sirdanilot
BBcode owns in sigs!
Civ 4 mtdg? I would've signed up, if it weren't for the fact that I know absolutely NOTHING about civ4. And yes I have a civ4 disc but my brother bought that and I can't play it on my own computer anyway.
The RoundTable!
- Thread starter General_W
- Start date
sirdanilot
BBcode owns in sigs!
Absolutely impressing. I like the chinese cookie most.
I even own CIV, it's down in my cellar, collecting dust. I should sell it at ebay's as long as I get some mones for it...
(I think it's a giant step back)
That sounds like a good idea!
Oh, but my brother is going to get a new laptop shortly so he might be able to play it then... toobad, no cash
(but erm, what has all this to do with the round table...)
AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
For the roundtable (this can wait until after our turn, I would think)
WAR HAS COME TO THE GREAT ISLAND WORLD!!!
Fast-moving purple galleys able to safely stay on deep sea tiles have landed dangerous mounted warriors on the peace-loving land of the council. This unprovoked act of aggression is made more perfidious by the fact that there is an active peace treaty between BABE and The Council which has lasted hundreds of years and had 20 years left to go!! Further, BABE simply landed their troops, forcing The Council to declare war or risk attack on our cities.
We destroyed their initial expeditionary force with no damage to our own units and expect to destroy any other landings by BABE.
WAR HAS COME TO THE GREAT ISLAND WORLD!!!
Fast-moving purple galleys able to safely stay on deep sea tiles have landed dangerous mounted warriors on the peace-loving land of the council. This unprovoked act of aggression is made more perfidious by the fact that there is an active peace treaty between BABE and The Council which has lasted hundreds of years and had 20 years left to go!! Further, BABE simply landed their troops, forcing The Council to declare war or risk attack on our cities.
We destroyed their initial expeditionary force with no damage to our own units and expect to destroy any other landings by BABE.
donsig
Low level intermediary
Yeah, we'd better wait on this one till we actually kill off the two units that landed!
A little rewrite, to spice it up a little:
For immediate release:
WAR HAS COME TO THE GREAT ISLAND WORLD!!!
Fast-moving purple galleys able to safely stay on deep sea tiles have landed dangerous Mounted Warriors on the peace-loving land of The Council. This unprovoked Act of Aggression is made all the more perfidious by the fact that Babe broke a Peace Treaty in order to land the troops. The Peace had lasted hundreds of years and had 20 years left to go before expiring naturally.
Let it be known across all the toroid oceans: A Treaty with Babe is worth no more than a contractual obligation between two year olds.
For immediate release:
WAR HAS COME TO THE GREAT ISLAND WORLD!!!
Fast-moving purple galleys able to safely stay on deep sea tiles have landed dangerous Mounted Warriors on the peace-loving land of The Council. This unprovoked Act of Aggression is made all the more perfidious by the fact that Babe broke a Peace Treaty in order to land the troops. The Peace had lasted hundreds of years and had 20 years left to go before expiring naturally.
Let it be known across all the toroid oceans: A Treaty with Babe is worth no more than a contractual obligation between two year olds.
donsig
Low level intermediary
Nice. Here's a reply to something zyxy said in another thread:
I really don't see anything wrong with the tactic they used. They can seriously claim they just landed to explore and had no intentions of attacking. They can argue that they didn't break the treaty because we are still at peace. While this all would merely be justification for their aggression it seems to me to be a valid tactic in Civ III. It's also more realistic than the![[civ4]](/images/smilies/civ4.gif "Civ4 [civ4]")
transportation of units outside cultural borders when war is declared. I agree its a low move but I don't see it as a cheat.
Yes, we should call it an act of aggression on their part and take the stance in the UN that they broke the peace treaty. We can even call it a dastardly sneak attack but let's not call them cheats.
Let's look at it this way: Wotan might actually get interested in this game again. Until we wipe his army out.
I really don't see anything wrong with the tactic they used. They can seriously claim they just landed to explore and had no intentions of attacking. They can argue that they didn't break the treaty because we are still at peace. While this all would merely be justification for their aggression it seems to me to be a valid tactic in Civ III. It's also more realistic than the
transportation of units outside cultural borders when war is declared. I agree its a low move but I don't see it as a cheat.Yes, we should call it an act of aggression on their part and take the stance in the UN that they broke the peace treaty. We can even call it a dastardly sneak attack but let's not call them cheats.
Let's look at it this way: Wotan might actually get interested in this game again. Until we wipe his army out.
sirdanilot
BBcode owns in sigs!
