I think I now understand Cohen

[Schmoe]

Stormbinder said:
Are you sure about it Cohen?

From general logic perspective spells that target single person should be fooled by Mirror Images, reducing chances to hit to 1/n, where n is number of mirror images (2*airschool+1), while area effect spells such as Fireball, etc should completely ignore Mirror Image defense.


At least this is the way it works in D&D, and IMHO it makes sense.

After thinking about it more, I came back to this thread to post this exact same thing. Logically, it doesn't make any sense that Mirror Image would protect against an area effect spell, which should affect everything, images and Air Queen included, in the area.

[Cohen]

Sadly Mirror Images protect from Area spells (and should not).

Indeed 100% prec 1 single target strikes directly the being ignoring the mirrors, and I believe this is right too because the mage could sense what is living and what is magis ... like a Soul Slay seeks the soul ... an Incinerate will seek a body to set aflame, you cannot do that to a ethereal mirror image.

I've killed with Arco Astrologers both Vanheim (in early game) and Caelum AQs

[The Panther]

archaeolept said:
... and now, for instance if you follow Lintman's horrible advice ...


Lint's advice in this situation was grotesque ...


Panther I have not once in this thread, other than in my response to you, responded in any way to lintman's post.

Ok, not once. Twice then. What exactly are you smoking anyway?

So, I ask yet a third time. What did you find in the post that was horrible or grotesque?

[archaeolept]

[censored] panther you are a pain, only partially quoting me. The second quote was in direct response to you. the first, as I said, was in the context fo the discussion; namely re. [censored] Zap threatening to throw the game. As such, one mention of lintman before you started accusing me of overreacting to a post I barely considered and was quite irrelevant to what I was discussing.

lintman's original advice was "horrible" as I said, given that who it's intended recipient was. Encouraging basically self-centred anti-social behaviour to someone who was considering ruining the game as a tactic isn't a good thing; even if some of his advice, in general, was cogent.

But encouraging someone who threatens to throw a game, when they are still a huge power, to "go kamikaze" so that people will not in future games be willing to "mess with you" really isn't productive advice, IMO. Let us remember that the person he was threatening to go kamikaze on wasnt' his "nemesis", and hadn't even made any sort of attack. Rather, Zap was threatening to throw the game to Storm, who would be the best choice for being his "nemesis." There is all sort of advice that may in general be fairly good, but can be terrible when given to a certain individual or in a certain situation.


Panther, as well I would suggest you cut down on the ad hominem insults, w/ which your Posts have been rife.

[LintMan]

archaeolept said:
[censored] panther you are a pain, only partially quoting me. The second quote was in direct response to you. the first, as I said, was in the context fo the discussion; namely re. [censored] Zap threatening to throw the game. As such, one mention of lintman before you started accusing me of overreacting to a post I barely considered and was quite irrelevant to what I was discussing.

lintman's original advice was "horrible" as I said, given that who it's intended recipient was. Encouraging basically self-centred anti-social behaviour to someone who was considering ruining the game as a tactic isn't a good thing; even if some of his advice, in general, was cogent.

But encouraging someone who threatens to throw a game, when they are still a huge power, to "go kamikaze" so that people will not in future games be willing to "mess with you" really isn't productive advice, IMO. Let us remember that the person he was threatening to go kamikaze on wasnt' his "nemesis", and hadn't even made any sort of attack. Rather, Zap was threatening to throw the game to Storm, who would be the best choice for being his "nemesis." There is all sort of advice that may in general be fairly good, but can be terrible when given to a certain individual or in a certain situation.

archaeolept - I'm sorry you found my advice to Zap horrible and grotesque. I was not trying to encourage Zap to "throw the game" in any way. Perhaps I misunderstood the context - I was under the impression Zap was beleaguered mainly by Vanheim and it's SCs (who I was referring to as his nemesis - wasn't this Storm?) and sinking with little to no hope of recovery, while his nemesis was well on the way to winning the game.

I'm not privy to the inside goings-on of the game or any private Messages and didn't get the impression that Zap was "considering ruining the game as a tactic". It seemed to me he thought he was sunk and wanted out of a game he had promised not to quit from. I was trying to give a suggestion of a way to make the game remain fun for him and worth staying in, rather than quitting. Maybe his situation wasn't as dire or near the end as I had thought, but that was my impression from what he wrote.

I'm also puzzled by your statement "Let us remember that the person he was threatening to go kamikaze on wasnt' his "nemesis", and hadn't even made any sort of attack." I must be missing something - I don't recall seeing Zap threaten anywhere to go kamikaze on anyone. I'm also pretty sure Zap mentioned not being able to stand up to Vanheim's Air Queen and Vans - so presumably he was getting attacked by them? And isn't Stormbinder playing Vanheim, who I was advising to go all out against? I don't know how what I wrote could be construed as advocating "throwing the game to Storm". My thought was that he had already said he had no good answer to Van's threats, so going all out against Van would at worst be ineffective and leader to a quicker demise, and at best weaken/thwart Van enough that another player could take Van down (ie: he'd get "revenge" against Van for sinking him).

