SGOTM3 Rome - Maintenance Thread

[microbe]

I wouldn't comment on which team had the most luck, since I couldn't looked at their game thread. But at least in our game, if we could have got a leader for the Great Library, or even Pyramids, things could have been very different. Or if AI didn't start GL in ~450BC. This IS luck. We didn't need to change our strategy and the outcome would have been very different.

That said, luck is fair game and I don't want to whine about it. There is still a more lot to do which doesn't depend on pure luck. I also don't believe that by luck only a team could do very well. So I congratulate all the players who have higher score than us (which is most of them). All I want to say is luck does exist and sometimes plays a significant role.

 

[Mauer]

So basically, some of my friends think luck is significant, some of my friends don't. Personally, I agree with my friends .

 

[microbe]

I thought D still remained at X+60, and no DOW was needed at X+40 (C's turn)because you were already at war with C?

A = X
B = X+20
C = X+40 (already at war, since prior to B)
D = X+60

DJMGator, unfortunately, your interpretation seems to be totally wrong.

Assume C declares on you in turn X+15, then what happens is:

A = X
C = X+15
B = X+35
D = X+55

I hope I get this right this time. mad-bax please correct me if I am wrong.

Now, let's get a poll here. Who really think he understands the rules here? I can come up with a quiz to test. Not that I know the correct answers.

 

[Mistfit]

Ok lets get a MB ruling on that one

Now, let's get a poll here. Who really think he understands the rules here?

I thought I did until I read this post

 

[microbe]

Here is mad-bax's latest rule clarification in our thread. Note the bold font.
=================================================

This is the rule.

1. You must declare war on the first civ you make contact with on the turn you make contact.

2. You must declare war on the second civ you make contact with 20 turns or less after you declared war on the first civ.

3. You must declare war on the third civ you make contact with 20 turns or less after the turn you declared war on the second civ.

4. You must declare war on the fourth civ you make contact with 20 turns or less after the turn you declared war on the third civ.

5. yada yada yada ad nauseum.

Things that can change this.

a) A civ declares war on you. This is the same as you declaring war on a civ early. So the next civ in the list has a DoW date twenty turns from this time.

b) You declare war on a civ that is not next on the list. Fine. Then the DoW date for the next Civ is in twenty turns time.

I called it the twenty turn rule because it is exactly that. Every twenty tuns you are at war with a new civ. If you want to declare war earlier, or out of turn then that's up to you. If a civ declares war on you then hard luck.

 

[dmanakho]

I mentioned it on our team thread...

M-B needs to hire an attorney for 2 reasons....
1. Polish all the rules and statements prior to the start of the game.
2. to defend himself from SGOTM players after game is started...


@MIcrobe: I still don't understand completely the rules.. and i was the one who made a mistake playing for our team... I declared war way earlier than i should have.

@M-B: I am not picking at you. It's just 1st time everyone plays such a variant, I think it was almost impossible to predict all the possible combinations and game twists until it has actually started. If we have the same variant game next time it will run much more smoothly.

In overall it was lots of fun to play this game, and it's kind of shame we finished it so early, it's been somewhat boring lately.

 

[microbe]

I decided to go through the whole maintenance thread because I want to see where all the confusion comes from. And now my suspicion is kind of true: mad-bax confused everybody and himself.

Assuming civ ABCD met in order, and we declare on A at turn X. Then C declares on us at turn X+15. So what should we do?

TheNamesis666 asked this question:

MB, what happens if someone declares war on us, do we still declare 20 turns after the last war we started or is it 20 turns after we were declared upon?

mad-bax answered:

Nothing changes. You declare on the next civ in your list 20 turns after you declared on the last one. If the civ that declares IS the next one on the list then it is handled in the same way as if you decided to declare on that civ early.

IOW, nothing changes if an AI NOT next in the list decided to declare on you early. (btw, it's rather weird that things do change when the next AI declares on us)

So:

A = X
C = X+15
B = X+20
D = X+60

Compare it to the latest interpretation:

b) You declare war on a civ that is not next on the list. Fine. Then the DoW date for the next Civ is in twenty turns time.

Now could it be there is a difference between you declare on AI and AI declares on you? Nope:

a) A civ declares war on you. This is the same as you declaring war on a civ early. So the next civ in the list has a DoW date twenty turns from this time.

So:

A = X
C = X+15
B = X+35
D = X+55

Now tell me how to interpret these inconsistent rules.

The whole thing is a joke now.

