Ok, I will send Predesad's password to LouLong via e-mail. Also, is LouLong going to abide by the diplomacy that Predesad has already established with the rest of us? I plan on sending LouLong the diplomacy that I had going with Predesad in this game and I hope he adheres to the peace that we currently have.

Thanks, Dogboy. I'm sure LouLong will abide by Predesad's agreements...LouLong, if you don't care for the position you find yourself in there is no problem with saying "thanks, but no thanks". You know I appreciate your offer of help either way.

Yep I know I had a pledge of peace with Predesad till turn 83. I'm happy if LouLong doesn't want to continue that though. With no idea when/if Predesad will return I don't expect LouLong to honour his agreements at least with regard to me. Rochinante created the game so its his shot to call.

got game!
played and sent to Lord Kaboth

sent to Dogboy

got, played, sent

1525BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

played and sent...within 10 minutes I think?

turn 60 = 1500BC sent to Lord Kaboth

sent to Dogboy

played and sent

1475BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

1450BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

Played and sent. The funny thing about this turn is I popped a goody hut near the Egyptian border. It was on a volcanic mountain covered in pollution so it was hard to see. But it did yield me some cash. Very nice.

Sent to Dogboy

turn 64 = 1400BC sent to Lord Kaboth

sent to Dogboy

played and sent

turn 65 = 1375BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

played and sent

turn 66 = 1350BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

turn 67 = 1325BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

turn 68 = 1300BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

Kaboth, there is a problem with the game. I just sent you an e-mail about it. Send the save again.

Turn 69 = 1275BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Sent to Dogboy

I have made an executive decision.
Prededad quitting was a major blow to the game, the replacement slot was contingent on keeping Predesad's deals so as to maintain the integrity of the game for the other players but the new player (who doesn't post here) has indicated his unwillingness to play under this restriction. I decided not to offer this third-hand position to anyone and have retired the Persians.

Lord Kaboth and Dogboy--if you don't want to continue on with the game that is perfectly understandable. We will declare Dogboy the clear winner (with myself bring up the rear).

I hope you do want to continue because it has been a pleasure sharing the game with you so far.

I realize that retiring the Persians means that Dogboy gets an even bigger advantage but I don't care so much about winning as about playing well and having fun.

Rocky, I just sent you an e-mail.

I want to continue playing this game. I don't see how retiring his civ gave me a fair advantage, or anybody else for that matter. But I hate quitting so I will keep playing.

I have made an executive decision.
Prededad quitting was a major blow to the game, the replacement slot was contingent on keeping Predesad's deals so as to maintain the integrity of the game for the other players but the new player (who doesn't post here) has indicated his unwillingness to play under this restriction. I decided not to offer this third-hand position to anyone and have retired the Persians.

Lord Kaboth and Dogboy--if you don't want to continue on with the game that is perfectly understandable. We will declare Dogboy the clear winner (with myself bring up the rear).

I hope you do want to continue because it has been a pleasure sharing the game with you so far.

I realize that retiring the Persians means that Dogboy gets an even bigger advantage but I don't care so much about winning as about playing well and having fun.

You are perfectly free to make an executive decision in your game and I won't keep hard feelings (guess it won't show in your behavior with me in the other PBEM where we are both either) but I just want to state my surprise.
Maybe it is my fault for not reading the entire thread (which is mostly boring as it is "played and sent to xxx" as in most PBEM threads) but I did not know :
1/ I was supposed to post here (is it to show the game is going well ? You might have a point for the process but I don't think I have delayed the game so the spirit (correct in English I hope) was respected I think.
2/ I was supposed to keep all ongoing deals when I picked up the civ. Dogboy for instance asked me what I was about to do concerning his relationship with him so I got the idea that with a new player things could change. I understood perfectly I could not just step in and change everything right away but I considered normal that I would play as myself, not as the previous player who had not left me any special instructions and who was probably different from me anyway. In that kind of situation, I believe the other players should have come to me and explained what the situation (deals, treaties) was and whether I had plans on my own I wanted to share.
And I think you should not ask a replacement player to act exactly as the player he replaces would have because I believe it is impossible.
Besides, nothing can tell you the former player's behavior would not have changed....

... or I am completely mistaken and does everybody in PBEMs always respect deals completely and utterly (this is an honest question as I am quite new to the PBEM community but a massive "yes" would surprise me as an experienced MP player) ?

