MP Asia Twist - Wraithlord Wins! - Page 45

archaeolept · #1 August 15th, 2009, 12:26 PM

Aethyr - routing an SC is a classic cheap way to deal with them. I strongly advise against using something like that as support to a bunch of otherwise fairly unimportant scrub troops. He escaped that same fate previously when you threw up that insta-castle; now his luck has run out.

Wraithlord: having not paid any attention to victory conditions, I was a bit shocked to see (two turns back) that this game only has a 7 vp victory condition. I had completely forgotten about this, although I must have known at one time. Ok, so I'm stupid

It seems a bit sad for such an epic game to rest upon teleporting on someone's poorly defended vp, but I don't really see a good way to modify the conditions. Perhaps that one has to have the walls on an 8th breached before trying for the 7th?

WraithLord · #2 August 16th, 2009, 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archaeolept

...
Wraithlord: having not paid any attention to victory conditions, I was a bit shocked to see (two turns back) that this game only has a 7 vp victory condition. I had completely forgotten about this, although I must have known at one time. Ok, so I'm stupid

It seems a bit sad for such an epic game to rest upon teleporting on someone's poorly defended vp, but I don't really see a good way to modify the conditions. Perhaps that one has to have the walls on an 8th breached before trying for the 7th?

Heh, there I was thinking you had it all planned ahead

Yes, I agree 7 VP is low for this game, or in large scale game for that matter IMHO. I think 9 is a more appropriate number.
We are both two VPs short of victory and both very close to get them. I'd say it's quite likely we either take the last VP at exactly the same turn or one of us is a turn short.
Pretty lame considering the awesomeness of the game so far.
Perhaps we can just call it a draw and end it there b/c there's no way to technically change the victory conditions now?

Slobby · #3 August 15th, 2009, 08:45 PM

gg all was fun

Aethyr · #4 August 15th, 2009, 11:35 PM

Bye Slobby..

@ Arch, yeah pretty dumb move on my part to leave myself vunerable that way, the rit. of returing made me less cautious than I should have been.

archaeolept · #5 August 16th, 2009, 01:04 AM

yeah, I figured that's why you felt secure.

Aethyr · #6 August 16th, 2009, 01:09 AM

live and learn...or in my case, die & learn would be more appropriate I guess.

PashaDawg · #7 August 16th, 2009, 09:39 PM

Hello:

A player has requested an extension until Thursday, which I granted.

Thanks.

Pasha

PashaDawg · #8 August 16th, 2009, 09:42 PM

Thanks for playing Slobby! You lasted a lot longer than me!

archaeolept · #9 August 19th, 2009, 05:21 PM

Of course it is, as you yourself put forward. How else could it be considered a "grey area", something you "wouldn't normally do", except under the pressure of the situation (namely that I was about to match you in VPs and thus "close to winning the game"). If barbarians attack your province, it is not open to me, conventionally under a NAP, to take it while your attention is elsewhere (and then be defended from any counteraction by the supposed NAP), nor is there any "one turn rule" for dibsies. If this were not so, it would be possible to siege someone's cap w/ whom you supposedly have a non-aggression pact, or block paths of retreat in a war with a third entity (or interdict pursuing forces, as could have happened in the Eriu situation, as I almost sent forces into two of those territories to finish him off). No NAP could hold under such circumstances. Somewhat similarly, as you implied, no NAP can really hold under a situation of imminent victory, either ("force majeure").

But, as I said, I basically agree with your right to do so, though you could well have cleared up this question in advance before taking action, as that would have allowed me to operate under equivalent conditions

WraithLord · #10 August 19th, 2009, 05:37 PM

I see your points.
And well, they are not worth all the hassle. I can give 17 back to you this turn, 304 next turn and a province of mine in exchange for 282. There you go, I am stepping out of the gray and into the light

Would that work for you?
I'm off to sleep now, please answer here or PM me if you wish to discuss different amendment. I suggest we come to an agreement before the turn hosts.