Civ4 Warlords - OT game?

[BCLG100]

No one told me it was illegal. Serves BCLG right for declaring war on me. I did tell him I wasn't very happy with his demands. Everyone knows me and Sparta were on friendly terms what with our war on Bazza. If it's illegal then declare the other OT game void as the LAOD traded cities and units constantly.

it is different, in games because them cities and units which you were trading wern't just about to be taken/killed by an opposing civ, you and sparta didnt seem to be on very friendly terms when we agreed to declare war on you

If BCLG wants to talk about unsportmanship then unsportmanship to build up huge alliances with bully tatics. He's just crying because i'm ruining his chance to win the game, which serves him right for declaring on me anways.

well then ruin it properly by fighting back. Just what huge alliances is this anyway?

If this is dememed illegal then I would like to motion that the gifting of techs to BCLG earlier in the game when he was bottom of the table because he kept not taking turns to be illegal and unsporstmanly.

Are you referring to when i lost my warlords disc and was already involved in a tech alliance with someone and then gifted techs back? You can verify this with my allies if you want

 

[ComradeDavo]

The alliance with Igloo Dude and the rest in the east.

I didn't know you'd lost the warlords disc.

@Whomp - no I gifted them to Sparta. Let me make it clear - I wanted Sparta to beat BCLG at this game, hence why I took such action.

 

[IglooDame]

Since there's precedence in the MTDG it appears this move was clearly an exploit in my view. The cities that were under siege should be given to BCLG and the others should be given back to Davo.

Davo-- I hope you kept your units by moving out of those cities.

Thank you Whomp for the ruling.

There's two choices here - either I can simply restore a save pre-gift-acceptance (the recoverysave from the beginning of Sparta's login noon EST yesterday), or they can be gifted back. Who's at war right now, and have there been any serious battles (or other RNG events) in the last 24hrs?

And Davo, I think in the other cases you cite, that there's a presumption of doing it for the good of the alliance without it being de facto suicide on one player's part.

 

[azzaman333]

I'm a little removed from diplomacy (from my own actions I'll admit), but I view this generally as a valid tactic.

If we do go back, I offer a vassalage to Davo.

 

[ComradeDavo]

I'd only accept a return to the save pre-acceptance, and strict rules set about unit and city gifting...i.e none allowed at all.

 

[ComradeDavo]

I'd accept azza's offer.

 

[azzaman333]

I'd only accept a return to the save pre-acceptance, and strict rules set about unit and city gifting...i.e none allowed at all.

Unit gifting is fairly easy to track, although I would disagree with such a measure.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Just to be clear, I didn't know that gifting the cities and units would be deemed illegal, and wouldn't have done it if there had been a clear set of rules forbidding it in place. I doubt anyone really forsaw this though, so no ones to blame for those rules not being there.

 

[azzaman333]

Just to be clear, I didn't know that gifting the cities and units would be deemed illegal, and wouldn't have done it if there had been a clear set of rules forbidding it in place. I doubt anyone really forsaw this though, so no ones to blame for those rules not being there.

Well, the bulk of BCLG's army is made up of gifted units from VRCWAgent and IglooDude, so gifting units is deemed to be legal.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Well, the bulk of BCLG's army is made up of gifted units from VRCWAgent and IglooDude, so gifting units is deemed to be legal.

Question for BCLG - If that is true how is that any different from me gifting cities and units to Sparta? If the only reason your able to attack/defeat me is because of gifted units in the first place, then in principle I think it's fine for me to use the same tatic to avoid those cities and units being captured/destroyed by you!! I smell a double standard!!!

 

[IglooDame]

Just to be clear, I didn't know that gifting the cities and units would be deemed illegal, and wouldn't have done it if there had been a clear set of rules forbidding it in place. I doubt anyone really forsaw this though, so no ones to blame for those rules not being there.

That's why we put in rule 11: "If you suspect that a tactic qualifies as an exploit, or think that it might be called unfair, post it in this thread for group decision earlier rather than later. Remember, we're trying to stay newbie-friendly." Or if nothing else, PM Whomp or me about it.

The rule that I think Whomp is referencing prevents the gifting of a city which is threatened by an attacking player to a third party which prevents the attacker from taking it. The city gifting that I've seen so far is either the result of deals between non-allies (give me that city or I kill you) or quid pro quo between allies (you can have this city, you can work it better than I can). And I don't think anyone would anticipate gifting one's entire civ (minus the capital?) to an ally, as it would be less effective than playing both civs as-is (maintenance costs) and if the giver was trying to bow out of the game they'd simply be expected to find a replacement.

 

[BCLG100]

Thank you Whomp for the ruling.

There's two choices here - either I can simply restore a save pre-gift-acceptance (the recoverysave from the beginning of Sparta's login noon EST yesterday), or they can be gifted back. Who's at war right now, and have there been any serious battles (or other RNG events) in the last 24hrs?

