SGOTM 11 - Fifth Element

[havr]

GO GERMANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry had to inject that!

Every time I am for England, and every time they disappoint me.
And I am not even English!

Sorry UT, but everytime Germany loses I am happy.
But they are a good team.

 

[havr]

It couldn't have been cricket--the English would have walloped them.


Clearly, the Italian players already "scored" big time in 2006 and would now rather get home to their wives/lovers ASAP. "Let other teams have a chance at glory," one player was quoted as saying, "we're already rich and famous and our sexy, muscled bodies are better put to use growing the Italian population."

Italy always plays bad in the first round. The funny thing is that if they would have passed the first round they would have had a very good chance of winning the tournament...

 

[BLubmuz]

Italy always plays bad in the first round. The funny thing is that if they would have passed the first round they would have had a very good chance of winning the tournament...

This time our team was weaker, but you never know.
If they could play like they did in the last 15 minutes with Slovakia thay could have done something.

Just a good side on this: our coach is covered of s**t.

 

[havr]

Talking about my upcoming TS (whenever it comes, in a year a or two).

I don't think I will have the time to really work on TS. In about three weeks I am relocating to the other side of the world (well almost, Tel Aviv -> New York). So I am really busy these days, and we better skip my TS.

I will continue to monitor the thread trying to throw some useless advice here and there....

 

[Dhoomstriker]

This time our team was weaker, but you never know.

I still think that they were faking it and just wanted to get home to their women:

Spoiler :

http://x-sosen.neostrada.pl/Italy.jpg
http://www.bankoboev.ru/images/NjIw/Bankoboev.Ru_world_cup_girl_italy.jpg

If they could play like they did in the last 15 minutes with Slovakia thay could have done something.

That just proves my point. "See, honey, I am really good, I proved it in the end, I just wanted to see you sooooo badly, though, that I helped to blow the game."

Just a good side on this: our coach is covered of s...

I read a couple of articles that said the media was too quick to jump and just blame him, since the local talent pool has been shafted out of playing in the top leagues in favour of "imported" players from South America, thus making it tough for locals to become strong, competitive players (presuming that the top leagues are the most competitive leagues). But even those articles still put SOME of the blame on him.

 

[BLubmuz]

Back on topic, now!

Yes i meant 1W of Bedrock, not 1E of marble, it's 1SE. Still i better see a road there.

Of course the worker will complete the horse pasture, then he will do what i posted.

I see your point for Silverado. OK let's keep that poor city size 1 for 8 more turns.

Also, it would help if you could detail WHICH squares Delhi will work, it would be appreciated. Just to clarify, "max Hammers" does not mean work a 1F + 2H (3 Basic Inputs) square. It just means work all of the Mines. In addition to the Mines, work some GRiv Cottages and the GRiv Irr square. We should still avoid working the 3 Basic Input squares in Delhi, since we are not yet THAT desperate for Hammers there. I'd rather grow the City a bit, as well as grow our Cottages, wouldn't you?

I got some doubt here.
On a first attempt i've tried to work the hamlet+cottage, but i needed 3 pops for the Aqueduct.
Then i worked any possible hammer tile, so next turn i needed only 2 pops with a good overflow.
In case, i can run again the test to see which is the limit.

Also, i don't like to left the TS with a wonder to complete and all the possible things.
I propose to play until we'll (hopefully) successfully complete that task, then save without making any move.

But i see your points about duping our competitors.
So, i will save on turn 162, i've never seen a human player lose a WW the turn he's goin' to complete it.

Next player will play that turn right after we decided about possible civics changes.
Even if i think we'll change nothing until turn 163.

Unit away cost
i was rising that problem, then i forgot to post.
1) I suggest to let the warrior in the northern desert where he is.
2) we can move the settler for Crabs 1E of the location and move the warrior inside our borders.
3) same we can do for rice: move the settler where the warrior is (or 1W of rice, changes nothing, our worker chopping will fogbust), and move the warrior inside our borders.
4) we can keep our warrior from Bedrock over the cows, to fogbust at least a tile in the island. Alternatively, we can move him 1E of the forest in the northern tip and move the one in the desert inside our borders.