You told me I broke a deal. I accepted to replay so as to make it reach its natural end before having my own policy and not making you feel betrayed or cheated (cheated is indeed a mistake, betrayed in Civ 3 is in my mind quite comprehensible). But then you seem to be still unhappy because I told you I would consider a certain move an act of war. Isn't that legitimate ? Or was there another deal sharing the lands that I did not know about ?

So I respect your decision but I would not mind some "whys".

Gents, I will comment about my thoughts on breaking deals in PBEM. This has been a problem since PTW came out. Many people have argued that breaking deals is ok since it's a game. You should trust no one and expect deals to be broken because they are broken in real life. People have also argued that they are "in character" i.e. you can't trust the Mongols. And then they argue that just because they broke a deal in one game doesn't mean they will break a deal in another game. But I feel differently about that. I think that you should not break deals in this game. If you do break a deal, how will anyone know to trust you in future games? The arguement of "in character" for this game will allow you to break deals in any game. Every civ in the history of the world has broken a deal. But I digress. I had this similar problem in another PBEM game located here

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=78870

You can skip to page 8 where you will see ****** and I had peace, then he sneak attacked me, claiming I forced him to sign a peace. If I ever see him in other PBEMs, I know not to trust him.

I can't comment on what other people think about breaking deals, but I say you shouldn't do it. If you want to attack someone, wait until the peace deal runs out. Then find diplomatic ways to do it. Here is an excellent way to go to war diplomatically. Either read the whole thread or go to page 9.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=73516&page=1&pp=20

Here is another way to go to war diplomatically. Either read the whole thread or go to page 4.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=75009

In both of these cases war was waged but it was after all peace deals had expired. And if you read the threads, you really can't tell who the aggressor was because both sides were right and both sides were wrong.

But the bottom line in my view, is deals should be honored.

Well, I am not gonna spam this thread (especially now :p ) but I can't say I totally agree. If I am against breaking trade or tech deals against gpt because it can look a bit like cheating IMHO (except in case of alliances of course), I think treachery is normal in this game, albeit not automatic. Maybe it is because I have played Diplo too much but I think you are aiming for the survival of your tribe and you can have different means (especially throughtout different games) to achieve that. Napoleonic Europe might be an extreme example but when you are bullied into an alliance I consider legitimate to try to go out of it. And extensive diplomatic actions can lead to complete turns of situation, a bit like what happened in the middle of the battle of Leipzig.
So both Dogboy and Rocinante (because you are playing with me in other PBEMs), just know that I can be faithful or a deal-breaker depending on my choices, abilities, circumstances (for instance in one Napoleonic PBEM I have been bullied into a change of alliance) or play style. But except in the case of special rules or editor flags (locked alliances, locked war) I think all situations can evolve. And I don't trust my friends, peaceful neighbors completely because historically (what Civ3 aims at recreating) it was a mistake and I can understand that. If someone betrays me succesfully I will be mad of course but I will consider the player did a great job and I made the mistake.

Have a good game. Bye !

Ok I'm not exactly sure what happened here, Did Lou Loung attack someone? What deal did he break? The only deals I had was some turns of peace with Predesad.

In my opinion Lou Long should be aloud to play as he likes perhaps with some restrictions maybe he must be at peace with everyone for 10-20 or so. In case others players want to have a chance at building additional defence to counter who may be an aggressive new replacement player. But after that hes free to do as he wished sneak attack or whatever. Sneak attacking is not without consequences, if you behave in such a war your unlikely to receive future PBEM invites and may be barred from games.

I'm happy to keep playing but I certainly don't think Dogboy has an unfair advantage yet. But then I don't know the terrain down his way much. And he certainly has not won yet.

Oh and I have sent the file on to Dogboy

And how did you retire the Persians anyway Rochinante? I noticed they were missing from my diplomacy screen.

I am going out of town Saturday afternoon and will be back Sunday evening. Times are east coast USA. Have a good weekend.

sent to Dogboy

1225BC sent to Lord Kaboth

I'm new to the forum but have been playing civ for 2 years now. My civIII conquest is ready to be thrown in the trash. The last 10 or so games I have not gained any resources. I rarely get coal, so I can't build my rail system. I never get rubber. If I can tolerate enough I never get aluminum. I always have to go to war to get those resources. Am I alone or is another patch needed.

I'm back. Game is played and sent.