And Davo, I think in the other cases you cite, that there's a presumption of doing it for the good of the alliance without it being de facto suicide on one player's part.

No i refrained from moving on purpose.

Davo you seem annoyed at me for being friendly with my two neighbours to the east and yet your completly at ease being the vassel of azza who's alliance consists of Sparta, RB and kan. Now who's the flip flopper.

City trading and the such like should be allowed just not when the cities have enemy units within 5 turns or something like that away.

And Azz just how would you know, theres a reason why you havnt had OB and its predominantly due to your ingame actions.

 

[ComradeDavo]

That's why we put in rule 11: "If you suspect that a tactic qualifies as an exploit, or think that it might be called unfair, post it in this thread for group decision earlier rather than later. Remember, we're trying to stay newbie-friendly." Or if nothing else, PM Whomp or me about it.

The rule that I think Whomp is referencing prevents the gifting of a city which is threatened by an attacking player to a third party which prevents the attacker from taking it. The city gifting that I've seen so far is either the result of deals between non-allies (give me that city or I kill you) or quid pro quo between allies (you can have this city, you can work it better than I can). And I don't think anyone would anticipate gifting one's entire civ (minus the capital?) to an ally, as it would be less effective than playing both civs as-is (maintenance costs) and if the giver was trying to bow out of the game they'd simply be expected to find a replacement.

The problem with that is that I think you and VRWC gifting units to BCLG to use against me (and probaly civphizzla )is a tatic that qualifies as an exploit.

 

[Whomp]

The rule is not stated but since you can't abandon a city in civ4, which would be a logical outcome, simply giving away a city under siege is exploitive with the game engine. The legitmate reasons for gifting cities are things like captured city given to an ally as part of the booty or cities exchanged for maintainence reasons.

I think the save should be played again. If Davo wants to do anything with the other cities he has that were not under siege that seems more legitimate (vassalage or gifting).

Unit gifting is a whole different item imo. Clear alliances should bolster anyone who's in need.

 

[IglooDame]

The problem with that is that I think you and VRWC gifting units to BCLG is a tatic that qualifies as an exploit.

I disagree (else I wouldn't have done it), but I guess we have to go to our referee again, then.

Whomp?

 

[BCLG100]

Question for BCLG - If that is true how is that any different from me gifting cities and units to Sparta? If the only reason your able to attack/defeat me is because of gifted units in the first place, then in principle I think it's fine for me to use the same tatic to avoid those cities and units being captured/destroyed by you!! I smell a double standard!!!

For a start azz doesnt know what he's talking about as he doesnt have OB with me and therefore can't even see the majority of my units.

Theres a difference between gifting units and gifting cities for a start! cities have a direct improvement to the score, gnp, mfg etc etc. Units on the other hand are a means to an end. Also just how do you know that them units havn't been paid for in terms of tech/ luxuries/ gold etc.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Here's a simple solution, I am not going to log into the game again, thankyou everybody for the game, I look forward to the next one when the server being used for the other game is free, plase put my civ on A.I for the rest of the game.

Sorry this became a problem, like I said I didn't think there was a problem. IglooDude - you know where to look to see discussion between me and Sparta, I didn't think he and BCLG were planning anything against me, I've exchanged PM's with him regarding intel on BCLG's cities.

I think it's fairest if I stop playing and the turn is rolled back and my civ switched to A.I. for the rest of the game.

 

[azzaman333]

For a start azz doesnt know what he's talking about as he doesnt have OB with me and therefore can't even see the majority of my units.

Theres a difference between gifting units and gifting cities for a start! cities have a direct improvement to the score, gnp, mfg etc etc. Units on the other hand are a means to an end. Also just how do you know that them units havn't been paid for in terms of tech/ luxuries/ gold etc.

I've seen large jumps in your power at the same time VRCWAgent and Igloo have had large drops. I have also seen you with the SAME army Igloo had when killing Elrohir, when you were attacking Ed. I did have open borders with him, and I have had OBs with Davo since before I cancelled my OB with Matrix. You don't know what I know.

 

[BCLG100]

I've seen large jumps in your power at the same time VRCWAgent and Igloo have had large drops. I have also seen you with the SAME army Igloo had when killing Elrohir, when you were attacking Ed. I did have open borders with him, and I have had OBs with Davo since before I cancelled my OB with Matrix. You don't know what I know.

Thats fairly amazing as they were attacking elohir with axes whereas i finished off attacking ed with maces, ohwell guess the army can be exactly the same naturally i wouldnt build anything and just rest on my laurels whilst offering other people vassalage to simply annoy the other players.

 

[Whomp]

From my perspective, units are a different deal altogether versus cities under siege. If someone leaves their borders underprotected either because they were giving away units or their allies didn't help them it's completely different deal than cities.