 

[mad-bax]

Well... you have me of course. The rule as clarified by me and linked first in your post (#167) is correct, and is the clarification by which all the teams have abided by, except yours.

Having read right through your thread, and turnlogs, and opened three of your teams saves I was put in a difficult position. You have declared war late, you have signed peace with an opponent, and you have failed to record the date at which an opponent declared war on you, and can only narrow it down to within twenty turns.

This competition (I had rather hoped) would be a friendly affair. A bit of light relief from playing GOTM. To my mind it's a bit like the difference between playing singles tennis and doubles. The singles is all very serious and every line call scrutinised, wheras in doubles you play to win sure, but you have a laugh doing it.

With this in the back of my mind, and confronted with the stark choice of excluding a whole team because of the actions of one person, or finding a way to allow the team to continue, I chose the latter, and softened the rules for you. The intent of the rule was only ever to prevent teams from sandbagging. So long as teams made a genuine attempt to keep to the spirit of this, then declaring war a little late, or forgetting to disband a few slaves here and there would be overlooked. Had it been GOTM, then your game would have been excluded without question. But I'd rather hoped I'd never be forced into doing this in SGOTM.

So yes, the rule as described by me to your team in your thread IS inconsistent with what everyone else has been playing to. I surrender.

So now you have me painted into a corner, what next?

As for this game being a joke, then perhaps you are right. I never thought of myself as capable of running these games anyway, but nobody else would step up to the plate. So I did it, because I thought that some people would get some pleasure from the format. The hours I spend fiddling with maps and playtesting them to try to get them kind of OK means I have no time to play GOTM or any SG's now. All I can do is lurk in other peoples games at work whilst looking over my shoulder for my boss. I'm not sure that is what I want anymore. So if you know anyone that has the technical competence, the time and the ability to put up with this kind of response, then please let me know. If you and I agree on one thing it's that I am not good enough to run this event. So let's find someone who is.

I respect you as a player microbe, but I want you to know that you have taken all of the joy out of this event for me.
If you would like to continue this discussion, may I respectfully suggest we do it by PM.

Thanks.

 

[dmanakho]

that's all i can say
M-B please don't give up on us....
This game is a joy, and I bet everybody will sign under this...

You've been great

 

[denyd]

I must be truly into S&M because I too am very much enjoying this slugfest. Rarely have I felt the need to continue playing a game that I thought I might lose, yet this one has captivated me.

Please don't feel frustrated by the constant questioning over this new variant and continue to suppy us with new and challenging ideas.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

We're hanging on by a thread. It isn't so much about winning or losing, it is about the journey. You've created a very interesting journey for us, MB. Please keep up the good work

 

[AlanH]

MB. Please don't let one player who has a specific problem ruin this for you and the other 77 players who are registered for, and enjoying, this game. Sure it's a learning experience and we can refine the variant rule set better next time around by prior discussion. But you are quite right, this should be a relaxing 'doubles', not a vehicle for individual blood letting.

 

[a space oddity]

Let me add my voice to the discussion: the variants where only invented to make the game more interesting. Interesting as in fun, not as in difficult and worrisome. It's a game remember, to be shared by friends.

Let's give MB a big instead of harassment. I for one am very glad that he went ahead and started this, knowing how much work it was. And I am all the more glad that I managed to persuade him to play with us in this game.

 

[microbe]

Mad-bax, so you are accusing us of doing things LATE instead of early.

Let me go through my summary in the spolier thread:

The order of AI contact:
Greece, England, France/America, Russia/Babylon, Ottoman, Germany.

France/America make contact with us at the same turn, Russia/Babylon at the same turn.

I'm skipping other AIs to avoid spoiler information. We can discuss this once the game is over.

The declaration of wars:

2510BC (turn 32): Greece.
1700BC (turn 52): England.
1250BC (turn 71): America - here barbslinger probably did make a mistake I think we should declare on France first instead of America, as we bought contact with America from France and met it the same turn. But hardly a big deal IMO.
925BC (turn 84) : France declares on us.
825BC (turn 88): Babylon declares on us.
350BC (turn 111): Russia declares on us. We declare on Ottomans and Germany at the same turn too.

