Test pitboss

[Lord Parkin]

I have retired to AI. I agreed to sub for remake20 for 3 weeks, but it's been almost 3 months. I haven't heard anything from remake in a very long time. AI can be his steward for a while.

Okay, no worries. Sorry to see you go, but it's fair enough that you shouldn't have to wait around forever being a sub.

Dear Lord Parkins Neighbours,

Do any of you want to win the game? How have you let him build nearly every single wonder going without at least taking a crack at wiping him out? If you could kindly make some effort everyone else would appreciate it.

Regards
Everyone else in the game.

Dear BCLG (aka self-appointed "everyone"),

You may not be aware of it, but in these multiplayer games there are things you can enter into called "deals", "treaties" and "diplomacy". Crazy stuff, I know. Of course, the level of trust in these deals varies from player to player. For instance, I'm now fairly convinced that had you been my neighbour, even if we had a deal you'd probably take a crack at wiping me out behind my back if I got beyond a certain threshold of points. Thankfully, other people who play this game are apparently willing to act honestly and keep their word, allowing long-term deals which have large benefits for everyone involved. You should try it sometime.

Kindly,
Your apparent nemesis.

 

[Sommerswerd]

^

 

[azzaman333]

Okay, no worries. Sorry to see you go, but it's fair enough that you shouldn't have to wait around forever being a sub.


Dear BCLG (aka self-appointed "everyone"),

You may not be aware of it, but in these multiplayer games there are things you can enter into called "deals", "treaties" and "diplomacy". Crazy stuff, I know. Of course, the level of trust in these deals varies from player to player. For instance, I'm now fairly convinced that had you been my neighbour, even if we had a deal you'd probably take a crack at wiping me out behind my back if I got beyond a certain threshold of points. Thankfully, other people who play this game are apparently willing to act honestly and keep their word, allowing long-term deals which have large benefits for everyone involved. You should try it sometime.

Kindly,
Your apparent nemesis.

I don't really see the benefit in letting you win without a fight.

 

[Lord Parkin]

I don't really see the benefit in letting you win without a fight.

Who said anyone's going to let me win without a fight? I fully expect an eventual epic battle to stop me from winning. For the moment though, that's still a very long way off.

 

[Robi D]

Dear BCLG (aka self-appointed "everyone"),

You may not be aware of it, but in these multiplayer games there are things you can enter into called "deals", "treaties" and "diplomacy". Crazy stuff, I know. Of course, the level of trust in these deals varies from player to player. For instance, I'm now fairly convinced that had you been my neighbour, even if we had a deal you'd probably take a crack at wiping me out behind my back if I got beyond a certain threshold of points. Thankfully, other people who play this game are apparently willing to act honestly and keep their word, allowing long-term deals which have large benefits for everyone involved. You should try it sometime.

Kindly,
Your apparent nemesis.

I on behalf on the CDZ player take offence at this. Not one of us has ever broken our word to take someone out, if we want to do so we just wouldn't give our word to begin with.

On another topic i'd be happy to see some more carnage as it seems my only hope of climbing the rankings

 

[Lord Parkin]

I on behalf on the CDZ player take offence at this. Not one of us has ever broken our word to take someone out, if we want to do so we just wouldn't give our word to begin with.

I didn't intend to cause any offence, I was merely speculating (and teasing a bit, I admit ). However, it really should have been obvious to everyone that there's no way I could have built that many wonders without having some friends on my continent. I assumed that BCLG would have realised this, and as such you have to admit that a comment like "How have you let him build nearly every single wonder going without at least taking a crack at wiping him out?" implies an expectation that there is no excuse - friends or not - for letting someone build a lot of wonders without attacking them. Don't you agree?

On another topic i'd be happy to see some more carnage as it seems my only hope of climbing the rankings

Indeed, it seems that the world is fairly quiet these days. Probably due mostly to one of the unfortunate side-effects of tech trading being on: everyone quickly groups into tech alliances and as such there are hardly any wars (at least until later in the game, where it's typically not single nation fights but instead tech-bloc vs tech-bloc). Ah well.