I agree for the archer: we can load the warrior in the galley, unload him first on the island. If he see nothing dangerous (you're right, animals are gone) we can then unload the settler, or move the galley to another spot.

BTW that galley is a pain to produce: do you have some idea about it?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

More PPP-related Comments

Back on topic, now!

Yes i meant 1W of Bedrock, not 1E of marble, it's 1SE. Still i better see a road there.

Okay, but if, when we go to complete a Road later, we instead put the Road on the GFor 1NW of Bedrock (1E of the PMarble), then we'll be able to move faster between Bedrock and the Three Clams City. I thought that the point of building Roads was to get us faster movement.

The other part about Roads is to avoid reducing our chance at free Hammers from Forest regrowth.

By building Roads on Forests that we do not plan to chop anytime soon, instead of on the square adjacent to said Forest, we maximize our chances of Forest regrowth, since a Road disrupts Forest regrowth chances when it is build on a square adjacent to a Forest.


I am not fighting against building a Road at all, I just don't like where you chose to put it.

I got some doubt here.
On a first attempt i've tried to work the hamlet+cottage, but i needed 3 pops for the Aqueduct.
Then i worked any possible hammer tile, so next turn i needed only 2 pops with a good overflow.
In case, i can run again the test to see which is the limit.

Okay, I will go back and look at what I did. Here are the squares that I worked:

T156
Delhi fires the 4 Scientists and works: 2 Corn, Copper, GRiv Irr, GRiv Cot (1S of Delhi), GRiv Cot (1NE of Delhi), GHRiv Mine (NE + E of Delhi), GHRiv Mine (E + E of Delhi--it will be completed on this turn), PHRiv Mine (1SE of Delhi)

T157
Delhi works the same squares
I have 17 overflow Hammers + 15 base Hammers. After Bureaucracy and Org Religion bonuses, that equates to 56 Hammers going into the Aqueduct

T158
Delhi whips the Aqueduct for 2 population points
Delhi stops working the GRiv Irr and the GRiv Cot (1NE of Delhi) and instead works: 2 Corn, Copper, GRiv Cot (1S of Delhi), GHRiv Mine (NE + E of Delhi), GHRiv Mine (E + E of Delhi), PHRiv Mine (1SE of Delhi)

T159
Delhi works the same squares
I have 50 overflow Hammers + 15 base Hammers. After Bureaucracy and Org Religion bonuses, that equates to 178 Hammers going into The Hanging Gardens

T162
Delhi is still working the same squares (no change since T158)
Before chopping the 2 Forests, Delhi has 260/450 Hammers invested with + 41 Hammers coming in this turn, which would complete The Hanging Gardens in 5 turns.
After chopping the GHFor NE + N of Delhi and the PHFor NE + E + E of Delhi on this turn, +261 Hammers are listed as coming in this turn, which will complete The Hanging Gardens in 1 turn.
Delhi will grow in size in 1 turn from Food-based growth and will also get 1 population point from The Hanging Gardens, so on Turn 163, we'll then be able to work the GRiv Irr and GCot (1NE of Delhi).

Perhaps you forgot to switch Civics or Religion when you played again quickly, which would account for the reason why the Aqueduct required 3 population points to whip.


Note that we can OPTIONALLY switch Civics to Slavery + Organized Religion
and Switch Religion to Confucianism on EITHER T156 or T157.

T157 would mean one less turn of pissing off Saladin (1/10th of a point less of pissing him off) but one less turn of pleasing Zara. Since Zara is very easy to get to a Pleased, I don't see much value in making him a tiny bit happier. Plus, we will save a bit of cash for 1 turn of not being in Organized Religion and can get a tiny bit more culture in our empire for being in No State Religion.

If we switch Civics + Religion on T157, we will just wait 1 turn until T157 to whip the Confucian Monastary in Riverdale, instead of whipping it on T156.

Switching Civics + Religion on T157 will still leave us the freedom to choose to switch again at the start of my turnset on T162.

