• In anticipation of the possible announcement of Civilization 7, we have decided to already create the Civ7 forum. For more info please check the forum here .

Replacement(s) needed for 16-civ Rocky Pangea pitboss

@Morgan - I'm against using the world editor on a running multiplayer game as it offers too many advantages to the side using it. I'm also against granting secured peace turns to subs; it's not in the rules, it was not done for subs that could have benefitted before; it's easily exploitable precedence for the future.

I agree with the above statements. The problem is that precedent was already set that absent players would be turned to AI and that precedent is no longer being followed so we are looking for a fair compromise.

I have taken a huge hit by Whiplash dropping out of the game after investing so many resources and strategy around our alliance. Whiplash's not playing his last 5 turns has utterly destroyed his civ which makes it unfairly easy target for his neighbours to attack.

Here is my proposed compromise assuming Kemal is not taking over the civ.

1) Turn the civ to AI for 5 turns. The added production bonus will help offset the 5 turns that were lost when Whiplash quit without notice.

2) I will take over the civ for the next 10-20 turns, at which point if the civ is viable then I will get one of my friends to take over the civ. If the civ is not viable then I'll just continue to play it out until it's inevitable demise.

An acceptable alternative to item 1 is a 10 turn peace treaty with Whiplash's neighbours. To allow Whiplash's neighbours to attack Whiplash after such severe neglect without at least the AI production bonus is grossly unfair.

Please note that I first brought up Whiplash's absense 3 turns ago (which was a long time ago in real time) so it's not like I didn't do what I could to help resolve the issue in a timely manner.

Is this an acceptable compromise?

Regards,
Exploit
 
@slaze - AFAIK: Ras betrayed oyzar in a manner oyzar saw as especially unsportsmanlike. Oyzar reacted very emotionally (in PMs and such) and left the game, team Cav, civfanatics, and perhaps CIV altogether; Ras felt it's best to leave the game too.
 
Thanks usun.

As far as setting the civ to AI for a period, I don't think that will help much. It's Asoka, his build units drive is "sometimes" and build wonders is "very often", I don't expect exploit to get the desired result.
 
I agree with the above statements. The problem is that precedent was already set that absent players would be turned to AI and that precedent is no longer being followed so we are looking for a fair compromise.

My understanding is Ricardo and Sarge were turned to AI 1-2 turns before elimination. Were there any other instances of AI control?


I have taken a huge hit by Whiplash dropping out of the game after investing so many resources and strategy around our alliance.

Oyzar invested all of his (not insignificant) winning chances in the alliance with Ras, and got cheated. As far as I can tell you have only invested several techs everyone else has in whiplash (about zero value in my books).

More to the point, this is a FFA game, investing in your own civ is the only investment guaranteed not to turn on you next turn. It's presumptuous to believe you knew all of whiplash dealings, let alone to prophecy the future.


An acceptable alternative to item 1 is a 10 turn peace treaty with Whiplash's neighbours. To allow Whiplash's neighbours to attack Whiplash after such severe neglect without at least the AI production bonus is grossly unfair.

Whiplash already has peace treaties with his neighbors. Again, it's presumptuous to believe what his neighbors intentions are.

2) I will take over the civ for the next 10-20 turns, at which point if the civ is viable then I will get one of my friends to take over the civ. If the civ is not viable then I'll just continue to play it out until it's inevitable demise.

Exploit, you are somehow mistaken that whiplash civ is yours. It's not. Whiplash is a person of free will. His civ vassalage is peaceful and therefore cancel-able. Offering to run his civ yourself or via a friend goes against the spirit of FFA games. It amounts to me saying I had secret dealing with whiplash and I want control over his civ as compensation.
 
Ok to give everyone a clear understanding of just how screwed up the Whiplash position is due to neglect. I am going to reveal his defenses.

  • Three of his six cities have no defenders.
  • His army consists of 1 warrior, 1 spearman, 1 swordsmen each guarding separate cities.
  • His cities are not producing anything and haven't produced anything in 5 turns.
  • There are several barbarians headed through his lands capturing his vacant cities.

Letting other players attack is simply offering up Whiplash's cities as free gifts. Getting another player to take over the civ is simply wasting their time as they can do nothing but effectively die. The "instant" AI army build is probably about the only way the civ has any chance to survive.
 
