Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

omg, all sorts of Posts in this thread are missing, How are people to make sense of a complex multi-leveled argument if the historical record is wiped clean? I've seen this happen before in forums; never w/ good results.

Now, death threats, racial or sexual insults, and such, should be deleted, or, better, "bleeped". but to cleanse the historical record during a debate is, well, I don't even know how to express the depths of my aVersion.

[ May 06, 2004, 08:04: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I fooled around a bit with an 1150 -point rainbow wyrm. 300 hp and regen is fun. But you run out of fatigue in big fights and when machaka blinded it I had to use GoH... which can't be relied on in multiplay. And you cant put an elemental armor on it. But even a no-magic wyrm can probably beat a VQ early on. I'll test this... ok I tried it.. no magic-wyrm vs rainbow3 VQ. The wyrm's bite is not magical, the vq resists poison, and since lifedrain fatigues the victim the wyrm was soon passed out. The vq did not even get hit.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well the topic of other SCs made me bring him up. The wyrm can allow a quick entry into the water early in the game. And it can hold off knights while your shooters do some damage. For early expansion it can be a big boost. And if its a non-magical god then praying him back from the dead doesnt hurt him much. And he is an easy god for new players to use in their first few games.

Personally I like to build off the Manticore.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

omg, all sorts of Posts in this thread are missing, includer Jasper's original "troll". How are people to make sense of a complex multi-leveled argument if the historical record is wiped clean? I've seen this happen before in forums; never w/ good results.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Surgical is sloppy but better than losing a whole topic that has good information in it.
Everything has its pros and cons.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

omg, all sorts of Posts in this thread are missing, includer Jasper's original "troll". How are people to make sense of a complex multi-leveled argument if the historical record is wiped clean? I've seen this happen before in forums; never w/ good results.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Surgical is sloppy but better than losing a whole topic that has good information in it.
Everything has its pros and cons. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

[ May 06, 2004, 08:04: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

Wyrm could, in fact, have magical weapons, but as Astral Weapon is anastral spell it would be quite a risk... A new low.level spell giving mage and/or block of units magical weapons would be nice.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

Giving immortality to SC-capable pretender probably wasn't such a hot idea. Giving it to the one with earthrealness, two resistances, inherant lifedrain, and flying is something that should probably be looked at. Sort of like when the developers made an immortal unit for Vanheim, they chose the boar and not the Van. Immortal Vans are not impossible to overcome, however, this does not make them a strong balance decision.

[ May 06, 2004, 05:07: Message edited by: Blitz ]

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

Deleting other people's Posts? I didn't even think that was possible.

Certainly seems like a bad move to me. There have been far more rude and offensive Posts in other threads. This Last one may have been inaccurate, but if it was really deleted, then ya, I agree it would stink big-time to have Posts deleted if they weren't totally out of place (as in, threats, curses, very hurtful words, illegal stuff).

PvK

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

-You- can't delete other people's Posts. Moderators can.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

Did Gandalf really delete other people's Posts in this case? I'd be pretty shocked if he did, since I don't recall anything being really out of line.

Deleting and editing ones' own Posts though is pretty common on this forum, although in some cases it can make it tough to figure out what happened.

PvK

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

That is, it's often much better to add an apology and/or disclaimer to a regrettable post, than to remove the text.

PvK

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

Its not that unusual for Posts to be deleted if they take the mood too far in the wrong direction. Actually what I did was delete my post which probably was basly worded. Also the post before it which started the off discussion, and the one following it which was nothing but flames.

Alot of things could be done. Editing, removing a post, removing a thread. But the thread has alot of good info in it if it can stay friendly.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

Seems to me terribly heavy-handed for something that I would not have said warranted any such attention. I'd also hope that when a moderator is involved in a discussion that he/she thinks warrants editing other people's Posts, that he should have another, uninvolved moderator look at it and decide whether to do it.

Removing other people's Posts without obviously good and impartial reason can have a lot more negative effect than someone ranting, or even some people flaming each other.

People get quite upset about it. Even if they weren't the ones whose Posts were deleted. Also, it makes it impossible for later readers (or even previous participants looking back to see where a misunderstanding or overreaction came from) to fairly judge what happened. (e.g. People may have later written something which wasn't deleted, but the tone may have had something to do with something that was deleted.)

So what if someone mistakenly Posts about some sort of "old boy network", or there's some misunderstanding going on? It's been a lot worse on other threads.

When Posts start vanishing though, well, I'm with the group who just feels like leaving the forum alone at that point, or finding one with less moderator deletion going on.

Generally, until this one, I've had extreme respect for every post and contribution you've made, Gandalf. So, I hope you see where I'm coming from on this.

PvK

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

I appreciate Gandalf's efforts to keep things civil. And I'm chagrined that I let my bias on the topic at hand drive me to criticize his post, while ignoring the post that prompted it. My apologies.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I haven't been active in this thread (and don't have a strong an opinion on the topic), but I agree with PvK that deleting Posts to preserve a thread's "tone" is a very very bad precedent, even if done with the best intentions.

As I see it, it is a very slippery slope from there to deleting Posts that maybe "damage the useful tone of the forum" because, say, they "argumentatively/offensively portray the game in a bad/unfair light". It's Shrapnel's forum, so they can do that if they want, but I don't think people really trust a forum like that or feel they can speak freely.