So, my vote goes towards switching Civics and Religion on T157 (BUT DO NOT FORGET TO DO SO!), saving us a bit of cash, getting a tiny bit more Culture, and making Saladin 1/10th of a point happier with us. Since we won't whip the Confucian Monastary in Riverdale until T157, we will lose 0 bonus Hammers from not having the Organized Religion bonus.


Since you'll be playing a longer turnset, don't forget to build YET ANOTHER Settler in Wheaties. We should build 2 more Settlers (counting the one that is currently being built plus one more) there, before starting on the Granary.

Of course, you should make sure that your PPP lists the turn on which you need to switch from building a Settler to building a Galley, otherwise the Granary will just get produced. If you want to be lazy, you can just set up the build queue in that City to be Settler -> Galley -> Galley -> Granary. I don't care, either way.

But i see your points about duping our competitors.
So, i will save on turn 162, i've never seen a human player lose a WW the turn he's goin' to complete it.

The only way to miss out on the Wonder would be the next player (it sounds like I will be up next) performing rogue play of switching the build queue. Since all build items are completed at the end of your turn before the next AI gets their turn, we will automatically, 100% get the Wonder.

Next player will play that turn right after we decided about possible civics changes.
Even if i think we'll change nothing until turn 163.

I have no trouble with making the decision quickly as part of the start of my turnset, if it will make you feel better.

2) we can move the settler for Crabs 1E of the location and move the warrior inside our borders.

The risk here is Forest regrowth. What if a Forest regrows on the square where the Settler was going to settle? We will not have time to chop that Forest, so it is a BAD thing if it grows, since we will be unable to use it, while at the same time, it will slow our Settler's movement back onto that square.

For all that I keep harping about trying hard to let Forests regrow, here is one time where we do not actually want a Forest to regrow!!!

3) same we can do for rice: move the settler where the warrior is (or 1W of rice, changes nothing, our worker chopping will fogbust), and move the warrior inside our borders.

That move makes sense because no Forest can grow on top of a Rice Resource. Just be careful if you see a Galley--do not panic and accidentally settle on the wrong spot. We are settling on the Rice in order to gain a Flood Plains square that no other City can work, so we have to remember to move back to the Rice if an AI Galley shows up.

4) we can keep our warrior from Bedrock over the cows, to fogbust at least a tile in the island.

Unfortunately, we won't fog-bust (fog-busting refers to visibility and is different from spawn-busting) any more by moving to the PCow square, because our cultural borders are already doing that. We also won't be able to use the 2x2 spawn-busting radius to our advantage for land units, since the Grassland Jungle Sugar is THREE squares away from the PCow. But, certainly, put Warrior 8 on the PCow, as doing so will spawn-bust 3 squares where a Barb Galley could otherwise spawn. That'll reduce the chances of an evil Barb Galley appearing.

Alternatively, we can move him 1E of the forest in the northern tip and move the one in the desert inside our borders.

That would just be the same in terms of Unit Supply costs: "add one apple to the basket and remove another apple from the basket"--you will still have the same number of apples in your basket.

Plus, I do not like standing a unit horizontally or vertically adjacent to a Forested square, as doing so messes with Forest regrowth.


So, by the sounds of things, we'll have to retreat Warrior 6 (the Warrior that is currently in the northern Desert by the Fish + Incense City location) back into our borders. It won't be for long, anyway--once we settle our western Cities, most or all of the units to the west will automatically be within our cultural borders, so Warrior 6 can head back out of our borders once again.

BTW that galley is a pain to produce: do you have some idea about it?

Yes, I do. It costs us 75 Hammers. Whipping 1 population point gives us 45 Hammers. 75 - 45 = 30 Hammers.

Chopping the PFor where the Three Clam City will go = 20 Hammers.

So, after 10 turns at 1 Hammer per turn, we can whip the Galley.

But, if we improve the GHorse River square, we will get more than 1 Hammer per turn in Bedrock, meaning that we can whip the Galley sooner than 10 turns from when Bedrock's Settler is completed.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Obviously, there are a lot of details to keep track of.

If you can put them into a PPP and then run a test saved game that executes the steps and even upload that test saved game, it will be easy for me to help you double-check if you missed something.

