Hammer of the North v2.9 PBEM

@Peaster
We aren't telling you everything ;) - But the same files were used, even though I still don't know where the Giant came from... It remains a mystery, but it was clearly not Duke's intention of giving it to me, and hardly was he capable of it, since doing with Civ2Dip would make it active only on the next turn, and doing it with the AI would require the unit to be in a designated city.

We'll work the unit trades out via email, as it really doesn't belong here, for confidentiality reasons.

To clarify the other things :

Contacting an allied AI after agreement, for facility of trading (be it maps, units or techs) is one thing, but contacting an AI player to 'bend the rules of civ2' (which I think it accounts to) is unfair, IMHO. If you think otherwise, I am willing to accept it, though.

No peeking : What I meant by the quote was the peeking of a turn, where you let the AI play the other players' turns to get an idea of their forces and capabilities. I see no harm in looking at the save the way you suggested yourself, in SP mode, where no civs take moves. I personally haven't done this, as I haven't seen the need to, but I accept that others may play differently.
 
Morten Blaabjerg said:
@Peaster
We aren't telling you everything

Of course not! But surely you understand that this kind of situation is delicate. The players involved should be open about relevant info.

...contacting an AI player to 'bend the rules of civ2' (which I think it accounts to) is unfair, IMHO

Why do you think it bends the rules ? AFAIK this is perfectly legal in GOTMs, which have an incredibly long list of rules compiled over many years. I have heard of MP rules against contacting a second player's AI, but IMO the intention is to protect the second player from abuses.

It is unlikely that everybody will agree on what bends the rules, what breaks the rules, and what just takes advantage of game mechanics. IMO the rules should be clearly stated before the game starts. Hasn't the MP/PBEM community made any effort to do that?

No peeking : What I meant by the quote was ... you let the AI play the other players' turns to get an idea of their forces and capabilities.

Wow ! Was anyone considering that kind of peeking ?
 
Whether it's 'bending the rules' or 'taking advantage of game mechanics' it is a matter of opinion IMO. If you insist on being able to do this and nobody else objects, I am ok with it.

AFAIK there's no detailed pbem rules list. As each scenario is different, it'd probably be difficult to work something like this out for each occasion that arises.
 
817AD #2 was even worse for Germany than 817AD #1, as the Danes played a little better this time :mad: [At 'Poly, "replay" means you perform exactly the same actions as before - as much as possible]. But maybe 817AD #2 did not go so well for the Danes either;

The proud Viking Chieftain who abandoned Denmark a few years ago returned in 817AD to destroy the evil Danewirke and the village of Hedeby. Perhaps there was some truth to those rants about Loke deceiving the Danish rabble, for their King fled across the border and joined Saxony. Unfortunately, an Emperial Guard has been required day and night, to protect him from the many angry Germans who want to see his head on a pike.

------------------------

I have not used the alliance-to-declare-war ploy yet in this game (though my memory is fuzzy about 817AD #1). If there are no objections before 820AD, I will probably use it. I agree that it is a matter of opinion whether it should be legal, but rules should be decided in advance, and there are many many factors in this scen that already favor the Vikings.

IMO making a rough set of MP rules would be (would have been?) worth the effort. I doubt that a new scenario would require very many adjustments. BTW, I have heard of some "rah rules" at 'Poly for MP, but don't have a link to them...
 

Attachments

I am ready to play
but I would very much like to get a clear explanation of what happened in the "affair of the disappearing giant" before I play.
I have read what has been written in this thread, but many points remain unclear to me: has there been diplomatic action previously? has the giant really disappeared? has a turn been replayed without trying to make the same moves as in the previous turn?
If someone has a clear view, please help me :crazyeye:
 
I admit not playing precisely the same as the previous turn, as for one I couldn't without the Giant, and second, the game was based on completely different presuppositions, with one unit less (which means a great deal to the Danes right now).

In the previously played turn, my Giant was clearing the tracks for my missionary, in the newly played one my king and raider came to perform the action instead, admittedly going a little further...

As it turned out, the second turn stands out perhaps even worse than the first for me, losing the Danevirke wonder in the process, so nothing has basically changed balance-wise. I managed to destroy a German city, the Germans managed to destroy a Danish city, and gained a king in return for a Giant - so I suppose Peaster won't have much to complain about either.

