Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Beacuse that is more obviously intended to be purely a joke, and it doesn't relate at all to behavior in the game which is the only thing that is the perogative of a game owner anyway. You could just as likely say, "No eating crackers while playing" and noone would take it seriously because it's none of your business what we eat while playing, and how would you know if we did anyway? The other rule is more like something that would be your business as the game owner, and something close enough to legitimate rules people have suggested in the past that it seemed possible you did intend for it to be taken seriously, in substance if not in presentation.

Geoschmo </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Only one thing Geoschmo ... consider switching to decaff. Bcause someone that WASTES so much time writing about a JOKE someone made on some obscure board in a galaxy far far away, really has too much time on his hands.

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

Uh oh, looks like a derail.

I could tell there was some joke there, sure, but I thought you might have some rule behind it. It was a little too long and complicated, it seemed, to be simply a political jab. So I did what any reasonable person would do, I checked. The driving one was pretty good, though.

Second, if I had my way George W. Bush would never have been on the Republican nominee for president. While I respect the man and the office, and agree with many of his goals, the means by which he has reached some of these ends have been very disappointing. And then there are the speeches.... What I wouldn't give for another Douglas MacArthur, or even a Reagan or Nixon behind the podium, speaking in a fashion more fitting the leader of the free world.

But I voted for him, in fact I registered as a Democrat so I could vote against Gore twice. I have a grudge against Gore for his terrible treatment of the hackish culture (Clipper Chip, Steve Jackson Games, "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."), for his populist attitudes, and for his censor-happy wife.

In fact, if nothing catastrophic happens in the next year, Bush is likely to be re-elected, but only because the only other party people take seriously isn't offering any decent alternatives. The current front-runner, Dean, has been building his reputation as a Bush-Hater since he started. This is going to do a great job of swaying loyal Democrats, which he needs to get the nomination, but will alienate that oh-so-important undecided 20% that the Democrats need to secure the presidency. Add on top of it all that he is also a populist, so I can tell you I won't be voting for him either.

So yeah, four more years of Bush. But it's the fault of the Democrats as much as it's the fault of the Republicans.

Just to let you know, I'm Independent, having un-registered from the Democratic party after voting in their Primary. I give my loyalty to neither of these two behemoths, and would rabidly support the Libertarians if they could ever get their act together and offer a platform acceptable to the general public.

And that will be it. Not gonna post in this thread again. Done enough damamge. Ee-yup.

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

I happen to live somewhere in Europe, and still I didn't realize it was a joke. (Apart from the comment on Dubya that is, this part was clearly a joke, although what it has to do with a PBW game I wonder) Last time I checked, I was slightly older than five as well. The "noone becomes a terrorist because he lost his homeworld" could very well apply to some tactics I thought of involving guerilla and scorched earth schemes, and I can even see a reason why it *might* be forbidden by some house rules.

These joking rules were also among proper house rules, which is somewhat annoying. And once again, you will have a hard time convincing me there *were* needed for some obscure purpose.

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">They probably take George W. and his "Axis of Evil" stuff too seriously - they probably don't understand that he and his like remarks are pure jokes here in Europe. After all, they will probably vote for him (again)... what do you expect... </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yeah, I figured that much. Why does every discussion here turn out to be a EUvsUS dabate:)

And another thing... they can't vote in George W. AGAIN as they didn't even vote him in the first time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

In reality only something like 37,9% of the total US population voted for him, but because of the insane and totally out-dated electoral system the US uses he got over 50% of the ELECTORAL votes (wel... apparently even that had to be decided by a court... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

I mean why in gods name would someone count the votes in one state, decide who won in that particular state and then assign a specific number of electoral votes from that state to the federal vote... I mean talk about a stupid voting system.

I don't know any European (or other democratic ) country that uses this kind of inaccurate system to elect its head of military and all around big chief (a.k.a. the president).

I mean historically it was kinda justified... as some states that were formed before others (especially the oroginal 13) wanted to have more POWER in saying who gets to be the president... more even thnt their % of total US population at that time would allow if they would just add up all the votes cross the US.

But today... state A can haev an equal number of electoral votes as state B even though they might have very different total pupulations. ...Add this up over the entire union and you'll see how the americans elected George W. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I say either "up-date" the number of electoral votes each state gets to more accuratey reflect their total population OR ... dismiss this silly system alltogether and just do the math like everyone else...

