EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [running]

[Yskonyn]

OCEANS OF LAND (http://www.llamaserver.net/gameinfo.cgi?game=Oceans_of_Land)

Summary
-Map: Cradle of Dominion (already included in vanilla Dom3)
-Amount of players (max): 10
-Mods used: CBM 1.6 (Get it here (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8767&d=1252953736)!)
-Aim of the game: To let noobs get their feet wet in MP.
-Nations banned: Ryleh, Atlantis, Oceania, Helheim, Vanheim, Tir-na-nog, Niefelheim, Hinnom, Mictlan
-Turn processor: llamaserver
-Also please take a look through the Llama FAQ:
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=35160 (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=35160)
-Turn time start at 24hrs, accomodating for longer intervals when game progresses.
-Admins: Yskonyn, GrudgeBringer
-Who should join: Noobz, Internediate players, Vets who won't play agressively, but pose a helpful attitude towards the noobs in- as well as out of game.
-Who should NOT join: People looking for a no-holds-barred war, experienced players looking to win easily or agressively, people who definately want to play with nations that are banned; there will be no discussion.
-The game will have a master password
-Do NOT password protect your pretender to avoid problems when needing to sub a player.

-Diplomacy is allowed. Use PM on this forum or e-mail for inter-player contact, so be sure to enable private messaging in your profile! Use this thread for reports every player should or must know (like alliances or treaties).
A bit more on diplomacy; I am in favour of roleplaying when engaging in diplomacy, but I am aware there are lots of players who don't like RP, so this is not required. But it does create a nice setting and adds to the atmosphere.
Because we are playing with new people I think we need to have a few diplomacy rules. In my last game diplomacy turned out to be highly unreliable which was quite confusing for me, so let us abide by some simple rules:
1 - Allies are not to be backstabbed. If you want to attack your ally, you first have to break your alliance with that player before attacking. So this means there is a five turn buffer limit between declaring the end of the alliance and the first attack. This is to prevent the new players from being confused about what happened. And it gives the players' mind some rest about who to trust for now (see rule 3).
2 - On the matter of NAP's we need to keep it simple; IF the NAP is registered here on the forum it is binding. If you have secret agreements (ones not made public here on the forum) they can be broken at your own risk.
3 - This does NOT rule out deceit. You can still catch your victim quite unprepared, so deceitful acts are allowed, but remember to abide by rule 1 and 2 at all times. If there's some sort of disagreement between two players please contact me or Grudge.

To clarify a bit more about the simple rules of diplomacy concerning Alliance or NAP's:
Alliance: The 'buffer' I was talking about -in rule 1 above- was the amound of turns you cannot commence hostile action against the other player after you have broken an alliance.
So if you want to cease having an alliance with player X, you notify him or her, then the 5 turns start where you cannot attack player X so he has some time to prepare and settle for the broken alliance.

NAPs: You agree with the other player how you want your NAP and if its then registered on the forums its binding, if not you're on your own.
How many turns you want the NAP to hold is entirely up to the two players to decide amongst themselves.
In addition:
I thought if two players would agree on a NAP-5, for example, this was a non-agression pact for 5 turns. After this you either renew or you cease to have it.
It turns out that the most common use is different:
If two players agree on a NAP-5 those two players have a NAP until either of them cancel it, but then those 5 turns start where you are NOT allowed to attack still. Only after the 5 turns have passed you can commence hostilities.
For a NAP-3 this would be three turns and so on.

Players
1 - Marverni (Yskonyn)
2 - Arcosephale (GrudgeBringer)
3 - <TBD>Kailasa (13lackGu4rd)
4 - Caelum (Euarchus)
5 - C'tis (Swan)
6 - Yomi (Dark Kitty)
7 - Pangaea (SciencePro)
8 - Tien Chi (Silence0)
9 - Ermor (Doo)
0 - Sauromatia (earcaraxe)

Description
Oceans of Land - The vast possibilities that lie in these lands to lead your nation to greatness are endless. The Cradle of Dominion, as these lands are called, are a vast and diverse territory. There are 199 provinces to conquer and there are 22 sea regions. 'Oceans of Land' also hints at the one map rule of this game: no water colonization.

This game aims to provide a gaming evironment where noobs are able to try things with their nation and get to know the game a bit further without fear of being obliterated by good experienced players early on in the game.
Therefore we have decided to ban certain nations for balancing purposes (see above). Also water construction is not allowed, therefore all water dwelling nations belong in the banlist for this game. Agartha may still be chosen, but remember you cannot settle on water provinces.

Veteran players are accepted under certain conditions;
You do not plan to steamroll and wage war agressively right from the start of the game as this would defeat the 'introductory nature' of this game.
As a vet you may only choose a weak nation and you are expected to engage in tutoring or at least pose a helpful attitude towards the noobs. You are not in this game to win or show how much powertricks you know in Dom 3. Again, this game is aimed for noobs to get their feet wet.

Grudge is admin as well as me. He is experienced, but therefore plays as a weaker nation. He has been very helpful so far in aiding new players to get their bearings in Dom 3.