It's a very low tactic, but I agree that it is in fact allowed. But they have a penalty aswell: They had to break a treaty to perform this tactic. And breaking treaties is not against the rules.
The problem is though that everybody already knows they can't trust babe, so their penalty is way lower than our penalty.
The problem is though that everybody already knows they can't trust babe, so their penalty is way lower than our penalty.
How do people feel about publishing this?
I think that we should publish it, but I don't really like the last sentence. While I think a reference to contractual obligations is nice, I don't want to start name-calling. I would prefer to put it as "A Treaty with BABE is not worth the paper it's written on", making it more neutral.
The turn is played, but I don't want to send it off until we've posted this. Can we do that now?
AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
I am fine with posting it, with the last sentance the way you liked.
Message posted in the UN thread.
AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
good
We should probably not spend a huge amount of time and effort discussing this in the Roundtable.
What WE have shown is that if you have a peace treaty with us and you land troops on our soil without asking permission or even answering letters, we will take that as an act of aggression and wipe them out.
What THEY have shown is that if BABE galleys show up outside your lands, then BABE considers it perfect ok to land units in your territory.
We can, if we want, point out that there is open land on our island that they *could* have landed on, but they decided to make an aggressive move.
It doesn't really matter who violated the treaty - either this was a prelude to an invasion or it wasn't, but we certainly could not allow such a landing to persist.
We should probably not spend a huge amount of time and effort discussing this in the Roundtable.
What WE have shown is that if you have a peace treaty with us and you land troops on our soil without asking permission or even answering letters, we will take that as an act of aggression and wipe them out.
What THEY have shown is that if BABE galleys show up outside your lands, then BABE considers it perfect ok to land units in your territory.
We can, if we want, point out that there is open land on our island that they *could* have landed on, but they decided to make an aggressive move.
It doesn't really matter who violated the treaty - either this was a prelude to an invasion or it wasn't, but we certainly could not allow such a landing to persist.
I'm a little late to this fracas, but I really think that my fellow Councillors should try and hold their tongues in the UN. Don't misunderstand me - I am in complete agreement with everything I've read so far (but I'm still on page 2 
).
AT sums it up perfectly in the above post. But I must point attention to Niklas' post in the UN. He argues our side most eloquently, and I must admit that I'm very proud to serve on any team that he's a part of. It shames me that I'm a native speaker of English yet I find he expresses my thoughts better than I can.
).AT sums it up perfectly in the above post. But I must point attention to Niklas' post in the UN. He argues our side most eloquently, and I must admit that I'm very proud to serve on any team that he's a part of. It shames me that I'm a native speaker of English yet I find he expresses my thoughts better than I can.
cubsfan6506
Got u
Wait till you get to page 3. Whomp is down to one liners.
Don't worry, I certainly won't be calling any names this time around.I'm a little late to this fracas, but I really think that my fellow Councillors should try and hold their tongues in the UN. Don't misunderstand me - I am in complete agreement with everything I've read so far (but I'm still on page 2
Wow, thanks!
I'm glad you liked it. Ridiculous by Whomp and BABEs in the UN.
Talk about sour grapes.
I don't think they actually believe in the position they are advocating either.
Niklas has done a brilliant job.
One little thing that you mentioned in your initial post was the diplomatic silence from BABE after we asked them at least two times why there were 10+ galleys off our shores.
I think this also speaks volumes, and should be mentioned again at a fitting time.
I mean, gathering up a stack of units just off our coast and landing 2 units on our soil after days of ignoring our diplomatic communications...?
Talk about sour grapes.
I don't think they actually believe in the position they are advocating either.
Niklas has done a brilliant job.
One little thing that you mentioned in your initial post was the diplomatic silence from BABE after we asked them at least two times why there were 10+ galleys off our shores.
I think this also speaks volumes, and should be mentioned again at a fitting time.
I mean, gathering up a stack of units just off our coast and landing 2 units on our soil after days of ignoring our diplomatic communications...?
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
well done all! Wotan, and sadly Whomp, are just making themselves more and more ridiculous.
Niklas has very successfully made our case, but we probably want to avoid
at this point. I am also very proud of this team! Pretty much every comment from our side in the UN came across as very classy, I think.
Sorry for but I'm truly saddened by Wotan's inability to grasp this issue. I promise I won't stoop to accusations of any kind.
but I'm truly saddened by Wotan's inability to grasp this issue. I promise I won't stoop to accusations of any kind.Similar threads