I can testify to that the Giant remains where he was, with the Norse, although noone knows how he came to appear in one of my cities, other than it must've been a mixup/flaw in the trading mechanics of either civ2 or civ2dip. Unless the Giants have begun an act on their own in this game...
 
My turn and the diplomatic action have all remained the same, just that the Giant was confirmed as to have been left where he should have been. I have no idea how it was moved to the control of the Danes, since gifting units through Civ2Dip requires a turn to pass to avoid double movement of the unit and a gift through a players AI requires the unit to be in a city and not the lone unit in that city.

The Giant in question was at 23,17 and was exploring 'Fire Island' in the far north. He was not gifted through Civ2Dip nor through the AI. I am lost as to how he ended up under the control of the Danes and transported to their city.

All this was just to get him back where he belonged.
 
Morten's account is accurate, but by going further than before, he caused fairly serious losses to Germany that he has no way of knowing about. I think he and I agree that Denmark and Germany were both hurt by the replay, but probably less than the value of the giant.

It still seems a little strange that Morten didn't notice the extra giant in Denmark, and that DoM hasn't answered my questions. I am not complaining too much, because I am about ready to write the game off anyway. And because a quick poll of the Allies did not support a strong complaint.
 
This is a game
and some mystery remaining doesn't scare me.
I'll play my turn tomorrow.

(I like the idea of a giant ready to move against the orders given by the AI :) )
 
Peaster said:
Morten's account is accurate, but by going further than before, he caused fairly serious losses to Germany that he has no way of knowing about. I think he and I agree that Denmark and Germany were both hurt by the replay, but probably less than the value of the giant.

It still seems a little strange that Morten didn't notice the extra giant in Denmark, and that DoM hasn't answered my questions. I am not complaining too much, because I am about ready to write the game off anyway. And because a quick poll of the Allies did not support a strong complaint.

I'm not sure what you mean. Morten did notice the Giant, but he just assumed I had gifted it to him along with some other units. Not until I started to read of Giants in the Danes hands did I know of it and then wondered where it came from since I had heard nothing of it before when I was given accounts of the Danes resourses.

What questions were not answered? I believe everything was touched on already. I'll kind summarize what happened from my side to see if that clarifies anything.

When I saw the Giant discussion I pulled Mortens save and checked the Norse situation in SP mode (During the course of the game I saw many times were the save was pulled multiple times so I assumed people were checking the game already.). I then checked it to the save that I had started that turn with and saw I was down a Giant. A quick check of all my Giants told me which one had disappeared.

The Giant was gone in the save I posted so I had to go back and redo the end of my turn and made sure he stayed where he was suppose to be. Morten then played off of that save, which the only difference was that he did not have the Giant. Nothing else from the game file or diplomatic relations was different.
 
Units given thru civ2dip don't pop in from nowhere and they cannot move in the same turn that they arrive. I'd expect Morten to know this and think twice about the giant. Also, if I got a giant from another player, I'd expect some kind of discussion along with it.

I guess your last post answers my question about when the giant disappeared - between the start of your 817AD turn and the end of it (correct?). I cannot think of anything to cause that either - probably just a computer glitch of some sort - or Loke.
 
Patient English said:
Where are the Christian "magic" units Morten? I could use a damn good archangel strike right now....:)
I actually considered putting them in the game (they're in the units.gif), but ultimately decided against it, in favor of a 'strictly rational' christendom. The vikings being the mystical pagans and the christians representing the rational march of inevitable medieval progress... That, and I ran out of events-space. But I'd very much like to hear any ideas :)

Archers and other missile-borne units can attack Ravens, btw.
 
Arthedain said:
Anyways, I have an important message to all. From august 10 - 26 I will be in Bulgaria. At my enxt turn I will clear my password (will play as many turns as I will make until my trip though) and then I think one of my allies can play for me while I'm gone. Well he may as well take over the civ if he likes. Any one up for it? Patient?

Was someone set to play the Frisians? Or, should we let the AI have it since they will be down to one city soon? Or, do we want to let the game sit for a week?
 
Maybe you could take a look to see if his turn is complicated. It sounds like Arthedain would be happy for you to play the turn.
 
Back
Top Bottom