Glad to have you!</TBD>

[13lackGu4rd]

wanna try Mictlan in a MP environment as opposed to SP.

[Frozen Lama]

that is the oddest list of banned nations i have ever seen. you realize that TNN is probably in the top 5 weakest nations right? and you allow the heims, intermediate nations, yet allow mictlan and lanka? its your game, so i won't argue, just curious why

[rdonj]

that is the oddest list of banned nations i have ever seen. you realize that TNN is probably in the top 5 weakest nations right? and you allow the heims, intermediate nations, yet allow mictlan and lanka? its your game, so i won't argue, just curious why

He didn't ban the heims. I think what he's doing is eliminating all the glamour nations to remove nations with strong stealth abilities. Of course, there's still a lot of other nations with stealth... here is where my logic breaks down :(

[Squirrelloid]

I agree with Frozen - I'd ban Lanka long before I banned Vanheim. And Banning TNN is hilarious.

[militarist]

And No CBM.. it's quite risky..especially in peaceful environment.

[rdonj]

that is the oddest list of banned nations i have ever seen. you realize that TNN is probably in the top 5 weakest nations right? and you allow the heims, intermediate nations, yet allow mictlan and lanka? its your game, so i won't argue, just curious why

He didn't ban the heims. I think what he's doing is eliminating all the glamour nations to remove nations with strong stealth abilities. Of course, there's still a lot of other nations with stealth... here is where my logic breaks down :(

I meant he did ban the heims! Wow, screwed up there.

[GrudgeBringer]

No Cbm is an oversight, it will be included and Mictlan WAS banned just not listed...Abysia was on the bubble also depending on who took it...

His idea was to try and get noobs in and not have stealth or water nations..Lanka for a noob is hard to play so he left it in.

I think all those that think that his game is skewed in a direction are probably too good to play in it anyway....

Look guys..he started D&G and most of the noobs where gone in a flash, so he decided to make some balancing rules...they may not be the best but they aren't bad considering he is a noob himself.

And tir being weak is maybe laughable. but it is a stealth nation by definition so it is out. He will only take 4 vets and if he feels they will unbalance the game he will not accept them...C'mon guys, give him a break...he wants some vets but wants them playing weak nations to give the noobs some learning and test your prowess.

If you have any suggestions please make them known and he will consider them.

[Maerlande]

It's a noob game. It's what it is and he set it up. It will play out in interesting ways. And Squirrelliod, Frozenlama, and rdonj. You guys just are NOT noobs. I'm a noob!

[Maerlande]

Oh yeah! And Grudge is an evil player. He does evil things like honor and integrity. What the hell is Dom3 coming to if that kind of carp is allowed?

[Euarchus]

Can I have Caelum please?

[Yskonyn]

The thing with nations is quite difficult, chaps. On the one hand you don't want to ban too many nations, but on the other hand you want a game that stays running past 40 turns also. :)
So the banlist might not be what you would expect that does not mean things will work out that way too. Like Grudge said; veteran players are screened first and might not be allowed to play a certain nation, while a noob IS allowed to play that nation.
The banlist is merely a list of nations that NEITHER players are allowed to pick. And yes, Mictlan was an oversight.

The thing with stealth is that we currently banned all nations depending highly on stealth afaik and that includes TNN eventhough it might not be that powerful. This is for the sake of avoiding any arguments about stealth ("eventhough he has TNN -a weaker nation-, he STILL has stealth!"). See? The other side of the medal. That's what I wanted to avoid.

Wether to include CBM or not is up for debate still as far as I am concerned, David and Goliath was also played with Worthy Heroes and vanilla.
The ongoing discussion is wether you want noobs to play with vanilla first (and maybe a few small mods which don't alter gameplay too much) or get them into playing with the big often used mods right away.
I am in the 'go vanilla first' camp myself as I think you should first know how a game plays at its core to be able to understand what a mod has altered exactly. Reading a readme.txt or a changelog doesn't really help if you never saw it hands-on. But, like I said, this is up for debate and will always be. If the general wish for this game is to include CBM once we have players enlisted, we'll go CBM enabled.

EDIT Euarchus, welcome! You have been added to the list.

[Quitti]

Well, just to weigh in my opinion - while stealth can be leveraged as a tool, it's not too good to warrant a banning of a nation. I realize that this is your game, and you make the rules, but ea van and tnn are quite weak nations. Helheim can be slightly more powerful due all the death magic you can get access to with national mages. I can see why such early game rush powers (especially since this is vanilla and not CBM game) such as mictlan, hinnom and niefelheim would be banned from the game.

I'd also like to inquire what "aggressive play style" for a vet means - it's considered quite normal to attack a weak(er) neighbor(s) to gain lands, gold&gem income and more land. I know that vets can do this much more efficiently and counter this much more efficiently than newbies/intermediate players, but the problem lies in that if you don't do that, you (usually) lose the game. Turtling might work for a few nations, but it'll almost always detriment your long-term game. Some nations are easier to deal in early/midgame with other nations, and they grow in power the later the game goes - eg. Kailasa and T'ien Ch'i and quite a few MA/LA nations which are not relevant here, as this is an EA game.