 

[azzaman333]

Indeed, it seems that the world is fairly quiet these days. Probably due mostly to one of the unfortunate side-effects of tech trading being on: everyone quickly groups into tech alliances and as such there are hardly any wars (at least until later in the game, where it's typically not single nation fights but instead tech-bloc vs tech-bloc). Ah well.

I think it's more to do with how bloody big this map is.

 

[Lord Parkin]

I think it's more to do with how bloody big this map is.

That too, I guess. There's one heck of a lot of land around as well; the land:sea ratio seems abnormally high.

 

[BCLG100]

Dear BCLG (aka self-appointed "everyone"),

You may not be aware of it, but in these multiplayer games there are things you can enter into called "deals", "treaties" and "diplomacy". Crazy stuff, I know. Of course, the level of trust in these deals varies from player to player. For instance, I'm now fairly convinced that had you been my neighbour, even if we had a deal you'd probably take a crack at wiping me out behind my back if I got beyond a certain threshold of points. Thankfully, other people who play this game are apparently willing to act honestly and keep their word, allowing long-term deals which have large benefits for everyone involved. You should try it sometime.

Kindly,
Your apparent nemesis.

I'm not even going to dignify this with any response but don't expect to sign any arrangement with me at any point in the future of this game or other games.

I on behalf on the CDZ player take offence at this. Not one of us has ever broken our word to take someone out, if we want to do so we just wouldn't give our word to begin with.

On another topic i'd be happy to see some more carnage as it seems my only hope of climbing the rankings

This.

I didn't intend to cause any offence, I was merely speculating (and teasing a bit, I admit ). However, it really should have been obvious to everyone that there's no way I could have built that many wonders without having some friends on my continent. I assumed that BCLG would have realised this, and as such you have to admit that a comment like "How have you let him build nearly every single wonder going without at least taking a crack at wiping him out?" implies an expectation that there is no excuse - friends or not - for letting someone build a lot of wonders without attacking them. Don't you agree?

No.

 

[Lord Parkin]

I'm not even going to dignify this with any response but don't expect to sign any arrangement with me at any point in the future of this game or other games.

If you want, that's your choice of course.

But dude, you really should lighten up and not take my posts in this thread (or any other game thread) so seriously. They're supposed to be lighthearted and fun, certainly not seriously taken to heart. I am well aware that you are a seasoned and experienced player; of course I am, I've played in many games with you before. My response was thus (I thought fairly obviously) tongue-in-cheek, intentionally silly, pointing out trivial things that you and everyone else clearly already knew... in other words, intended to be humorous.

Obviously the attempt at humour was poorly recieved by you, so I apologise that you took it the wrong way. I still don't quite see how you could have missed the (to me) obviously ridiculously over-the-top and jovial tone, but I guess that's the problem with words written on a page - it's easy for two people to interpret phrases in very different ways when facial expressions and tones of voice are removed from the equation.

I'm trying to poke lighthearted fun, not mortally offend anyone.

 

[Lord Parkin]

For the record, this was more of the response I was expecting. Fight being poked fun at by poking fun back - enjoy the trash talk, and no-one needs to get offended.

Dear Lord Parkin,

You may not be aware of it, but in these multiplayer games there is a thing players can enter into called "war". Crazy stuff, I know. You probably won't be familiar with it yet. But don't concern yourself about it for now, just keep building your wonders. Other people who play this game will be happy to take care of the warring, as well as the redistribution of your land and wonders into our hands, later on. So just keep building away... we'll be knocking on your door soon enough.

Cheers,
Everyone else.

 

[Robi D]

Well as a joke LP its not a good one. To break a deal is about the worst thing you can do playing civ aside from cheating, hence people will take offence at being accused of being that type of player even if said jokingly.

 

[BCLG100]

If you want, that's your choice of course.