Lastly, my line about getting a rep so no one will mess with you was a joke, hence the big grin smilies. More likely if you get a rep as a kamikaze nut, people just won't want to play with you anymore.

[archaeolept]

No. zapmeister tried a massive landgrab against the collapsing Arcos, and the weak marignon. Storm began to fight him, and I gave Zap my 3 turns notice as required by our agreement, since I had promised marignon that I would come to his aid in the event of attack.

Zap was fighting storm, but said that he would throw the game to storm if I attacked in any way - after being browbeaten by him, I was going to attack w/ one raiding party of 15 slingers. Even that was too much for him, and he still threatened to throw the game. As such, I did not do anything to meet my personal word to Marignon that I would come to his aid, not wanting the game to end so cheaply.

Thus, while his major opponent was Storm, who could be thought of as zap's nemesis, the threat involved throwing it is completely to his supposed "nemesis."

This is the context of my taking poorly your suggestions of "going kamikaze."

As it turned out, Zap couldn't handle storm's arguably weaker nation, and so, even w/ one of the largest empires still, decided he wanted to quit in this "no quitters" game. As a side note, and ironically, Cohen himself fought till the bitter end.

I'm just hoping this game can be salvaged. It was my first time playing as mictlan, and I was enjoying the difference.

[The Panther]

archaeolept said:
yes. threatening to throw a game is a common tactic amongst children and bad players everywhere

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

I only flame those deemed worthy (with myself as the sole judge on this). At least I have never resorted to name calling like the above post, for I like to be far more subtle than that!

I do find it sad that arch's inflamatory Posts have driven off an excellent MP player. My counsel to Zapmeister is to ignore the ravings of arch. There are plenty of decent people in this game, you just have to find them and avoid the ones who aren't pleasant.

I am glad to see that arch's knee-jerk reaction did not drive LintMan away too. As for LintMan, I would suggest sticking your toe into the MP world on Mose Hansen. It is entertaining and not all that time consuming with most games being set at a turn every 1 or 2 days. And you should find a newbie game on there at some point in the very near future.

[archaeolept]

"At least I have never resorted to name calling like the above post"

Firstly, my statement as stands is correct. It does not itself call any names, but merely asserts the fact that "threatening to throw a game" is a common tactic amongst children and bad players. do you deny it is a common tactic, or that it is the sort of thing children or sore losers do?

Secondly, it is clear that you yourself have been resorting to insults. here are a few:

"Arch, do you understand English very well?"

Actually, there would be little doubt that I understand English rather better than you do, as far as that goes. It is not especially relevant, however. and:

"What exactly are you smoking anyway?"

which is a classic ad hominem.

"ravings" - another nice little bit of implicit name-calling on your part


As well,
"Tell me one single thing in the above post which is childish and immature."

[referring to lintman's post] - I never claimed that lintman's suggestions were themselves childish and immature - those adjectives were restricted to Zapmeister's threat to throw the game to his opponent. Obviously you seem fine w/ such tactics. My problem w/ lintman's suggestions as to going kamikaze were that these could reinforce Zap's already evident tendencies towards this.

Now, you may consider zap's propensity to quit from committments and immediate resort to threats of throwing a game as indicative of being an "excellent player." I would only suggest that this shows more about what you consider good than it shows about anything else...

" do find it sad that arch's inflamatory Posts have driven off an excellent MP player. "

lolz++ This is a classic bit of historical revisionism. In case you didn't notice, Zapmeister had already said he wanted to abandon the game, a la cohen, before any of my so-called "inflamatory" Posts. Cart before the horse?
Obviously, the original "inflamation" was Zapmeisters prediliction to threats of game-throwing. Then his whining about not being able to deal w/ Storm's handful of Van's and one Air Queen. Then his wanting to give up and go home because he was receiving the same sort of pummeling he had previously been dishing out to Arcos and Marignon.

[Stormbinder]

archaeolept said:
I'm just hoping this game can be salvaged. It was my first time playing as mictlan, and I was enjoying the difference.

Hey, let's not dramatise the situation too much. Game has been a lot of fun so far for everybody, as far as I can tell from speaking with players. 4 nations in close race with each other, no newbies, no AIs, no regular "cheese" due to the rules preventing it, interesting map, etc. Nothing have been ruined so far, so there is no need for salvaging. Machaka has not missed any turns, it has been fighing me to the best of thier abilities, constantly counterraiding me and killing several of my vans and SCs in addition to my troops. I am sure they will continue their struggle under Mark's leadership. I've turned off quickhost to help Mark get into game, as he requested.

[Ozymandias]

For what its worth I believe that maiming weapons penetrate mirror image in the same way that life draining ones do; i.e. you hit an image but the target still suffers the fatigue drain or limb chopping or whatever.