the oobs 4th pitboss game (Warlords), 15 players

3 against 1 !! I am sure we can manage that :p Seriously though there should be alot of people to ask, or just make a new thread about it... If you want to retire to AI i can't promise that someone won't use it to bribe you into some war one way or another :p.
 
I managed to get online and couldn't get in either.

I think its best if I don't go to war until my net is back. I'm not at war with anybody (or at least I wasn't!). Is it OK if people don't attack me until Monday?
 
basmans_grob said:
I managed to get online and couldn't get in either.

I think its best if I don't go to war until my net is back. I'm not at war with anybody (or at least I wasn't!). Is it OK if people don't attack me until Monday?
Click to expand...
Just so you can sleep at night ... I have not declared war on you, nor is that my intention. I can't speak for DanD (re him declaring war on you) ... and of course he might do something that would force my hand ... since you have put your troops right into "no man's land".

dV
 
I'll be out of town for a day or two (haven't decided when to come back), Spike will be taking a turn or two for me.

IanDC: If you can't wait any longer to take a turn, feel free to take it, even if it means double turning me; but wait if you can.
 
Well atm there are only two sides so me oob da_vinci etc are moving first then the other side are moving. Obviously for people that are not in direct conflict it doesn't matter much(iandc doesn't have to wait for me and dandridge doesn't have to wait for oob for example..).
 
basmans_grob said:
I'm all up and running as well but one question,

how do we deal with the DM in a muliple person war?
Click to expand...

If A & B are at war with C, then either A & B (in either order) take their turn before C, or C takes their turn before A & B.

I haven't yet seen a war with 'three sides'.
 
basmans_grob said:
I'm all up and running as well but one question,

how do we deal with the DM in a muliple person war?
Click to expand...
Hmm ... you planning to be at war sometime soon ... ? Some free advice ... chose your side carefully! :eek: :lol:

the oob said:
If A & B are at war with C, then either A & B (in either order) take their turn before C, or C takes their turn before A & B.

I haven't yet seen a war with 'three sides'.
Click to expand...
It is always possible that the war starts with A before C but C before B. Which is undesireable because B has to wait for both A and C, which can be hairy with time zones and work schedules. But if basmans does what I expect, then we might be in exactly that scenario. Which may be what prompted his question.

dV
 
da_Vinci said:
It is always possible that the war starts with A before C but C before B. Which is undesireable because B has to wait for both A and C, which can be hairy with time zones and work schedules. But if basmans does what I expect, then we might be in exactly that scenario. Which may be what prompted his question.

dV
Click to expand...

If Player A and B are at war, and player C joins the war against player B (essentially allying themselves with player A), then the order system I described above can be used... however they will need to take their turn before the person they're attacking if that's what their new ally is doing, or afterwards if it's the other way around. But whether or not they take their turn before or after their ally does not matter, so it shouldn't be a problem.

I hope that made sense... the main thing is, an alliance should be considered to be one player in terms of turn ordering. Of course we can be more liberal than this in some cases... for instance I'm at war with DanD, but since we're far away from each other, there is no need to regulate our turn order.
 
the oob said:
If Player A and B are at war, and player C joins the war against player B (essentially allying themselves with player A), then the order system I described above can be used... however they will need to take their turn before the person they're attacking if that's what their new ally is doing, or afterwards if it's the other way around. But whether or not they take their turn before or after their ally does not matter, so it shouldn't be a problem.

I hope that made sense... the main thing is, an alliance should be considered to be one player in terms of turn ordering. Of course we can be more liberal than this in some cases... for instance I'm at war with DanD, but since we're far away from each other, there is no need to regulate our turn order.
Click to expand...
Well here is the issue that needs resolving potentially, Ally 1 is at war with axis 1. Neutral 1 has been moving before axis 1, axis 1 moving before ally 1. Neutral 1 declares on axis 1, essentailly allying himself with ally 1 becoming ally 2, (or "formerly neutral 1"). Is neutral 1 expected to delay his move until after axis 1 (thus giving axis 1 a double move)? If not, then we would be stuck with the two allies straddling the axis player with their turns.

So to create the alliance as one player in terms of turn order, someone has to delay, giving someone a double move, if they did not already start out that way. Which could upset a carefully crafted timing of the declaration of war.

dV
 
Oh I see... in that case, neutral 1 should (in the turn before they declare war), take their turn at such a time so that they will be in sync with their future ally, then when they declare war the next turn they will not have to double turn to do so.
 
If I'm basically only at war with one person shouldn't it only matter that I dont DM him? Even if somebody else in the war moved each unit will still only be moving once.
 
basmans_grob said:
If I'm basically only at war with one person shouldn't it only matter that I dont DM him? Even if somebody else in the war moved each unit will still only be moving once.
Click to expand...

Yes that's right... you don't have to worry about his allies unless you're officially at war with them as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kcd_swede
  • Sticky
[BTS] NEWS: BOTM 293 - Willem, Monarch - Starts July 15
Replies
4
Views
838
Smiregal
S
kcd_swede
[BTS] BOTM 292: Boudica, Immortal; Final Spoiler (game submitted or abandoned)
Replies
11
Views
770
MirrorGuard
MirrorGuard
kcd_swede
[BTS] BOTM 293: Willem, Monarch - Final spoiler (game submitted)
Replies
11
Views
867
Bemep42
B
F
Dedicated Server or Workaround?
Replies
0
Views
190
frankwascake
F
lymond
  • Sticky
GOTM SITE IS DOWN TEMPORARILY
Replies
0
Views
544
lymond
lymond
Back
Top Bottom