There is such a high volume of information that it will be hard to believe that you did not miss a thing. But, if you can achieve that standard of getting absolutely all of the points that we discussed incorporated into the PPP, I will be very impressed indeed!

 

[Dhoomstriker]

In about three weeks I am relocating to the other side of the world (well almost, Tel Aviv -> New York).

By the way, best of luck with the move!

I hope that your welcoming to the city is a warm one!


Let's see... three weeks plus a couple of days to get your computer set up... at about 5 days per turnset... that should put us right about at your turn by that point.

 

[BLubmuz]

@Havr
best of luck from me too!

Can i keep you in the roster for next round of TSs?

Now, my PPP 3.1
I've seen what to do in Dehli and it works like Dhoom said.
The only thing i don't like is to waste a worker turn moving to the 3clams site. NTW i tested and it will arrive in the forest, then i must move that worker to partially pasture the cows and finally to the forest. Straight to the forest he looses 2 turns.

Another decision which no one mentioned is the chance to whip the granary in Wheaties and the Monastery in Riverdale the turn before the HGs are completed.

But this can wait, since i'll left this partial turn to Dhoom.
More, this time i've seen 2 barb galleys, 1 in the south and one near Aksum. Plus the one near the sugar, luckily not a threat for ours.

I guess we must research MC after currency, we need at least a trireme to defend our nets.

What about the AP n Dehli? In Wheaties it takes forever, i think.

I think i can play later tonight, unless some problem arises.

EDIT: sorry, but i won't have time to post a detailed PPP. Rest assured i've studied any move and usually i don't make mistakes. Now that i've tested everything is simple. I will spend 15 minutes instead of 5, but i'll play carefully.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Can i keep you in the roster for next round of TSs?

I'm pretty sure that that will be the plan.

Now, my PPP 3.1

Indeed, please write it. We'd love to see how you captured all of the info that we've been discussing into a well-formulated plan.

I've seen what to do in Dehli and it works like Dhoom said.

Great.

The only thing i don't like is to waste a worker turn moving to the 3clams site. NTW i tested and it will arrive in the forest, then i must move that worker to partially pasture the cows and finally to the forest. Straight to the forest he looses 2 turns.

Okay, but that's why we are discussing putting a partial Worker action into the square 1W of Bedrock (1SE of the PMarble).

Only sometime in the future, once we are say, done working the PCow that both Bedrock and Three Clams City share, will we be in position to put a Road on the PFor 1NW of Bedrock (1E of the PMarble). Not now.

So, the decision is only down to WHICH improvement to put on the square 1W of Bedrock (1SE of the PMarble). You want to put a Road there. I want to put a Cottage there.

I argue that we will eventually (but not now) want to put a Road on the GFor 1NW of Bedrock (1E of the PMarble). That way, we'll get faster movement between Bedrock and Three Clams City than by having the Road on the square 1W of Bedrock (1SE of the PMarble). So, I argue that a Road on the square 1W of Bedrock (1SE of the PMarble) will be redundant, since we will have a better Road right next to it that our units will always use.

Now, because Roads mess up Forest regrowth, I don't really want us to complete a Road on the square 1W of Bedrock (1SE of the PMarble) until really late in the game, if ever. But, as soon as we put two partial turns into the Road there (from Worker 4 and then Worker 5, as per your plan), someone will argue that we should just complete the Road there. But then we'll mess up the best chance of getting a free Forest growing in the area.

We don't really need EITHER a Road OR a Cottage on that square for a long time. So, if we promise not to complete the Road on that square 1W of Bedrock (1SE of the PMarble) until AFTER both of the Forests 1N and 1S of that square are chopped, then I don't really care if you put partial Roads there, since we won't need to complete either a Cottage or a Road there for quite a while. But, if the intention is to COMPLETE that Road before the Forests get chopped, then I am strongly against putting partial Roads into that square.

Another decision which no one mentioned is the chance to whip the granary in Wheaties

That's because we are building ANOTHER Settler. You must have missed putting in that additional Settler and hence got the overflow Hammers into the Granary. If you start work on the Granary, we will miss out on the opportunity to settle a second off-continent City during my turnset.

