong position in the game. (not saying we are winning this). What fun is it to sail around the planet and find any access to the others blocked? We would have fought off a landing in a proper manner without blocking access completely. We would have allowed a landing and fought it off or lose (whichever outcome). Our team decided that a turtling game is absolutely no fun and not worth spending 1.5 years for.

@Rik, the map is fantastic. It provided us with a lot of excitement. I think the enthusiasm about the game had been pretty high in all aspects of the game. All the more were we put off by such spoilerish, unfun and exploitive action. It should have simply been banned (which I assumed it was)

Firstly we haven't played poorly and are in no danger from losing like you were. Secondly you quit without notice to anyone including your teammates, were as we have not quit yet but have come out and told everyone of our current feelings about the progress of the game in the hope of getting some adult discussions going and maybe even finding a solution that makes everyone happy. Do you need me to go on donsig?

Go on as long as you want. I've got a thick hide. I also think that if I had come out last game and tried to have TNT retire like BABE is trying to retire now I would have still gotten the same reaction. The real difference between last game and this one is I realized long before the Galls attacked us that we had no chance of winning, yet I played on as turn player (when no one else on the team would) doing what I could. Another difference is that my hissy fit as it's been fondly called got my TNT teammates to standup and play the save out. I didn't even disappear from the game. We took our whipping and some of us joined this game.

I don't know what kind of adult discussion you want. You all know the game changes radically if you just up and retire. How would last game have gone if TNT had done that? My thought then was we should just abandon our cities right away and disappear. I saw no point in fighting the Gauls just so MIA could win! Would the Gauls have been caught like they were by MIA cavalry? Maybe not. But in a way MIA deserved to win last time just as the other three teams deserved to lose. They played the best game and they others didn't. It's far from clear in this game who has played the best and that's the shame in the game being trashed so early.

It is called tactics. If you know that you are going to be attacked. you do the best to defend yourself as best as you can.It's an exploit to be able to 'defend' using warriors against even tanks IMHO. It's not defense, it's just using the stupid game mechanism of C3C. Defense would be if all troops could actually amphibiously attack.

Yes we would have, again its a natural part of the game. If we saw a anyones flotilla coming we would have tried to fight them off instead of finding a way to avoid the issue.

C'mon - it's not natural to leave tiles open for your enemy land on. Unless you're drawing them into a trap, that is. But what if you don't have the resources or time to put together a trap? The only safe tactic is to prevent the landing in the first place. I'll refer you to the wisdom of Karate Kid:
"Mr Myagi, Mr Myagi - what's the best way to block a punch?"
"Best way to block punch?... Don't be there."

So it is indeed a natural part of the game to blockade your coast - not an exploit at all. If the landmass were larger it wouldn't have been possible to blockade, or if the landing had been attempted earlier there wouldn't have been as many units for the blockade, in which case every smart player would employ a roving blockade. Please, stop insisting that blockades aren't natural. They are as natural as your desire to build the Great Lighthouse and launch an invasion in the first place.

So it is indeed a natural part of the game to blockade your coast - not an exploit at all.If that is really the common agreement amongst players, this game is surely my last MTDG

A lot of sour grapes here.
How about having a plan B or C?

Yes we would have, again its a natural part of the game. If we saw a anyones flotilla coming we would have tried to fight them off instead of finding a way to avoid the issue.

That's an interesting logic you have, cherry picking what is "natural" and what isn't. It's also much easier to say you would have when the situation didn't happen to you. And who said SABER will blockade until marines? It could be a temporary strategy. Taking one tile islands that are safe until marines is a similar strategy, I could point out, wouldn't it be more "sporting" to reliquish some of those?

Just for the record, a picture from the last MTDG:

http://img284.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dnutspreattackvq1.jpg

Now yes, we were much later in the game at that point, but the Doughnuts did make MIA wait until we got to marines - apparently they didn't feel blockading as much of the coast as possible was an exploit then.

Lots of discussion, lots of insight, some heated exchanges but hopefully no friendships ruined.

However....

will Team BABE still resign?

An exploit is using a game mechanic to gain something for yourself without a proportionate cost. There is definitely a proportionate cost for blockading your coast - your troop upkeep cost runs rampant. So say whatever you like about SABER's strategy, but it definitely isn't an exploit.

I also stand by my previous comment. If all other teams were to block their coast, and take the associated costs, BABE would win the game, since the rest of us couldn't keep up with research and the like. Without giving out too much spoiler info (*cough*), I dare say that SABER is the only team to have done this. Why? Because BABE has painted on the wall for the last 50 turns that an invasion of SABER is coming.