@ Bimmer: I don't know why you are posting that here. But I will answer anyway. The resources allocation is C3C has been tweaked somewhat. A lot of people are noticing that resources are not as abundant as they used to be. You can go into the editor and change that if you want. But if you don't want to do that, then you will have to play the game the rest of us are. Fight for resources. Trade for resources. Manipulate for resources. Etc...

sent to Dogboy

Lord Kaboth & Dogboy--do you think that LouLong is right--that most Civ players are liars?
I must say, after reading LouLong's post, I am absolutely convinced I did the right thing.

"So both Dogboy and Rocinante...know that I can be...a deal-breaker depending on my choices, abilities, circumstances"--LouLong

Dogboy - As I stated in my first post. I am relatively new to the forum. Jan 04. That was my first post. After looking around I myself moved the post. Thank you for pointing that out.

@ Rocky: I wouldn't call most civ players liars. Nor would I call LouLong a liar. People just have different styles of play. LouLong said that he played a quite a bit of diplomacy. I have never played the game, but from what I understand a lot of treaties are made, a lot of treaties are broken, and you don't know who to trust. Your level of playstyle seems to me that all deals must be honored. LouLong's playstyle seems to me that deals don't have to be honored. I think that deals should be honored, but that's just my opinion.

As I said in the e-mail, I didn't have a recommendation either way on whether or not to do what you did. That has happened to me before in another game and like I told you, I know never to trust that person again. I now know their playing style and will be cautious of them in the future. But I kept playing the game.

I think we are learning new things as we play this game. Things such as game conditions and settings when we start a new game. I guess when one starts a new game they should put the clause in it that all deals will be honored if they want the game to be played that way. There are many variants out there, and there is no reason why that can't be one of them. For instance, I'm in an always war PBEM right now where you have to declare war on everybody you meet the turn you meet them. I'm in another game where you form an alliance with the first person you meet and everybody after that is your enemy. So I guess if you want an honorable game it should be mentioned in the game setup.

Thanks, Dogboy. I'm sure LouLong will abide by Predesad's agreements...LouLong, if you don't care for the position you find yourself in there is no problem with saying "thanks, but no thanks". You know I appreciate your offer of help either way.
It was clearly stated that LouLong was to abide by Predesad's agreements--he had the opportunity to say no back on post #254

Lord Kaboth, I retired the Persians by having Dogboy send the new guy's turn to me--I didn't go through the rotation and look at your position if that is what you are worried about. The new guy's capital was on fire and the population rioting when I got there so it is a blessing that they were put to rest.

I have no interest in making others believe lies--it is not a skill I want to learn.

When and if I wage war I will declare war on the turn I cross your border or the turn that I assault a unit outside of any borders because the game screen says "this deal (peace) will last until war is declared" which to me means that a declaration is in order if you want to wage war. Further, I will post a battle log so you will know which units were attacked and won't have to wonder what happened. The new guy didn't declare war, notify me, or post a battle log either.

Here is a sample of what my battle logs look like:
3/3 archer defeats 3/3 warrior 3-1
4/4 spearman loses to 4/4 swordsman 2-4
2/5 swordsman defeats 3/3 warrior 3-1

Lord Kaboth & Dogboy--do you think that LouLong is right--that most Civ players are liars?

I would say no, Civ players seem to be a very mature, honorable and helpful community. If you do betray agreements, your most likely to be declined from playing future PBEM games so its not an advisable option.

Is it ok to break agreements?
I say no because if people are breaking them every 5 turns or so then theres little point making them, and if theres no point making them you remove the whole diplomacy aspect from the civ games.

Should a person be allowed to sneak attack/ROP abuse?
As long as they wait their agreements out before physically attacking or pillaging I see why not. If your empire falls apart because of this your playing risky builder style where momentum players should make preemptive strikes against you otherwise they will get beat on in the future.

Should Lou Long have been forced to honor Predesads agreements?
No, understand that you will turn people away by forcing agreements on them. They don't get to play their own game, which is often an attacking game that you should expect as they are often play hard and fast. They didn't found the empire so don't have so much inclination to make it rise in power. I think Lou Long should have been forced to offer peace to all players for 10-20 turns, so we can build military if necessary to adapt to a new opponant. After that he can play his own game. Not sure what to do with regard to luxuries and gpt deals.

sent to Dogboy

I'd post but Kaboth already played and sent so I won't

sent to Dogboy

turn 75 = 1125BC sent to Kaboth

sent to Dogboy

turn 77 = 1075BC sent to Lord Kaboth

sent to Dogboy

Kaboth, you posted here you sent me another turn. I never received it. Send again please.

edit: Never mind I just got it. Talk about e-mail lag!

turn 79 = 1025BC sent to Lord Kaboth

turn 80 = 1000BC sent to Lord Kaboth

Congratulations and thanks to Lord Kaboth and Dogboy, we have reached the milestone of 1000BC the usual stopping place for the Game of the Month Quick Start Challenge (GOTM-QSC)--I checked our progress vs some QSCs I did and we are coming along very well, indeed.