Building a Granary and then a Settler immediately afterwards is the worst timing possible for building a Granary. A Granary only has value if your City grows. A Settler stops all City growth.

So, if we start work on the Granary, we are giving up on settling a second off-continent City. Do you support such a plan? I, for one, would like to get AT LEAST a second off-continent City, and building ANOTHER Settler in Wheaties is the current plan of how we will accomplish this goal.

But this can wait, since i'll left this partial turn to Dhoom.

Nope, it can't wait until my turnset. We need to catch the overflow Hammers into another Settler, and not into the Granary, and that will happen on your turnset.

and the Monastery in Riverdale the turn before the HGs are completed.

The point is to whip the Monastary in Riverdale on T157, right after switching Civics to Org Rel and Slavery and Religion to Confucianism, not to wait. The longer that we wait, the more we will miss out on the cultural-doubling effect of building the Monastary early in the game. A Confucian Missionary is the next item to build in that City.

More, this time i've seen 2 barb galleys, 1 in the south and one near Aksum. Plus the one near the sugar, luckily not a threat for ours.

One near the Sugar WILL be a threat if you aren't careful. That's why I suggested moving the Galley for 2 movement points on its first turn, followed by moving it only 1 movement point on its second turn and ending its turn while at the same time we load up a Warrior and a Settler. That way, we should be "out of range" of any Barb Galley up there for long enough to drop the Warrior and Settler off on the following turn. Our Galley may then get attacked, but at least it will have delivered its cargo successfully.

I guess we must research MC after currency, we need at least a trireme to defend our nets.

I'm pretty sure that the team wants to go for Aesthetics and Literature next.

This late in the game, the AIs will all start to research Metal Casting anyway. We'll get it in trade within the next 2 to 3 turnsets. With our poor tech rate, we would basically research it at a time when its trade value would be meaningless, since the AIs would research it at about the same time. It is too late to research this tech ourselves and we should be able to get it in trade.

What about the AP n Dehli? In Wheaties it takes forever, i think.

Wheaties will get it in time due to the Plains Hills squares that we will chop and then Mine. Putting it in Delhi will simply dilute the Great Engineer pool, giving us a much-undesired late-game Great Prophet.

I think i can play later tonight, unless some problem arises.

Let's see your PPP. There's no PPP that captures all that needs to be done, so no one has even been able to agree to it.

Once you get your PPP, players have up to 48 hours to check out a token and update it or to agree to what is written. If we all agree to it within that amount of time, then you can play. If that time runs out, then you can play the latest version of the PPP, as updated by the team.

So, you should focus on using your "later tonight" time to get us your updated PPP, complete with all of the points that we have been discussing.

Only after the PPP is approved can we consider you playing it out. The 48 hour countdown starts once you've got a reasonably complete PPP upon which there aren't major comments. I'm pretty sure that our discussions qualify as being "major comments," to the point that no one has even said they agree with any PPP version yet. So, let's see you gather all of the info into the PPP. That's the UP player's job and the longer that you put off this task, the longer that you drag out your turnset.

We can help to update your PPP if needed, and we'll have to write the PPP if you refuse to do it, but we need to see a PPP that incorporates all of these things that we've been talking about.

 

[Mitchum]

I agree. I'd like to see a PPP. There has been a lot of information in the thread in the last several posts and I'd like to see what you plan to incorporate, what you plan to leave out, and why.

Since you've played several test games and you know what you plan to do, writing the PPP should take less than 30 minutes. Also, just because you know what you plan to do doesn't mean that the team knows.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

EDIT: sorry, but i won't have time to post a detailed PPP. Rest assured i've studied any move and usually i don't make mistakes. Now that i've tested everything is simple. I will spend 15 minutes instead of 5, but i'll play carefully.

Okay, because you are being stubborn for some reason are are refusing to summarize the info into a PPP, I will put it to a vote.