Just for the record, a picture from the last MTDG:

http://img284.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dnutspreattackvq1.jpg

Now yes, we were much later in the game at that point, but the Doughnuts did make MIA wait until we got to marines - apparently they didn't feel blockading as much of the coast as possible was an exploit then.

We really should have just got up in disgust in that game and quit. ;)

Everyone knew that this was possible to happen and yet nothing was said about it, so it was assumed to be fair game. You can't complain about the rules just because things aren't going your way, like you planned them.

Well I can bring up some pictures of MIA doing the same thing, especially a certain mountain tile :). Chamnix is right, it happened in the first game and no one took it as an exploit, simply logical tactics. I dont want to condone Saber taking it to the extreme, but there are other options to pursue.

I don't think SABER is taking it to the extreme - just taking it to it's tactical conclusion :)

Classical Hero said it well: "Everyone knew that this was possible to happen and yet nothing was said about it, so it was assumed to be fair game. You can't complain about the rules just because things aren't going your way, like you planned them."

This exploit is EXPLICITLY allowed in both HOF and GOTM. We had an 8 page discussion of the ruleset and no one mentioned it or a variety of other allowed exploits, cause they are just allowed.

What is different? Well, the AI would never pull it on you at a level lower than SID, cause they don't build enough units. And bombardment can get them to vacate a tile, too.

Maybe you should have made this clear when you posted it then. It's very hard to keep your moderatorship out of any issues that regard game play, and the above comment sounds very much like you are planning to make an official ruling. How is that not the "administrator Ginger_Ale" speaking?


Whenever I say "I'll wait for RegentMan", that means I'm not about to make a ruling. ;)

If you had known what the rest of the thread said instead of just taking one quote I made, you would know that in the thread we made it clear that if there was an amendment to be made, Team BABE would have to propose it - we as admins would not.

It seems like you are trying to pin the blame on me...

I think that is my fault Ginger Ale, I just PM'd Niklas the section where you expressed your disappointment.

@GA: Indeed, what Wotan said. He was using your quote as "proof" that the admins agreed with him, hence my reaction. But I see no reason to keep up that part of the discussion, you're doing a good job and let's just leave it at that.

Please don't misquote me. I never said I used it as "proof" the admins agreed with me, I sent it to you just to show that it was not only BABE players who found the situation disappointing. Unfortunately it is in the language of "glory and heroes" but it goes something along the lines of; even admins have some difficulty being enthusiastic about the situation.

Original text:
Nu är det så att även admins har svårt att känna entusiasm för situationen: Detta från "Ginger Ale"

Yeah, that's what it said. I'm sorry if you felt I misquoted, it wasn't my intention, and I don't think what I said differs very much from what you did. But anyway, let's just drop it now.

Wow, 2 pages on the same day in the same topic!

Anyway, maybe it sounds a bit rude, but I still think the words 'spoiled children' are useable in this situation. That is what most of Team BABE is acting like right now.

Now, you finally thought of a master plan, and you didn't have a plan B? You obviously need a plan B in every situation, and that plan shouldn't consist of running away from the game.

Think of it as if you'd made up your entire strategy revolving around using tanks to invade a civ. But when you get to Motorized Transportation, your only oil source expires, and the only other one is owned by the civ you wanted to invade, but they already have infantry so a cavalry attack is not in order. The easy way out would be to quit, but the harder way out would be to sit the game out and wait for space ship parts! Or even a cultural or diplomatic victory as plan C and D! So many options...

Now in a game against an AI you have this choice, but I don't think you have this choice in a game against other humans, and especially in a game against other human TEAMs, it should not even be considered to take the easy way out there.

Now this is exactly such a situation. It was just an example and it might not have been a good one, but I hope everyone understood what I tried to say.

What I want to suggest is this; request some extra time to play your save, and use it to confer with all team BABE members about a possible plan B, and act accordingly. Don't simply run away from hard, confronting situations, but deal with them.

Wotan has played the save and passed it on, obviously not resigning after all. I'm sure the BABEs will do their best for all our enjoyment, so I suggest we close this whole thread now.

Wotan has played the save and passed it on, obviously not resigning after all. I'm sure the BABEs will do their best for all our enjoyment, so I suggest we close this whole thread now.

Maybe they just played to get the game moving but they want to resign when they get the next save nonetheless.

Please, team Babe, enlighten us with your plan: are you going to resign or not? If not, then I agree this thread should be closed.

I really want to know the definate answer now and if it is 'No', then let's move on with the game and forget about this painful page of the UN history of MTDG 2. :blush:

Wow – I'm at a total loss about this. I'm very sad to see this has become so contentious.