Dom2 is a great game, and this is a pretty good community, so I think we can collectively withstand an occasional misunderstanding, troll, or even flame war.

I also think that if someone's post does need to be moderated, a much more preferable way would be for the moderator to edit down the offending part of the post, and insert an explanation of exactly why the post was moderated. In that way, at least some indication of the history of what people are reacting to is preserved.

Let me add, though, that I don't have any problems with Moderators deleting Posts that contain crud like hate speech, spam, gross obsenities, or wildly off-topic rants (ie: political cause stuff). These forums are free of that stuff, and I'm certainly glad of that and prefer to keep it that way.

Just my 2 cents.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

What astonishes me is that there are not more flame wars and arguments since we are just a bunch of Megalomaniac God Pretendars. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

(conveniantly ignoring the post-deletion debate)

Everyone seems to have conveniantly ignored http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif my "give us counter strategies" post. The summary of what I said:

A balanced strategy should, if anticipated have accessable and effective counters. I should not be able to tell you "I'm going to choose paper" and have a chance of winning (presumably you will choose scissors).

So can the more experienced players provide worked examples of viable counters to a) The typical VQ SC and to b) the castle/temple/VQ strategy, given that you guess someone is using that strategy from (say) turn 2.

You know exactly what is coming. You should be able to destroy your opponent for being so predictable....

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

Do you know how much time it would take to detail each and every strategy for each? There is one big, VQ counter thread for all the nuances of killing a VQ in and out of their domain, look there. Though you might want to discriminate the "Normal VQ" the "Equipped VQ" the "EQ with 6 Wishes pumped into it". Dominion fighting should be fairly simplistic with the suggestions that were presented. And for the castling, that is depending on the nation/use you use. If you have access to stealth troops or heavy high moving troops you don't have to worry about it as much, if you are playing Ulm on the other hand, you will have to worry about it.

Also you have to factor in "How many people playing the game" and "What map" and "If they have sea provinces" and "If they react in any given way."

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

This was meant to be "If you anticipated their use of this tactic from turn 2". So presumably when you spot it they are using a VQ, if you delay it will be an EQ, and further down the line an EQ with wishes.

I've read that thread and it seemed to mainly suggest ways to beat a VQ in battle, at least some of which seemed to me to be more expensive than the cost to your opponent of his VQ being beaten in battle.

I was after the "This strategy is balanced:if you anticipate it early you can do X" answer.

Thanks for the reply anyway, and I'll go read over that thread again, in case I've missed a valid answer to my query.

Cheers.

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">As a general rule, it'll always be slightly more expensive on a purely explicit level to guarantee success in an offensive operation against a defending force: However, if you're using resources that are reusable, this doesn't matter: You only have to replace the resources consumed. Also, the value of taking ground and holding ground, I.E., actually making progress against your opponent, cannot be quite so easily defined. Since driving off the opposing VQ defender and actually taking a castle represents progress that is not so easily undone, particularly since your opponent will now have to use a new tactic, given that you have decisively countered his old one.

How difficult this will be depends on how well prepared he was to switch gears. Obviously, if he has a secondary strategy that he can switch to, you'll have to counter that, too: However, this will no longer be the VQ....unless he's very stupid, and will keep hamhandedly trying the same, now ineffective, strategy.

[ May 06, 2004, 14:10: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">[italics added]

hmm, I was going to stay away from this thread, but given that I was subsequently attacked...

No, it wasn't nothing but flames. Likely you found the tone disagreeable, perhaps in much the same manner as I had found your tone previously disagreeable.

but to delete the evidence and then, after the fact, slander my post w/out anyone having the ability to judge for themselves...

ehh, ok, now I'm definitely out of this thread, which is now just a heap of burning wreckage anyways.

[ May 06, 2004, 18:12: Message edited by: archaeolept ]

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

[quote]Originally posted by archaeolept:

Quote:

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker: [qb] Its not that unusual for Posts to be deleted if they take the mood too far in the wrong direction. Actually what I did was delete my post which probably was basly worded. Also the post before it which started the off discussion, and the one following it which was nothing but flames. Alot of things could be done. Editing, removing a post, removing a thread. But the thread has alot of good info in it if it can stay friendly. italics added] hmm, I was going to stay away from this thread, but given that I was subsequently attacked... No, it wasn't nothing but flames. Likely you found the tone disagreeable, perhaps in much the same manner as I had found your tone previously disagreeable.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You mean like this post? Full of information and worthy discussion on the topic of the thread and the board?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Youre right.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Back on topic? Discussing "SCs other than the vq"? Sorry about that.

[ May 06, 2004, 18:57: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: SCs other than the vq
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">There are... well there was.. go back and see.. oh wait you cant, theyre not there. Well you can see some of the people who used to spend alot of time here flaming newbies who asked questions, or telling shrapnel that there games.. telling the devs that there game was all.. Nope, come to think of it those people arent around now.

They can always get another ISP account and come back with a different IP but that doesnt do much good unless they play much nicer. Or stay mostly real quiet until someone makes a post like why arent there more flamewars

[ May 06, 2004, 19:29: Message edited by: Wikd Thots ]