Does BLubmuz get to play outside of the rules and get to skip writing a PPP?
a) Yes, he has clearly demonstrated that everything he said makes sense. No one has had any major comments on what he has written. It is very clear to you exactly what BLubz will be doing in his turnset
b) No, you believe it is not clear what BLubmuz will be doing. He should write a proper PPP like everyone else. Also, we should follow our rules and allow others to provide feedback on BLubz' PPP

I vote b).


It is very ridiculous that we need to set up a vote this way, but I will have no confidence that BLubz plans to follow a lot of the things that we discussed until I see a proper PPP.

Now, my PPP 3.1
I've seen what to do in Dehli and it works like Dhoom said.
The only thing i don't like is to waste a worker turn moving to the 3clams site. NTW i tested and it will arrive in the forest, then i must move that worker to partially pasture the cows and finally to the forest. Straight to the forest he looses 2 turns.

Another decision which no one mentioned is the chance to whip the granary in Wheaties and the Monastery in Riverdale the turn before the HGs are completed.

But this can wait, since i'll left this partial turn to Dhoom.
More, this time i've seen 2 barb galleys, 1 in the south and one near Aksum. Plus the one near the sugar, luckily not a threat for ours.

I guess we must research MC after currency, we need at least a trireme to defend our nets.

What about the AP n Dehli? In Wheaties it takes forever, i think.

The above text is more certainly NOT a PPP.

"It works like Dhoom said" doesn't tell us whether you plan to perform those same actoins.

Then you go on to talk about a minor detail about which partial Worker action to use, when those partial Worker actions won't even be used to complete a full Worker improvement for quite a number of turns.

Then you talk about going counter to our plans of pumping out 2 off-continent Settlers from Wheaties by talking about building a Granary there instead.

Next, you indicate that you did not understand the timing of when to whip in Riverdale, even though that issue has been raised several times.

Then you talk about a bunch of things that would happen in the next turnset, such as tech research and building a Wonder. All of the things that you mentioned are contrary to all of our previous discussions on these topics. That means that there is no way that we have consensus on these ideas, so how can we play a PPP without at least some level of buy-in to the ideas that are presented in the PPP?

I'm sorry, but that's not even close to a PPP that summarizes what you will be doing in your turnset. Try again, please. You were starting to do well with your previous version of the PPP--what happened?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

EDIT: sorry, but i won't have time

Perhaps you would instead like to be skipped for the remainder of your turnset, since you do not have the time to devote to the game at present?

 

[Mitchum]

EDIT: [/B]sorry, but i won't have time to post a detailed PPP. Rest assured i've studied any move and usually i don't make mistakes. Now that i've tested everything is simple. I will spend 15 minutes instead of 5, but i'll play carefully.

Since we're still at a critical point in this game where every build and every worker action is critical, I think a detailed PPP is needed. It ensures that we are all in agreement on what will be done in the remainder of your turnset.

How about this. Since you do not have time to write a detailed PPP, I'll volunteer to do it for you. I will look at what both you and Dhoomstriker have written in the last 30 posts or so and come up with a PPP that addresses every point that has been raised. For any issues that are unclear or that appear to be in disagreement, I will raise them as DISCUSSION POINTS in the PPP such that they can be discussed and agreed by the team.

Or, you can take an extra day or two to write your own detailed PPP.

The choice is yours, but we need to get moving...

 

[BLubmuz]

Perhaps you would instead like to be skipped for the remainder of your turnset, since you do not have the time to devote to the game at present?

I got the time to devote, not the time to detail what i have already detailed enough to my taste. After Dhoom's answers all my doubts are gone, so i can play. And i'll do in a hour.

And Dhoom, the point of that only worker action is to give the forest a chance to regrow. 1 turn lost is not the end of the world. i'll move directly the worker on the forest to increase that chance. Starting an improvement can have the same effect that starting a road, i think.

 

[BLubmuz]

Dhoom, please STOP IT!

I've already posted my PPP, you corrected it where needed, so now i'll play.

We can't continue to lose days in posting PPPs.

So i will play, do what you want.

 

[BLubmuz]

That's because we are building ANOTHER Settler. You must have missed putting in that additional Settler and hence got the overflow Hammers into the Granary. If you start work on the Granary, we will miss out on the opportunity to settle a second off-continent City during my turnset.