But dude, you really should lighten up and not take my posts in this thread (or any other game thread) so seriously. They're supposed to be lighthearted and fun, certainly not seriously taken to heart. I am well aware that you are a seasoned and experienced player; of course I am, I've played in many games with you before. My response was thus (I thought fairly obviously) tongue-in-cheek, intentionally silly, pointing out trivial things that you and everyone else clearly already knew... in other words, intended to be humorous.

Obviously the attempt at humour was poorly recieved by you, so I apologise that you took it the wrong way. I still don't quite see how you could have missed the (to me) obviously ridiculously over-the-top and jovial tone, but I guess that's the problem with words written on a page - it's easy for two people to interpret phrases in very different ways when facial expressions and tones of voice are removed from the equation.

I'm trying to poke lighthearted fun, not mortally offend anyone.

Indeed and perhaps it could have been seen that way in your first post but your attempted justification in the second post shows that there was no 'right way' to take it, other than the insulting way of course.

So 'dude' perhaps in the future when 'making a joke' you should think about what that means, insulting someone in two consecutive posts is no-one's idea of a joke.

 

[Elkad]

But the original post implied that LPs neighbors should break deals and attack him, since he is busy building wonders.

I fail to see how him making the same crack back should cause all this drama.

 

[BCLG100]

No it didn't, how am i supposed to know whether or not his neighbours have deals with him. If anything it asks if there is a deal and if so why was it made. Perhaps you should re-read it.

So the same 'crack' was not made. At no point was a request made for out of game cheating as Lord Parkin stated I would do.

 

[Lord Parkin]

Well as a joke LP its not a good one. To break a deal is about the worst thing you can do playing civ aside from cheating, hence people will take offence at being accused of being that type of player even if said jokingly.

Point taken. I guess I had just assumed that everyone (especially people from CDZ) would be familiar with the concepts of "taking the piss" and "not being dead serious". But apparently I was wrong.

I'd like to point out that there's a double standard here, though. Trying to incite someone's neighbours into breaking their deals and going to war could equally be interpreted as being pretty offensive and insulting too. However, I didn't choose to react to it that way. To me, it was pretty clear that neither of us were serious in our initial posts. However, if my posts were being read as serious, it occurs to me that perhaps I should assume that BCLG was actually serious in his post. In which case, maybe I could have reacted something like this:

How dare you try to incite people you haven't even met in-game into declaring war on me. It breaks the spirit of the game, and is downright cheating to talk to civs you haven't even met, especially about warring with other civs you haven't met. You should know better than to be so rude and disrespectful to another player. I am deeply offended and insulted by this display of poor sportsmanship.

Of course, I don't actually feel that way. But see what I did there? I made a choice to blow it way out of proportion and get all insulted, when I could have taken it as not being serious or simply ignored it. It's how you choose to respond to things that matters.

Indeed and perhaps it could have been seen that way in your first post but your attempted justification in the second post shows that there was no 'right way' to take it, other than the insulting way of course.

That's simply untrue. Nobody forced you to take the posts that way.

The choice to take my posts as a personal insult was yours. I did not write my posts with the intent that they would be taken as insults. You chose to get mortally offended by something that was never meant to be serious in the first place.

So 'dude' perhaps in the future when 'making a joke' you should think about what that means, insulting someone in two consecutive posts is no-one's idea of a joke.

Sorry, but I just did a double take there... are you using a different internet to me or something?

But seriously, as I've said before, my posts were never written with the intent to be insulting. It was your choice to take them so personally, when I simply thought we were having a bit of lighthearted banter.

But the original post implied that LPs neighbors should break deals and attack him, since he is busy building wonders.

I fail to see how him making the same crack back should cause all this drama.

This.

 

[Lord Parkin]

No it didn't, how am i supposed to know whether or not his neighbours have deals with him.

Uh... seriously? Civstats gives a pretty good indication if you're paying attention.

If anything it asks if there is a deal and if so why was it made.

In which case, I could very well say that your post is totally out of line. You are, after all, requesting private in-game information that you have no right to know nor talk about before you even meet the civs in question.

So the same 'crack' was not made. At no point was a request made for out of game cheating as Lord Parkin stated I would do.

