I think I now understand Cohen

[Cainehill]

Zapmeister said:

But there's another issue. As you say, it's not a "boatload of fun" playing positions like this. Where does my obligation to spend not-fun-time in order to protect other people's fun-time start and end? Some such obligation exists, I would say, but it may be that I can't play as well as the AI in the time I'm obliged to give.

Speaking of obligation, I missed somewhat in your original post.

What about your obligation to not join a game that explicitly asks for "No Quitters" if you're going to quit? You're not having any success, so therefor you're not having any fun, so therefor you want to quit.

Tell me - is the first time you've ever run into a situation where you can't seem to do anything??? I mean - I've been through it in a couple dozen games, probably. I wouldn't think it was the first time for you either.

So - you joined a game that asked for players who were willing to play through to the bitter end, figuring you'd only keep playing as long as you're doing well enough. Bravisimo. (Applause gremlin)

This is the sort of thing that makes me wish we could have a sticky topic, maybe just one post, with the names of people who quit, especially after voluntarily undertaking an obligation not to do so in a given game.

What's so hard to understand about, "please don't join if you're going to quit"?

And frankly, Machaka has any number of things that should work well against Vans and even air queens, depending on immunities and MR.

Vans don't fight very well when blind. Nor when entangled. They're quite vulnerable to blade wind, which Machaka can get casters for pretty easily. Likewise, Machaka can get casters for Charm without too much difficulty. And casters for their own Ghost Riders, and Call of the Wild for stealth armies, etc, etc.

Albeit I guess you are possibly discovering why I think Mad Castling isn't the problem, raiders having too great an advantage is. You can never ever catch them in the province they're in, save for air trapeze, teleport, etc, which mostly pit a couple of casters against an army, and which are screwed if the raiders are over your fort.

There really, REALLY ought to be a chance for one army to catch another - as any juggler can tell you, there is no such thing as simultaneity.

[Zapmeister]

Cainehill said:
What about your obligation to not join a game that explicitly asks for "No Quitters" if you're going to quit? You're not having any success, so therefor you're not having any fun, so therefor you want to quit.

Sure. My understanding was that the rule was to prevent people from quitting as soon as the going got tough, not to prevent people from quitting when they feel totally defeated. I'm not the first nation to go AI in this game (if I do) although I would be the largest. But as I've argued elsewhere, counting provinces doesn't translate into winning chances.

Tell me - is the first time you've ever run into a situation where you can't seem to do anything??? I mean - I've been through it in a couple dozen games, probably. I wouldn't think it was the first time for you either.

It's not. I do try to tough out the bad times, because I take the point that you can't always be a winner, and some un-fun time when you're losing is the price to pay for the fun-time when you're winning. My position here is not that I'm losing, it's that I've lost, and I see a big difference there. Stronger players than I may be able to turn the position around, but that's not the point.

What's so hard to understand about, "please don't join if you're going to quit"?

Nothing, if it's that clear. But as I said, I'm not the first player to quit this game (if I do).

[Stormbinder]

Cainehill said:

Unethical??? Who's running the game, Stormbinder?

*sigh* Yes, I am running the game and I am that terrible SC/raiding nation in question.

Zapmeister's description of the situation is true and accurate.


I am extremely tempted to add my own bit of advice regarding how to deal with me to what was already mentioned here, but I understand that it would be like shooting myself in the leg. I promise Zap I'll tell you what I would try to do in your place, but it'll have to be until after the game. I did send few small bits of advice to you in PMs over the Last several days.


As for my own nation - I only have 1 real army though which I put together 1 turn ago. And I only have 2 SCs (AQs), in addition to vans, who are good raiders but not up to par agaisnt real SC. I do have one kickass AQ prophet though, who is real ***** to kill.



As Zapmesiter said, the problem is that if huge Machaka Empire would go AI at this point (turn 47) I could overun most of it in 1 turn, with my raiders, summons and teleporting SCs. And I would hate to win the game in this way. I imagine all other players would not like as well.




Meanwhile I can only say that I agree with what was saod by Archae, Graeme and Cain(gasp! ), both in tactical and global points of view.


In Zapmeister's defense I can say that it must be very frustrating for him to play against such raiding tactic, when enemy strike and retreat into shadow. And he also correct, I am not sure myself how my AQ have survived this Last turn big battle, after she was the only one commander left in the castle. I have few theories why it would happen, most likely this was due to that battle being castle defense. Or it could be a bug indeed. I even posted about it myself earlier today (look at the pinned Dom2's FAQ on the top of the first page, I've added some corrections to it today, routing mechanism is one of them).


And btw I also lost my banelord to you due to routing wierdness Last turn (he was scripted to hold 5 turns, since I was expecting your Ghost riders attack, and he was supposed to retreat once you kill the regular troops, which he didn't ). Although to be honest banelord and that AQ SC are not in the same wieght Category of course.


Regards,
Stormbinder