I've put the 2nd settler in queue as my first action, remember?

The point is to whip the Monastary in Riverdale on T157, right after switching Civics to Org Rel and Slavery and Religion to Confucianism, not to wait. The longer that we wait, the more we will miss out on the cultural-doubling effect of building the Monastary early in the game. A Confucian Missionary is the next item to build in that City.

Never mentioned this before. But i'll incorporate in my PPP. Now.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Dhoom, please STOP IT!

I've already posted my PPP

Where is it? You just said that you were too busy to write it.

so now i'll play.

Did ANYONE besides yourself approve this document that you have yet to share? I haven't even heard Unclethrill say "it sounds good," and he's usually the first to do so. But, there's nothing for him to comment on. WHERE IS IT?

We can't continue to lose days in posting PPPs.

We will lose more days if you miss doing the things that were discussed by ending up having to play extra turnsets at the end.

So i will play, do what you want.

If you do, then it's up to Turn 159 where you stop. You're not approved to play the extra turns to T162 without a PPP. You're not even approved to Turn 159 with a PPP, but at least that's your original turnset. T162 is not your original turnset and without a PPP, you're playing part of the next player's turnset.

I was the only one to approve you playing beyond Turn 159, and that's conditional on you having a PPP that captures the discussions. Without that, you have no one's authorization to play after T159.


We will also need your PPP in order to update the test saved game. So why make it so hard on everyone else? It will take considerably longer without the PPP to update the test game.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Never mentioned this before. But i'll incorporate in my PPP. Now.

That is the EXACT reason why we need to see a PPP. That is the FOURTH TIME that I mentioned this very fact. You are clearly not following all of the discussion. So how can ANYONE on the team have confidence that you are going to play with all of these details in mind when you clearly demonstrate that you do not have a grasp of the details? The only way is to play with a PPP that incorporates these details.

Having a PPP is supposed to make playing easier for you, make it easier for us to understand what you are doing, make it easier for us to help you out, make it easier for whoever updates the test game to update it properly, and make it so that teams can later review our game and follow through what we did.

Writing a PPP AFTER YOU PLAY is not a "Pre-play" Plan, is it?

That's because we are building ANOTHER Settler. You must have missed putting in that additional Settler and hence got the overflow Hammers into the Granary. If you start work on the Granary, we will miss out on the opportunity to settle a second off-continent City during my turnset.

I've put the 2nd settler in queue as my first action, remember?

Yes, you queued up the first of two additional settlers. Since your turnset is not supposed to continue past T159, you will not be playing to a point where that 2nd Settler will be completed, so we did not queue up a 3rd one immediately, as doing so would have been outside the scope of your turnset (and will still be outside of the scope of your turnset without a PPP, as you are to play no further than T159).


Let the evidence speak for itself. Here are three other times that I raised this exact point. The quote above is the FOURTH time that I brought up this issue.

Time #1

In fact, we might want to pump out TWO MORE Settlers from Wheaties before we build the Granary + the Apostolic Palace. Otherwise, we won't be getting Settlers out anytime soon.

Time #2

The suggestion for Wheaties was:
Complete the current Settler (for the Rice City location) -> Settler (for off-continent #1) -> Settler (for off-continent #2)

Time #3

Since you'll be playing a longer turnset, don't forget to build YET ANOTHER Settler in Wheaties. We should build 2 more Settlers (counting the one that is currently being built plus one more) there, before starting on the Granary.

EACH TIME I made it EXTREMELY clear how many Settlers we would need. I typed out extra words just so that the meaning was unambiguous.

I do not see how you can misinterpret ANY of the four times that I brought up the issue to mean building only 1 off-continent Settler and then a Granary in Wheaties.

Is it ENJOYABLE to feel the need to repeat myself? Definitely not!

Is it pleasurable to have a teammate demonstrate their ignorance of what other team members have said, especially when that teammate is the UP player and was a direct participant in the discussions that were quoted? Certainly not!


So what are you going to do about it to fix the situation? Will you write the PPP or will you wait for Mitchum to prepare it for you?