MP Game - Artifact Game - running 48hr qh

[Ironhawk]

archaeolept said:
so, upon discussions w/ quantum, it appears that not only was this a 6 vs 1 gangbang, but that the decision was earlier made to throw the game to ironhawk. That's one way to play, but not a style I am interested in supporting. after this turn i plan on staling my way out of the game, though i shall not resign.

Yeah this viewpoint is one-sided and completely unfair. The truth of the matter was a simple crisis of diplomacy. There came a time when my nation was ready for serious war. The targets were either Man or Pan. Pan was my first choice since he had explicitly told me he was going to invade me over the issue of the Treelords. BUT during my prepartions to pre-emptivly attack Pan, Ulm attacked him instead. Knowing then that if I too were to attack Pan that he would quickly be crushed and I would rapidly find myself with a long front facing a very powerful Ulm I was still unready to face... I chose the second option and attacked Man. After the Man conflict was completed I decided to use the attention-vacuum caused by the two major super-powers fighting in order to try and tackle Ermor.

As fighting in the Ermor war progressed favorably I began to look forward to the future. What would happen when Ermor was finished? Clearly I would have to attack a superpower, but which one? I chose to eventually attack Ulm as the bigger threat, given that he seemed to be succesfully waging war against not one but five nations. Additionally, if Ulm were to be defeated, the resulting geographic layout of Pan provinces would favor my eventual invasion of them. So, two turns ago, I made the final decision and began to support the Panish war effort with intelligence and material.

[Saber Cherry]

"No Diplomacy" is like playing the AI. Since "Unlimited Diplomacy" invariably causes problems and hard feelings (in games, offices, and nations), how about "Limited Diplomacy"?

- Limited Diplomacy Levels -

Level 0: No diplomacy. Public nondiplomatic messages allowed.

Level 1: No private diplomacy. Public declarations allowed (but not required): Unilateral declarations of war, unilateral declarations of peace, requests for trade at a fixed rate. Conditions allowed on war/peace declarations: Anything that does not involve a 3rd party.
Examples:
"I will send 6 water gems to anyone who sends me an Ice Sword. Should I receive too many, I will return the excess."
"I will declare war on Ulm unless his troops leave Province 120, and he gives me 200 gold in reparations."
"My people love the citizens of Soulgate Ermor, and would be content with our present borders for the next 16 months if Ermor will also pledge to peace."

...Of course, that causes a lot of public messaging, but it shouldn't be too much trouble.

Level 2: Private diplomacy allowed. However, no politics involving a 3rd party are allowed. In other words - no alliances, no mutual protection agreements, no discussion of other nations, implict or explicit. Trading is unrestricted.


Level 1 and level 2 are the same, except level 2 allows secret deals and directed trading. Still - since all deals are required to be fully unilateral, with no mention of any third party - there should not be any hard feelings, questions of ganging up, accusations of unfairness, soiled honor, or anything else; so long as everyone (with the exception of, at most, one person) in the game is trusted not to grossly violate explicit rules.

[archaeolept]

<quantum_mechani> well, I would have just withdrawn from the game myself but I figured ironhawk would get unstoppable soon enough, and I'm enjoying our war a fair amount
<archae> like i said, a rigged game
...
<quantum_mechani> you have to understand I am in a very awkward situation, whatever I do I'm slighting either you or iron
<archae> lol
<archae> you've thrown the game
<archae> i don't need any other rationalisations
<archae> games aren't primarily about winning
<archae> they're about how well you play, and about honour
<quantum_mechani> yeah, that's exaxtly it, and I see no honourable way out
<quantum_mechani> if I go iron's way I'm throwing the game

[quantum_mechani]

What is missing in that quote is a set of quotation marks around 'throwing the game' in the last line (not that I am saying the quote is incorrect, only that it would have clearified my intended meaning). IIRC, the gist of that and the next few lines was if I allied with Ironhawk you would call it thowing the game, if I switched to an alliance with you Iron would very likely consider it backstabbing.

[Ironhawk]

This is the situation of the game: Whoever QM sides with will win the game and whoever he fights will lose. But I do not understand why there is so much angst about it? QM is simply the King Maker. He is a powerful nation which cannot win on its own but can still effect the game enough to influence which other nation will win. It is a very common MP phenomenon that we should all be familiar with by now.

How can anyone gainsay his decisions about what to do with his empire? It's his to run as he sees fit. Any claims of collusion were clearly refuted when he laid his cards on the table. So he's just making the choice based on chance, preference, and diplomatic standing. All of which are completely legitimate.

[Ironhawk]

Ok, since the debate seems to have calmed down somewhat I would like to discuss how to move forward with this game. First and foremost, do people want to continue? Once we decide whether or not to continue then we can vote on how to call the game.

My vote is not to continue. I say that with a great deal of sadness cause I worked really hard in this game, did well, and was having a lot of fun. And while, technically speaking, we could get a replacement for Ulm... IMO, arch and the Ulmish wars were too central to the history of the game to just swap someone else in. Just doesnt seem right, you know?

[Rathar]

Well, speaking from left field and as someone who wasn't involved in the 'controversy"..

I attacked Ulm because they were clearly winning and with Mork cutting off all possibilities of growth I had no choice unless it was to involuntarily cede my provinces to them.

From my non irc (Don't trust it, never will, seems irrational yes but there ya go) vision it truly seems like what happens when one player gets huge, all the others jump on em. This tends to make the one feel picked on, and well, tis the case!! But necessary imho. My actions would have remained the same. (cept I would've figured out how to keep my army alive and then I'D be the evil empire mwah hah hah cough..) In any game of any type.

There is collusion and there are deals which smell of collusion but thats why we have descriptors in english that mean the same in the end but imply different things.

That said, I have no comment or clue about any collusion but I will say that in most any game with a balance of power situation being possible it frequently falls to one player who will NOT win to decide who does. My gaming group calls this the grovel phase..

After much blathering my point is: Work it out if workoutable, if not, end it, declare everyone winners and make another game with the things you learned.

How many of these things actually get to the end with one controlling all anyways? It usually becomes very obvious or pointless in my limited experience.

One last bit and this points no fingers, really. No really, damn it. Taking your ball and going home is lame. Cards you are dealt with suck? Play em and lose, think outside the box, offer bribes, take compromising photos and blackmail em, get in the next hand and take them to the cleaners.

Too much wisdom this late at night on insomnia drugs that don't seem to work..!

Rathar

P.S. Still looking forward to the next game!

P.s.s Stupid marble warriored, swords of sharpnessed orgevinemen!! Especially since same was within my capabilities and I overlooked it... Next time!

/rubs hands greedily and pets his cat

Rathar Kalinger

Oh, one last point. The use of the IRC channel was pretty heavily promoted in this thread so one should not be surprised that it was used. I already mentioned my feelings about IRC but in a RP sort of way I try hard to use only the ingame message system, 2 turn delay and all, no way to make certain that is the only way to go but tis the only way one should expect me to use. Seems more "natural" in these artificial envoronments. Think English east indies co. fighting the Frence rival company for nearly a year after peace had been declared due to the length of time it took for the news to percolate!

[archaeolept]

ehh, i haven't w/drawn. my plan is to hide my forces in my castles, let QM take all of my lands, and wait for each castle to be eventually beseiged. Possibly everyone gets so bored they stop playing, in which case I emerge and conquer the world.