Whoa dude, you really need to stop exaggerating and reread my posts. At no point did I ever suggest that you would meddle in "out of game cheating". At worst, you could have interpreted that I was suggesting you might want to break a deal with me if you had one so you could take me down. But at no point did I even mention the word "cheating". Breaking deals is a VERY different thing to cheating. (And I was not even accusing you of breaking deals; how could I, as we haven't even met in-game?)

 

[Irgy]

We really don't need to turn this into a flame war.

BCLG100's was perfectly reasonable in the fairly casual spirit of this game.

Lord Parkin's response was a fair cop, if you're going to suggest everyone dogpile a player then you can expect them to hit back by doing such things as questioning your integrity. Your actual integrity is somewhat beside the point in that sort of a comeback. It's like if you posted how fast your car was and someone responded by suggesting you have a small winkle. No-one really knows or cares how big anyone's winkle is, but the reality is you're setting yourself up for the comment by making the post in the first place.

Of course CDZ obviously take their reputation for sticking to deals very seriously, and an important part of doing that is to (over-) react any time anyone questions it, particularly if it's unfounded (as it always will be in the case of banter). Maybe Lord Parkin should have known that, maybe not.

Everything else just seems a little unnecessary to me.

 

[BCLG100]

I'm going to preface this post with;
'Have you actually read what you wrote?'

Whoa dude, you really need to stop exaggerating and reread my posts. At no point did I ever suggest that you would meddle in "out of game cheating". At worst, you could have interpreted that I was suggesting you might want to break a deal with me if you had one so you could take me down. But at no point did I even mention the word "cheating". Breaking deals is a VERY different thing to cheating. (And I was not even accusing you of breaking deals; how could I, as we haven't even met in-game?)

''I'm now fairly convinced that had you been my neighbour, even if we had a deal you'd probably take a crack at wiping me out behind my back if I got beyond a certain threshold of points. Thankfully, other people who play this game are apparently willing to act honestly and keep their word, allowing long-term deals which have large benefits for everyone involved. You should try it sometime.''

So whilst I asked what was going on, you then blew it out of proportion by accusing me of the type of person to break an out of game deal. Breaking deals is not different to cheating, cheating is doing something outside the laws of a game to gain an advantage. People enter into these games assuming an agreement will be met, you outright stated that had I entered into one of those deals I would have broken it.

In an online game where one has very little to take with him from game to game you have insulted me. So you said that I would break deals, as breaking deals can be equivocated to cheating you have just called me a cheater, perhaps you don't realise that doing so is an insult.

Point taken. I guess I had just assumed that everyone (especially people from CDZ) would be familiar with the concepts of "taking the piss" and "not being dead serious". But apparently I was wrong.

CDZ is very familiar with 'taking the piss' and 'not being dead serious'. However we can also recognise insulting.

I'd like to point out that there's a double standard here, though. Trying to incite someone's neighbours into breaking their deals and going to war could equally be interpreted as being pretty offensive and insulting too. However, I didn't choose to react to it that way. To me, it was pretty clear that neither of us were serious in our initial posts. However, if my posts were being read as serious, it occurs to me that perhaps I should assume that BCLG was actually serious in his post. In which case, maybe I could have reacted something like this

If you are reading my post as serious then perhaps you should actually read it. At no point does it state to break a deal, nor does it state actual war. It must have hit a nerve though as you then chose to directly insult someone when the post itself was not even directed towards you. The fact that you still fail to recognise that is mystifying at best.

I asked; 'what was going on, why have your neighbours allowed you to gain such a lead and not do anything about it'
You then 'jokingly' replied with 'BCLG would stab me in the back by breaking deals'
Before justifying it in your follow up post.

Sorry, but I just did a double take there... are you using a different internet to me or something?

You were insulting in the first post and attempted to justify it in the second post thereby reiterating the original insult, are you finding it hard to keep up? I appreciate your attempts to patronise me may be making it tougher on yourself, feel free to have an adult conversation and avoid doing so to make things easier.

 

[azzaman333]

Did someone say nukes?