@My friends on BABE… surely you'd agree that Chess isn't "broken" because a Rook can't move through pieces while a Knight can? It's not an exploit to block units when it works the same way for everyone. I remember the first time I saw a blocking pawn defense in Chess… I was so mad… and then impressed.
And yes, I know I could still attack the pawns, but my point is that every game has it's bizarre rules. Exploring what tactics you can employ within those rules is a great deal of the fun, I think. Appeals to "reality" miss the point entirely. I was never sure why Knights could pass through things that a Bishop couldn't…

I feel really bad that you don't see it that way. :sad:
Hopefully some fun can still be salvaged from this game, with all it's glorious, bizarre, and fascinating rules.

If you know that you are going to be attacked. you do the best to defend yourself as best as you can.
If that is really the common agreement amongst players, this game is surely my last MTDG
Seconded. I'll readily accept the flames of anyone who has 2 years to spend on a demogame space race. If relying on exploits and making the most out of the unintended features of the game engine is how you see fun, have a blast.

I was reluctant to call it over - we all were up to some point and discussed it and voted on it beforehand. I don't see it as quits, I see it as where legit, unexploitive players make a stand against jaw dropping, demoralising, fun-killing manoevers.

I was never sure why Knights could pass through things that a Bishop couldn't…
Silly, it's because the knight has a horse, he just jumps over them. Have you ever seen a bishop jump over a line of peasants? Didn't think so... ;)

Very well said, General_W.

My opinion echoes yours. Civ3 is ultimately just a game and not intended to perfectly mirror real life. We need to understand these limitations and play within that framework as best as we can, and still enjoy it even when it frustrates us! :)

I also hope this situation can be resolved amicably because ruining relationships--and reputations--over this is simply not worth it, IMHO.

That said, I'm of the persuasion that the honorable thing for BABE to do would be to continue. I believe that signing up is a commitment to the other teams to play to the best of their competitive ability until either their existence is ended or they win. Yes, it takes time, but that is implied in the commitment everyone knowingly signed up for! This commitment is kept, if for no other reason, than for the enjoyment of the other teams involved.

I don't see it as quits, I see it as where legit, unexploitive players make a stand against jaw dropping, demoralising, fun-killing manoevers.

I'm sorry, but are you the same Beorn-eL-Feared who was a member of Team KISS last game? Perhaps I should have posted this picture:

http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/9052/kissgz8hw0.th.jpg (http://img465.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kissgz8hw0.jpg)

:coffee: Oh.....hi, wazzup? What! Babes quitting the whole game? No way they doin' that. It's just a ploy to get some heat into the game, and a good ploy too. The truth is they have no military at all but 20 galleys full of settlers with nowhere to go :lol:

Seriously, someone on the Babes team could at least stay at the wheel and cause as much diplomatic disarray as possible. I imagine there's a lot of fun things to do besides stubbornly sticking to plan A. If you do give in I suggest you first gift all your cities to Gong as a tribute to Bugsy's White Sox.
Most of all I hope you come over the disappointment, cool off and refocus.
I trust Rik to have created a map that will in no way allow for a peaceful SS win. On the opposite I'm confident any warmongers will have their day before this is over.

You can verify in the old forums, Chamnix, that I had little part in that game after the middle ages - and none whatsoever in the above. Not that this blockade covered the whole island anyways.

I'd also like to mention in passing that the teams changed, as wholes, which leaves little room for 'previous team' attacks and that I think it really cheap (not to mention most oftenly offensive) to take a Cartman approach to proving a point by attempting to destroy the other guy's credibility.

@Daghy: the diplomatic disarray option was also discussed ;)

Guys, I don't care about last game. I'm trying to focus on this game. What do we do?

It seems clear other teams don't want to amend the rules. Okay, but then BABE might/will quit, something that will shift the balance of power in the game. What exactly is there for us to decide, besides trying to get BABE to not give up? What are the options we as admins have? Any chance for an amendment? Etc...

Or, more succinctly, what have we been discussing the past 5 pages?! :crazyeye:

:hmm: I thought the issue was resolved, and BABE is playing on, no? So just have RM close up this thread and be happy. :)

My point, Beorn, is quite simply that this tactic was used routinely last game, and nobody said a word about it. You may not have been involved, and the teams have definitely changed, but many players on your current team were certainly involved in those " jaw dropping, demoralising, fun-killing manoevers" as you call them, and I suspect they find that description as offensive as I do.

And, no the blockade did not cover the whole island, but do you honestly think that if the appropriate tiles were railroaded, then the units wouldn't have moved whereever a transport was spotted? Forgive my skepicism if I don't believe those units were going to stay stationery as transports sailed around them.