You two are great--I've had a real blast so far and hope to have a bunch more fun before its over.

Oh I'm sure we will I forsee a great industrial age struggle approaching.

Btw Rocky need we post sent messages here anymore? After all with only 3 people its pretty easy to work out whose holding up the game + we've all been very reliable players.

Played and sent.

Happy 1000BC!!!

We can save on bandwidth and only post when something happens--such as, I killed two barbies last turn and brought my total to seven (vs two warriors lost)--how many have you guys killed?

Sounds good to me. I just watched a barb horseman pass my defended city to go towards my undefended city. Now I gotta do the spearman dance.

I havn't had many barbs because most of my surrounding land is under my vision with little fog of war.

Who has 750BC? I'll send it Kaboth again

The last turn I got was 775BC.

Turn 92 = 690 BC sent to Kaboth

turn 97 sent to Kaboth on the 14th and again today

O' Kaboth, O' Kaboth, wherefore art thou Kaboth?

turn 103 started

Guys, I am going on vacation. I will be gone from June 20-23 and from June 26-July 1. Sorry for the delay.

Hi, just a reminder that I'm going on vacation today. I will be back on July 1 or 2. Sorry for the delay and see you when I get back.

210BC played and sent to Lord Kaboth

The Iroquis High Priests have announced that we are nigh ten years from the birth of the son of GOD christ, a cataclysmic event where the worth henceforth will be born anew and the dates shall forth be incremented with the A.D as was the Roman custom.

A major turning point in history, to be sure.

This game is going well. Thanks to the dedicated players in this game.

Hear!, Hear!

When and if the opportunity ever arose I would like to partner either one of you in an alliance game.

I wouldn't say no to that. An alliance game would be fun especially since my only one "lost in the email" to quote Dogboy, is now extinct.

Its a pity Predesad left the game it has unbalanced diplomatic relations considerably. I have no real chance gaining the centre land between you two. But in someways it makes the game interesting.

Kaboth: Actually, I was thinking in several ways you have it better than me or Rocky. For instance, let's say you wanted to destroy me. All you would have to do is sign a lengthy peace agreement with Rocky and then capture a lot of my land. Rocky can't attack you because you have a peace agreement with him, and he can't "dogpile on the weak (me in this case)" because he would have to go thru your lands which you won't allow. That would give you so much land. Same goes if you wanted Rocky's lands. Just sign peace with me and then capture all his cities and there is nothing I can do about it.

Of course you are right about being in the middle. Me and Rocky could sign an alliance to kill you and divide your lands. But so long as you keep signing peace with us you should be good. But I agree about Predesad leaving. That does unbalance the game because with four people it would be easier to grab an ally in case one of us tried to take over the world.

One thing is for certain. It will be interesting how this plays out.

Actually Dogboy you've made quite a few incorrect assumptions here:

For instance, let's say you wanted to destroy me. All you would have to do is sign a lengthy peace agreement with Rocky and then capture a lot of my land.

To get to your land Dogboy, I would require an ROP because the only way to you is through Rockies land. I could take boats but thats not a very feasible option due to the mineral investment involved and the support tied up.

Rocky can't attack you because you have a peace agreement with him, and he can't "dogpile on the weak (me in this case)" because he would have to go thru your lands which you won't allow.

Rocky doesn't need to go through my lands to attack you. He has direct access to all your South coast towns.

Secondly my empire is far too small to build a sufficient army to do you much damage Dogboy, I'd need Rockies help for that.


Of course you are right about being in the middle.

Actually I think you mixed us up Dogboy, I'm not in the middle Rocky is. I'm the purple empire at the far north of the map.

I'm the one in the middle, if you two agree to attack simultaneously, I'm toast.

Sorry about my post. I meant to say everything about Rocky, not about you Kaboth.

To all: I finally got my computer up and running. It had a problem that made the computer constantly reboot and there was nothing I could do. I had to wipe my hard drive and reinstall Windows XP. I am currently downloading all patches, drivers, and reinstalling all my programs. I should be able to play again real soon. Thanks for being patient.

Also, I need Rocky's e-mail as I lost all my .pst files.