COTM104 - Final Spoiler - Game submitted or abandoned

[templar_x]

he would, as he is only giving per turn goods for per turn goods in these deals... !! the AS will still make deals like that with you even after your rep is busted, only they become more and more expensive for you.

i am quite sure that taking the last city of a common enemy in an MA is seen as a breach of contract and gives you a rep hit. which is why you have to have THE OTHER PARTY take that last city. (and now i only hope that this "knowledge" does not stem from an older version... )
you happen to have a game around where you can test it?

t_x

 

[Lanzelot]

I've used that technique only once: in GOTM71 (Oct 2007). That was a Deity level game, and on this level it is not quite so easy to implement (killing an AI is difficult, but not the main problem: gaining a sufficient tech lead on the rest of the world is the tricky part... At least it was for me at that time: I was still a beginner back then), so I was able to set up the necessary conditions for it only very late towards the end of the game, getting a couple hundred extra gpt for the last 10-15 turns before victory. It didn't make much of a difference for that game, I just had read LE's story about his incredible 100K win (which was the big news on the forum at that time) and was curious to see, whether I would be able to make it work, too.

In any case, that game was not sufficient experience for me to tell, whether I suffered a rep hit or not. And then in Dec 2007 LE deals were included in the banned exploits under GOTM rules, so I haven't used it since then.

But here Lord Emsworth writes himself:

The other type of scam works similar, but that which is going to bring half of the deals to an end is not a broken trade route, but the end of Military Alliances by means of death of the Civ the alliances are against. So what you need to do first is make war against a Civ and when you just are about to destroy them, call up the other Civs and make deals as follows:

They give: MA against Civ A
We give: MA against Civ A + gpt​

This again simply assures that the AI has plenty of gpt which you are going to buy back with techs:

They give: gpt
We give: Techs​

When your victim bites the dust all that remains of this type of scam are several horrendously high gpt payments from several AIs to you. The more civs you can ally against your victim the better. The more techs you can sell, the better. And all that comes without a rep-hit.

Lord Emsworth is one of our most meticulous researchers and usually we can take his word for granted. (At least I have never found any occasion, where a result he published was wrong.)

 

[Lanzelot]

And when you think about it, it is only "logical": the goal of an MA is to kill a common enemy, isn't it. So it would be quite strange, if you would "break" that deal by "fullfilling" it... I wouldn't be surprised, if the developers of the game had paid special attention to that case in order to make sure that you can't get a rep-hit because you "fullfilled" a deal...

(Although I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case: there are enough bone-headed bugs in the Civ3 trading system, where quite obviously the developers didn't pay attention to anything... Getting a rep-hit for bringing a deal to its proper conclusion would fit in perfectly here...)

 

[_Legolan]

That's all very helpful information! I really appreciate all of the help

 

[templar_x]

maybe Cotta and myself will be able to create that situation in our training game...

in any case, in what LE describes he DOES NOT NEED A CLEAN REP. unless i overlook something...

t_x

 

[Lanzelot]

I think he needs a clean rep for this deal:

They give: MA
We give: MA + gpt

If you have a broken rep, they will not accept gpt-payment from you.
(Even if they would be willing to accept a plain deal "MA for MA" Crazy isn't it?
We: "Hey, how about an MA against civ X?"
They: "Sure, sounds good!"
We: "Oh, wait, let me gift you some extra gpt as a little bonus!"
They: "What?? No way I'm going to accept that deal!! You cheater, you!" )

BTW: if I understand it correctly, that was the reason why he had to prevent the rest of the world from meeting Rome, the civ against which he triggered the original "trade route scam" that gave him the initial money for the following Emsworth agreements. If the Romans had told the rest of the world about the broken trade routes, the rest of the exploit would not have been possible.

 

[templar_x]

they do accept gpt with a broken rep if the deal is only about per turn goods, like an MA. for sure, i have done it many times.
only gpt for hard goods is not possible any more (if not linked with a peace deal)
t_x

 

[StrictlyRockers]

This scenario was a nightmare for me and I didn't finish it and I probably won't be back. I had a such a blast with COTM #103! I took second place and went and played through another full game of civ with similar settings because that one was so much fun. This one was made intentionally so fkn hard i just gave up after fifty hours. If I ever come back it won't be for a very, very long time.

 

[StrictlyRockers]

I've moved on to Civ 5. Thanks of this push. But I still hate whoever made this scenario so much. Where do you live so that I can come and punch you right in the nose?? It's probably the same guy who made the COTM just before this one that I loved so much.

 

[templar_x]

my first reaction was, like, are you drunk?
but instead of seriously asking you this, I simply leave that in my eyes your comment is WAY over the top. maybe consider to weaken it to what you really want to say or to delete it altogether...
t_x