What are the options we as admins have? Any chance for an amendment?

Assume Babe quits.

Can the map be modded to erase Babe's lands completely? (remember Atlantis?)

Guys, I don't care about last game. I'm trying to focus on this game. What do we do?

It seems clear other teams don't want to amend the rules. Okay, but then BABE might/will quit, something that will shift the balance of power in the game. What exactly is there for us to decide, besides trying to get BABE to not give up? What are the options we as admins have? Any chance for an amendment? Etc...

Or, more succinctly, what have we been discussing the past 5 pages?! :crazyeye:

I had lots of reservations about signing up again because of the acrimony that took place at certain parts of the last game, but I decided to give this style of game another chance.

Right now, I am finding this game rather unfun albeit for completely different reasons than Babe's. I personally wouldn't care if we abandoned the game at this point because we can't all seem to play nice and just enjoy the game. If the game continues, I will certainly follow through on my commitment, but I can't say I'm dying to keep playing right now.

I believe I have a consistent record here in advocating that BABE not quit.

However, having had some time to reflect over lunch, I've come to 2 realizations…

#1 – Independent of whether or not BABE has good reasons, they don't feel like this game is fun anymore.
#2 – Independent of whether or not they're right, pretty much every non-team-BABE member has expressed outrage/disappointment = game is becoming un-fun.


Even though I think it's a total shame, it would seem that keeping fun firmly in mind, the best thing would be to play on without BABE. I'm sure the remaining 4 teams can think of a way to balance the situation to give everyone a level chance at doing well in the rest of the game.

Having BABE resign (and lose all their units and cities and leaving their land open) still seems like a decent option to me. Without the Great Lighthouse in this game, the remaining four teams all have an equal shot at getting there and colonizing their former land. Consider it an epic Maya like collapse :)

Without dredging back into who's right or wrong – I'd just like to see the fun continue… and it seems like this may be the best option. If there's a whole team that can't enjoy civ without warfare pre-marines… let's not make everyone suffer for that.

I remain totally open to persuasion either way. It's possible that all the blood is down digesting my sandwich and I'm not thinking clearly :D

Consider it an epic Maya like collapse :)


More like the Oklahoma land rush. :D

While I still think the honorable thing for BABE to do is to continue, this is also a voluntary game and forcing (not that anyone is) BABE to continue just sounds wrong.

Also, I wonder that if BABE continues to play but their hearts are not really in it, can we really expect them to play their best? I mean that in absolutely no disrespectful way to the BABEs--I'm new(er) to CFC and don't have any history with them--but I know that for myself as a competitive person, if I don't want to play, it's gonna be a struggle to give it my all.

So, if BABEs really do want to continue to play, by all means that's great! But if they don't, let's let them go.

I also like the idea of having a deserted island that everyone can rush to settle. Besides, I think that would create some ferocious pre-marine warfaring. ;) :D

Turn over all Babe lands to Harriet.

The day my company blocked this link was today! It will be a more productive day tomorrow. Today I was in mourning.
No ! :lol: !

The day my company blocked this link was today! It will be a more productive day tomorrow. Today I was in mourning.
Heh. Don't feel too bad because I have no access and had to hear about the verbal onslaught from my dad that everyone was calling us crybabies.

With that said I'll throw a few things into the ring.
1. Babe will continue on. In what form is really up to each of us and should not be a character assassination of those who decide to resign from the game. Hopefully, we can keep our solid core intact since the confidence in my own skills are hardly up to the level of many on our team. With that said, this was an unexpected tactic (exploit) of the game engine many of us feel should have been considered but hindsight is 20/20.

2. Chamnix putting up a picture of blocking the coast in MTDG I is a non sequitur. This game will require marines (except in very rare cases) instead of bombers which were well within range of MIA's cities.

With that said I'd like to propose a rule that will not allow forts on coastal tiles or we can guarantee this game will end in culture or space. Not a very appealing option to an old (with emphasis on old) (and less on) warhorse.

3. Since this game will undoubtedly move much deeper into the ages than MTDG I I suggest we attempt to move the save with some alacrity. There's nothing that will create a un-fun atmosphere and lack of interest as slow play.

1. Babe will continue on.

Great!

[party] :dance: :bounce:

...I'd like to propose a rule that will not allow forts on coastal tiles or we can guarantee this game will end in culture or space. Not a very appealing option to an old (with emphasis on old) (and less on) warhorse.

:eek:

James T. Kirk is my hero! I swear on my pointy ears!