Exploit, you are somehow mistaken that whiplash civ is yours. It's not. Whiplash is a person of free will. His civ vassalage is peaceful and therefore cancel-able. Offering to run his civ yourself or via a friend goes against the spirit of FFA games. It amounts to me saying I had secret dealing with whiplash and I want control over his civ as compensation.

The suggestion was made by other people that I take over Whiplash's position. I was merely responding to that proposed solution.

As for getting a friend to take over a position, it has nothing to do with a secret deal. There are several players in the game who probably consider each other friends. My friends are no more slaves to my desires then your friends are. My point is that we are having a hard time finding a replacement and that I know people who might play but I have no intention of asking one of my friends to take over such a dire position since it is not a "friendly" thing to ask of someone.

To be honest, I am getting tired of your obstructionist and accusatory attitude. I am putting forth ideas that try to amalgamate everyone's position in a fair and equitable way but you keep accusing me of sinister motives.
 
The fair way to play the game is to not try to rectify human mistakes by utilizing the world editor or deity AI.
 
Would your dilemma be solved, or at least helped, by finding a human player who is accepts (if not enjoys) taking over lost causes? That would be me ... ;) :lol:

Or are there more issues at hand than that?

dV
 
Hello,

I volunteer to take over the "lost cause" Whiplash civ...:goodjob:

Some of you may recognize me from the BTS MTDG... maybe not... anyway, I have read through this thread and I think I am now somewhat familiar with the situation. I don't have any particular loyalties to anyone here... I just recognize some of the names here as great CIV players and I hate to see what seems like such a good game fall apart over a player quitting...

So I will be happy to take over for Whiplash if you all will allow me. I know that it is hopeless, I know that I am just going to die, etc., etc., I want to play anyway. I will do my best... I will not miss turns (within reason of course) and most importatly...

I WILL NOT QUIT. I will play until I am elimminated (or until I win;)).

What say you?
 
OK, I see that Sommerswerd took over the Whiplash´s civ.
Missed this one, but nevermind ... I play PBEM on parallel forum and it actually quite suits me having to respond to an email once in a while. Good luck, Sommerswerd !! :)
 
Looks like we need a replacement for France, as Phillip has missed the last 4 turns. I sent a PM out to Da_vinci since he seemed to show interest, but he states that he subbed for someone in the early stages (pre-3000BC).

Does anyone recall who he may have subbed for, and if so, would you object to him taking over France? Since he admits to not remembering the exact details of his previous tenure, I'll leave it up to the other players to decide on the invite.
 
Looks like we need a replacement for France, as Phillip has missed the last 4 turns. I sent a PM out to Da_vinci since he seemed to show interest, but he states that he subbed for someone in the early stages (pre-3000BC).

Does anyone recall who he may have subbed for, and if so, would you object to him taking over France? Since he admits to not remembering the exact details of his previous tenure, I'll leave it up to the other players to decide on the invite.
I think I subbed for oyzar very early on (three cities at the time, I think) ... I think it was in other games I subbed for Munro and Rusten ... I have links in favorites for Lakes and Highlands and for Face of the Enemy, which I think were the Munro and Rusten subs ...

Munro and Rusten may recall better which was which.

Addendum: Hmm ... looking back at notes, might be I subbed for both in Lakes and Highlands? Subbed there for Rusten's Mehmed II of Aztecs, (Nov 10 -17 2009 it appears) and somewhere for Munro's Pacal of India (L&H too?). Yes, looks like I subbed for Munro in L&H Dec 15 2009 to Jan 3 2010 (gee, I hope we cleared that with Rusten! :lol:)

So I think the early oyzar was my only sub in Cav game.

dV
 
You subbed for me in Lakes & Highlands.

I welcome dV taking over for France.
 
I'll be hosting this game for a while, until Munro is ready to take it back or my server falls over - which comes first ;)

the game should be on kmbts.no-ip.org:2058

dV - as discussed, connection details above.

I've kicked Phillip to AI (got my wife to log in and retire using the admin password, so I wouldn't see any of Phillip's lands). So it's dV's for the taking. Welcome to the game! :)

Cheers
Munro
 
Top Bottom