Now what should be the correct one? Assuming no AI declaration, it should be:

turn 32: Greece
turn 52: England
turn 72: America
turn 92: France
turn 112: Babylon
turn 132: Russia
turn 152: Ottoman
turn 172: Germany

If we use the "nothing changes" rule, then it should be like this:

turn 32: Greece
turn 52: England
turn 72: America
turn 84: France declares on us
turn 88: Babylon declares on us
turn 108: Russia
turn 128: Ottoman
turn 148: Germany

Now we probably delayed 3-turn on declaring Russia, but we also needlessly declared on Ottoman and Germany. All in all we declared EARLY, instead of LATE.

Having read right through your thread, and turnlogs, and opened three of your teams saves I was put in a difficult position. You have declared war late, you have signed peace with an opponent, and you have failed to record the date at which an opponent declared war on you, and can only narrow it down to within twenty turns.

Nonsense. I may not remember the exact date on top of my head, but everything is in the turnlogs. Tell me which date isn't clear to you, and I'll dig it out for you.

As of making peace - there is NOTHING in the game rules that says we cannot make peace, if we are not supposed to declare on that AI for like 40 turns. Where is it?

Well... you have me of course. The rule as clarified by me and linked first in your post (#167) is correct, and is the clarification by which all the teams have abided by, except yours.

Really? I would be surprised if anyone else followed the same rules exactly.

I chose the latter, and softened the rules for you.

Sorry, the "special" rule you gave to our team is MORE STRICT than your "nothing changes" rule! Do you really understand the differences? Go read my previous post again.

At last, if you want to give a special rule to a team, please state it explicitly, not after you are challenged. In this case, I don't buy it at all, as you said this in our thread:

I called it the twenty turn rule because it is exactly that. Every twenty tuns you are at war with a new civ. If you want to declare war earlier, or out of turn then that's up to you. If a civ declares war on you then hard luck.

Clearly this has been your original intention, not some softened (hardened?) variation.

Moderator Action: Microbe, your comments are getting dangerously near to flames. Please take this debate to Private mail as requested by MB.

 

[Mistfit]

Here is an Idea microbe: If this Game is such a chore for you any you are so unhappy about the way it has been run QUIT

 

[AdrianE]

As of making peace - there is NOTHING in the game rules that says we cannot make peace, if we are not supposed to declare on that AI for like 40 turns. Where is it?

Rule 3 of the first post in our team's thread is:

"3. You must stay at war with that Civ until one of you have been eliminated."

I assume it is the same for your team's thread.

 

[microbe]

Here is an Idea microbe: If this Game is such a chore for you any you are so unhappy about the way it has been run QUIT

Yes I consider quitting, and I would have if it were just a single player game. But I have team members and they want to continue the game.

Does it mean that if I have problems with the rules, I cannot post it in this thread and get it cleared out?

All my posts are backed by facts and reasoning. If I am wrong, I am happy to be corrected. And I think it's relevant to everyone else.

I apologize to have commented that "this game is a joke". It may make people unhappy. But frankly, I think it is a failure on mad-bax's part. I don't mean to discredit his hard work of orginazing the games. I am only commenting on this game.

Everyone wants SGOTM to be a success. Just admit the mistake and do it better next time. There is no need to bash someone who just asks questions. Let's be honest, the rule sucks.

 

[microbe]

Rule 3 of the first post in our team's thread is:

"3. You must stay at war with that Civ until one of you have been eliminated."

I assume it is the same for your team's thread.

I responded to this point here.

 

[Wotan]

Rule 3 of the first post in our team's thread is:

"3. You must stay at war with that Civ until one of you have been eliminated."

I assume it is the same for your team's thread.

I guess the word Microbe read more into than was intended was "that" in reference to rule 2. about first contact war...

OTOH, all other teams/players caught the meaning of this to apply to all wars not just the first civ we met. Especially since it is an AW variant making peace would be rather farfetched.

I hope Mad-Bax will not drop out of the SGOTM's due to one bad apple...

 

[microbe]

I guess the word Microbe read more into than was intended was "that" in reference to rule 2. about first contact war...

This is not true. It literally means that but we didn't interpret it that way.

Let's me quote what I said:

So my understanding is that once you declare on any civ according to the 20-turn rule, you cannot make peace.

But it's very reasonable to say we can make peace (20 turns) before the due declaration day, as long as we still declare according to the agenda.

Remember "nothing changes"? Nothing changes, even for the CIV that declared on us. We still declare on it according to plan.

NOW doesn't mean "no peace". See this.

I hope Mad-Bax will not drop out of the SGOTM's due to one bad apple...

That's not my intent, and I hope SGOTM could continue. And if you learn to listen to bad apple, you may do it better next time.