Ages of Provolutia, surprise pitboss

[Geronimo20]

Sorry, if I misunderstood the terms of dissolution. I thought I could get out of the alliance after the turn 220 had passed. Then I admit I was not clear. I'll pay more attention to the terms next time

 

[Kaleb]

I'm sure the terms that you weren't supposed to be trading with our enemies whilst in the alliance were perfectly clear. Hence why you made such an effort to hide your actions and spin a story about how you needed the gold for yourself to build happiness improvements etc.

I knew what you were doing all along, I just didn't want you to realise I was already sending a force to flatten your undefended cities

 

[da_Vinci]

And the terms of our alliance were that we would dissolve it by mutual agreement, not that one side would just pull out when they felt like it.

Well, if mutual consent is required after a turn 220 deadline, isn't that essentially a permanent alliance? Wouldn't one side always want the alliance to remain in place? (Is that what you guys really agreed to at the start?)

And count yourself lucky that plako just happened to have destroyers of your SE coast a few turns back or your capital would be a smoking heap by now

Presumably not luck and didn't "just happen" ...

I knew what you were doing all along, I just didn't want you to realise I was already sending a force to flatten your undefended cities

That might in part explain why you didn't keep advancing on my position when I was subbing for Munro ...

dV

 

[Kaleb]

Well, if mutual consent is required after a turn 220 deadline, isn't that essentially a permanent alliance? Wouldn't one side always want the alliance to remain in place? (Is that what you guys really agreed to at the start?)

The other condition was that we remained allied until 2 out of our 3 remaining rivals were destroyed. so not quite a permanent alliance but certainly a long term pact. Given that Geronimo was still in the classical era when we met him and he received a huge amount of tech from us that was the kind of commitment we wanted in return.

Presumably not luck and didn't "just happen" ...

I highly doubt plako had destroyers in the area looking for transports loaded with troops that had sailed 2/3rds around the world to get there! I had a destroyer that had come the other way on a pillage mission, so those destroyers were there looking for him. Mistake on my part perhaps that I should have let my destroyer get caught earlier so plako would have had no reason to send his ships out looking for my lone pillager.

Istanbul would also be in ruins now if only Giger hadn't missed a turn at a crucial moment. Oh well... all that planning in advance hasn't quite had the desired effect

That might in part explain why you didn't keep advancing on my position when I was subbing for Munro ...

In part, yes. But the main reason I couldn't invade you was the same reason I couldn't invade plako or Elkad for much of this game. Most of this game I've had a war or threat of attack from 4 sides (and then 3 after we got rid of Classical) and whilst I have a decent army and mfg I just don't have the resources to do a mass invasion and defend 2 other fronts from attack!

Quite cool now that every civ in the game is at war

How often do you end up with a 4v4 in MP that didn't start off like that?

 

[da_Vinci]

How often do you end up with a 4v4 in MP that didn't start off like that?

Probably very often, when tech trading is on. And sometimes when it is not ...

Fog of war went that way, much to Exploit's chagrin ...

Chaos and Civ II did too, at least on one continent (but more lopsided in numbers on the two sides, although relatively even in tech rates), even without tech trading (I was facing down infantry with war elephants ... )

With tech trading on, you either have tech trading partners, or you have an appointment with the undertaker ...

dV

 

[Amask]

I have just taken plako's city, but wasn't given an option to raze.
The city used to be mine, but now I have less than 50% culture in there (in case you can't kill your own people).
Anyone know what's up with that?

If it's a bug, then it also affected the borders. The tile from which I attacked, which was mine at the beginning of the turn, is now plako's. As a result, I will lose 2 workers, a cavalry, and 2 tanks, one of which has a general attached to it and has over 20 xp.

Unless someone can explain why I couldn't raze the city, I would like to request a reload.
The great tank had many victories written in the stars for it, I don't want to lose it without achieving anything at all.

EDIT: plako has enough forces to clear everything I have around the city and retake it, I was going to move every attacking unit and the workers back but can't because the tile is his now.