And these people too:
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a358/Box180295/SGOTM9-Smurkz/pigsinspace3.jpg


3. Since this game will undoubtedly move much deeper into the ages than MTDG I I suggest we attempt to move the save with some alacrity. There's nothing that will create a un-fun atmosphere and lack of interest as slow play.
Until the last two turns, it appeared we completed a turn a day on weekdays and one full turn over the weekend, for about 6 turns from Sunday to Sunday. That doesn't seem to be too bad.

With that said I'd like to propose a rule that will not allow forts on coastal tiles or we can guarantee this game will end in culture or space. Not a very appealing option to an old (with emphasis on old) (and less on) warhorse.

3. Since this game will undoubtedly move much deeper into the ages than MTDG I I suggest we attempt to move the save with some alacrity. There's nothing that will create a un-fun atmosphere and lack of interest as slow play.

You can't seriously propose a rule change and expect us to rush ahead and play the save without knowing whether your amendment will be enacted. :confused:

I really think we need a little break here so we can all take a fresh look at this tomorrow. As much as I hate to give up this game it seems to have lost a certain something now. Perhaps it'll seem different in the morning.

I do think last game bears on this situation. Three teams went through the ordeal of having to play out a losing situation. At least last game all those were rather swift. This one won't be so quick. General_W's comments about fun are something we should all consider.

That's fine Donsig. Let's stop the game and vote on forts. If you want to add a proposal for ending the game due to a unfun element I would suggest you propose it.

That's fine Donsig. Let's stop the game and vote on forts. If you want to add a proposal for ending the game due to a unfun element I would suggest you propose it.

Do you mind if each team discusses your proposal or do you want a vote right now?

As for the unfun element I'm not sure I have a proposal to end the game for that. I was only thinking that if many BABES are about to leave and the rest of us think the game is now tarnished because of that then we may want to consider just ending this and starting a new game. I'm not sure if that's a good idea or not.

In any event I see nothing wrong with asking for a night or two to mull all this over. My team is up now and I think under the circumstances we should not be expected to rush to play our turn.

I'm sure everyone would accomodate your team's desire to hold the save.

As far as forts I'll open a UN discussion thread and maybe the admins can give us a timeframe for a vote. I'd think building forts anytime soon would be a bit silly but we should discuss it anyhow.

Hey we just got done with a gig. :band: Did we miss anything? :D

I don't think this blockade will last till marines. There are several opportunities before marines where it might fall, because the blockade of the whole coast is such an expensive thing. You doubt the enormous cost of it? Look at SABER's tech advance - they are left way behind. So, they will have to open their gates again some day.

With astronomy, the attacking monopoly falls and BABE might have to worry about an invasion of its own land for the first time. That's refreshing, believe me :D

With Military Tradition, SABER will open its coasts to invite someone to trigger their Golden Age. :mischief: :D
Just as we might do when Metallurgy is around... :p

With Railroads, every civ will feel more comfortable to leave landing spots open.

However all these moments are too late to have the MW be really powerful, but I consider it polemic to complain warfare completely delayed till Marines. :shake: :nono:

There is a certain time frame where this blockade works and you just had a bad timing of your attack.

And now on with the show! :bounce:

I fully agree with what paul said.

You simply had a bad timing and no plan B, but I'm sure that your team (which is probably full of people who are way more experienced than me) will recover from that position.

Now, is there anything else to discuss that requires this topic?

As of right now there's two players willing to continue on and one based on a contingency.

If BABE is down to only two or three players they will be hard pressed to keep to a 24 hour schedule. The Turn Player will probably be very involved with foreign communications and negoations. The other player(s) will be serving in multiple roles also.

What if we allowed them 36 or 48 hours to play their turn?

I believe that comment by Whomp is somewhat outdated, and that there will be more people in team BABE. Can we just let this thread die? Unless the BABEs have something else to add that is. Otherwise I suggest we just go on with the show (modulo the discussion in the UN about coastal forts in the other thread).

I'd say that Team Saber is willing to change positions with Team Babe in-game any time of the day.

I'd say that Team Saber is willing to change positions with Team Babe in-game any time of the day.


:hatsoff: Point taken.

Can we just let this thread die? Unless the BABEs have something else to add that is. My past preceeds me...

Hey we just got done with a gig. Did we miss anything? I joined... :crazyeye: ;) Hi bugs. :salute: :rotfl:

If you want to add a proposal for ending the game due to a unfun element I would suggest you propose it.
Well, the original unfun is back.

:salute: Hiya Admiral! :wavey:

Glad to see the madness is back. :crazyeye:

I don't like this whole Warrior's everywhere to protect our borders thing, seems like an exploit.

:deadhorse: :goodjob:

Err.... I only just realised this thread is almost 3 weeks old. Shows how much attention I've been paying...

Thread closed since it has outlived it's usefullness.