[ December 11, 2003, 13:56: Message edited by: JurijD ]

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Ok, well obviously you aren't interested in having a reasonable discussion about an aspect of your game rules that was possibly unclear.

Just one thing for you and then I will drop it.

As lead administrator for PBW, and moderator for this forum I get a lot of complaints from game owners and players about stuff going on in games that is "gamey", or "cheating", or "dishonarable", or "against the rules". In my mind 99% of it is stupid and people should just get over it and play, it's a game after all. But I am tolerant of others feelings enough to realize that some people take games a little more seriously that others do, and feelings can be hurt. So my official stance on these things is that they shuld aways be as clear as possible to avoid and conflict, and when it happens I try to facilitate a resolution that everyone can accept.

It is my sincere hope that everyone in your game understands all your house rules in the context you intend and there are no disputes about it or conflicts.

But if there is, please remember you were warned and don't come to me expecting me to do anything about it.

Geoschmo

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

FOR THE LAST TIME:
1. The joke IS between the rules, yes!
2. and I like it there... people should have a laught every now and then, even if they are reading my rules...
3. if aynone has a problem with that... TOUGH.

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

[quote]Originally posted by geoschmo:

Quote:

In my mind 99% of it is stupid and people should just get over it and play, it's a game after all. But I am tolerant of others feelings enough to realize that some people take games a little more seriously that others do, and feelings can be hurt. So my official stance on these things is that they shuld aways be as clear as possible to avoid and conflict, and when it happens I try to facilitate a resolution that everyone can accept. It is my sincere hope that everyone in your game understands all your house rules in the context you intend and there are no disputes about it or conflicts. But if there is, please remember you were warned and don't come to me expecting me to do anything about it. Geoschmo

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Listen, read my comment about decaff once again. And for the love of god stop replying to this silly discussion. You make it sound like someone actually cares...

And another thing... HOW?? could anyone understand that as a RULE... I mean... don't go and form a terrorist network... OMG. You people are ... well spend too much time here.

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You keep saying not to respond, and yet you keep making comments like this that compel me to do so. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

It's called "role playing". Many people enjoy playing the part of the "pissed off terrorist", or the "evil emporer" out to conquer the universe. That's what attracted me to the game in the first place. It's all part of the game.

And yes, I can very much assure you from my experience that many, many people care very much about house rules. It causes some of most persistant and heated discussions. That and politics. You've managed to get both of those into one discusion. Congradulations. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Geoschmo

Edit: By the way, I don't drink coffee.

[ December 11, 2003, 14:14: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

You know, Geoschmo does have some free time on his hands, but I wouldn't believe it is wasted. Or do you mean his efforts to keep PBW running are also a mere waste of time (and money as well)?

So, the key word here is "terrorist". As you can tell, the root of this word is "terror", which basically means a terrorist is someone who uses terror. However, you would have to consider what kind of terror is used. A terrorist Empire could very well be an Empire relying on attacks on civilians, lurking in storms, launching attacks against passing transports, and so on. It is called terror as well. (Of course, in the Real World, terrorism mainly describes bombings and other such acts, but the world could also apply to regimes instead of networks/individuals)

That's why you could actually consider this joke was indeed a rule, preventing some tactics for some obscure reason. Heck, even mines could fall under this too generic definition, or drones, or even carpet bombing a planet, among a lot of other possible actions within the game. Thus the misunderstandings that happened on this forum, as the term "terrorism" is way too generic and could apply to too many situations within SEIV.

Re: New PBW Game: Deep Oceans of Europa
 

when i read it, i figured it meant that people were not supposed to team up on each other. then i was wondering if it meant that people should not break treaties without warning, or use a treaty to sneak passed defenses and attack from the rear, or something like that.

but as for this thread, its totally out of hand. people seem to be asking reasonable questions, or calmly trying to explain what they mean, and JuriD is totally flying off the handle at them, making rather insulting jokes. now i dont care alot about politics, and dont like the president a whole lot, so thats not the issue here.

the issue is what seperates the Shrapnel and SE4 community from the rest of the internet. what seperates us from them, is you dont find **** like this in our commuinty. so get it the heck of this board.