 

[plako]

I think that you can't raze cities that have been once yours or at least founded by you.

The culture behaves a bit strangely I admit. I can guess the tile you used to attack and I actually had over 50% there. It would have turned to me next turn, but your attack seemes to have accelerated this process.

 

[Amask]

Forget the reload, this can just be another time I got smacked by unknown game mechanics.

 

[Indiansmoke]

That is correct you cannot raze the cities that were yours.

But the tile is a bit weird I admit...you mean you lost the tile in the same turn after taking the city? That is new to me..

 

[plako]

That is correct you cannot raze the cities that were yours.

But the tile is a bit weird I admit...you mean you lost the tile in the same turn after taking the city? That is new to me..

I'm 1st in turn order and i checked the tile in the beginning of previous turn. The tile was still under Ostrig's ruling but the culture in the tile had changed to my benefit so I did know it would be mine this turn. It seems that capturing the city immediately turned the tile to me that could be considred a bug or part of game mechanics.

Based on Ostrig's personal message to me it seems to me that this turn of events was actually beneficial to him. If he would have put his stack 2E of the city I could have kill it totally. Now I just got to few 1-1 wins although losing super tank obvivously hurts him.

 

[da_Vinci]

It seems that after a city changes hands, some adjacent tiles go neutral for a while, as if there is "cultural confusion", and even the culture latent in the tile is not expressed (or maybe the culture latent in that tile due to that city?).

Is it possible that part of what was keeping the tile in question in Amask's hands was his culture from prior ownership of that city, and the benefits of that prior ownership were transiently lost when the city changed hands ... allowing the cultural influence from another plako city to dominate that tile immediately?

I find the culture gyrations around city captures to be confusing quite often.

dV

 

[plako]

It seems that after a city changes hands, some adjacent tiles go neutral for a while, as if there is "cultural confusion", and even the culture latent in the tile is not expressed (or maybe the culture latent in that tile due to that city?).

Is it possible that part of what was keeping the tile in question in Amask's hands was his culture from prior ownership of that city, and the benefits of that prior ownership were transiently lost when the city changed hands ... allowing the cultural influence from another plako city to dominate that tile immediately?

This could be the explanation. City was previously owned by Ostrig and there is another city of mine close by whose culture reaches the tile. On the other hand there is also Ostrig's city in same position.

 

[Kaleb]

well that last turn was interesting. fun to get up to a little mischief too

 

[plako]

well that last turn was interesting. fun to get up to a little mischief too

I thought you would be experienced enough to know that change civic mission is broken. It doesn't take into account the size of the economy changed i.e. price tag of the mission is way too small to the potential harm caused. You really shouldn't need to use broken features/exploits to win.

 

[KingMorgan]

Whats this plako?

Could you list the broken missions / exploits that you know of? First i've heard of this problem?

 

[plako]

Main points are in this thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=247719

Especially post #37 is illustrative.

Switch religion has same problem.

 

[Indiansmoke]

Yeap this is tottaly broken, especially in conjuction with Christo redentor, and specifically banned in many multiplayer games.

But generally espionaze is broken, this is just one of the prime examples.

 

[KingMorgan]

Thanks for the link plako, I hadn't realized it was that broken, i've actually had an AI run a change civic on me, very suprised it was just the once seeing how stupidly cheap the misson is.

I think it's probably best not to use these missions, otherwise everyone will be doing it and we'll never finish the game.

 

[Geronimo20]

I can confirm that civic change hurts a lot compared to its cost! Maybe it is a revenge, who knows? ...

 

[Kaleb]

I thought you would be experienced enough to know that change civic mission is broken. It doesn't take into account the size of the economy changed i.e. price tag of the mission is way too small to the potential harm caused. You really shouldn't need to use broken features/exploits to win.

Actually that is news to me, thanks for the link. Part of the reason why I built Cristo was to mess about with your civics. Oh well, count those dead units as compensation this time I'll avoid switching civics or religion from now on.