[13lackGu4rd]

well, ok, can't say I didn't expect Mictlan to be banned under these settings, but I saw it wasn't so I tried... but if you've banned stealth nations I'm surprised you left Pangaea out of the ban list, being perhaps the primary stealth nation out there...

also I've overlooked this being played on vanilla as opposed to CBM. if this remains vanilla than I'll take Kailasa instead of Mictlan, if CBM than Sauromatia(not on the ban list) instead. and of course of you do allow Mictlan after all than I'll have it.

[Swan]

if 13lack gets sauromatia i would like the dying yet proud nation of agartha

if 13lack will not get sauramatia i would like the raptor riding ladies of sauramatia

[Frozen Lama]

Thank you GB. like i said, its your game, play it how you want. i was just curious

[Dark Kitty]

I would like to play as Lanka please (or Yomi if Lanka was to be banned for some reason)

[Septimius Severus]

Good to a see noob friendly game.

I agree with you Yskonyn on reasoning of vanilla for noobs. You can't appreciate the benefits or drawbacks of more drastic mods that make a multitude of changes to the game like CBM and others unless you first understand how the game is intended to play out of the box.

[SciencePro]

I would like to join as abysia please. I'm not exactly a noob but i'm hardly a vet either. I am happy to be helpful and non-aggressive.

I would vote in favor of CBM for noobs or anybody. As a noob you are still learning the game and its annoying to learn things one way then have it change all of the sudden when you play a CBM game later. Also, in vanilla, people can stockpile clams or blood stones or something which really distorts the endgame.

[Swan]

About the CBM vs vanilla: i would say lets play vanilla, i think we need to try how vanilla is in MP before using CBM. also the clam piling is doable but he best clammer, oceania, is banned.
Still i would play even if CBM is on

[Graeme Dice]

I'd be quite happy to play a nation like Kailasa if we're playing vanilla.

[Dark Kitty]

I would agree with Swan. After all CBM is a mod and nothing says it won't get replaced by another one in few months. And then you would have to learn how high are the spells, what effets have some items, etc... again.

Vanilla still allows to learn the mechanics of the game, the effet of spells, some basic strategies, etc... which is probably the most important thing in a newbie game.

By the way, I would like to switch to Yomi.

[Silence0]

Noob? Sounds like me...I would like to try tien chi...

[SciencePro]

actually in the interest of trying a new nation, can I play Pangea instead of abysia?

[Swan]

Scrap away the psychotic raptor ladies and the oversized worms, i'll lead the gloriawesome lizard empire of C'tis

[GrudgeBringer]

Personally, I also think that 'Vanilla' will soon be a thing of the past (or at least rare), and new guys should get used to what will be the 'norm'.

But I also think a vote should be taken once we have 10 and go with that.

[rdonj]

Yeah, CBM isn't going anywhere soon. And has been going strong for quite a while now.

[Yskonyn]

First of all: thanks for showing interest in my little game! I hope the first post has listed the correct names/nations so far. If there's an error let me know. Welcome, all new rulers!

Graeme, I am affraid Kailasa is taken by 13lack. Mictlan was his first choice, but he had to change obviously due to the banlist. First come, first served I am afraid. I hope you dont mind.
As an experienced player you're more than welcome to join! As long as you're going to play a weaker nation just like Grudge.

Quitti, I understand you sentiments about playstyle and the need fo agressiveness in a game of Dom3, but there's a big difference in efficiency, like you pointed out yourself.
An experienced player will know exactly in how many steps he can make his warmachine running at full speed, whereas noobs have a more trial and error approach to their empire management.
Just like in realtime strategy games like C&C it's just not fun at all to get totally steamrolled over in the first minutes of a game.
Same goes here. In Civ 4, for example, many noob games restrict the vets from engaging outside of their influence zone. Only noobs may do so. That makes for a very nice environment where new players can experiment with tactics while at the same time fighting amongst themselves, but choosing which vet to take on. Great system and I am aiming for roughly something in that direction here, hence all the rules. I hope this makes it a bit more clear?

[Graeme Dice]

Then if Kailasa is taken I'll play Abysia.

[Quitti]

Stuff + I hope this makes it a bit more clear?

Yes, very much so. Though, civ4 is quite different from dom3, but I guess see what you're after now, it puts vets into a kind of teacher-position in the game, not really giving much of a chance of victory except for allied one (if the game rules allow that), or by lifting the aggression rule at some point, say turn 35 or something, which is usually late midgame by then and first wars are already fought.

Still, the ban on stealth nation puzzles me somewhat. If newbies need to learn the game, they really should know that there is also stealth nations involved :) (Also, Pan and I think Ulm have stealthy troops so it's not a complete ban on stealth nations, but the 'usual' prime stealth nations, van and hel are there.)

[Doo]

I have not played MP before and would like to join.

Ermor if thats ok.

[earcaraxe]

Hi!

I would like to join with sauromatia.

i havent read all the posts here, but why is mictlan banned?

[GrudgeBringer]

I think that gives us 10

[Doo]

I guess once my spot is confirmed I upload a Pretender?

Can somebody confirm how to combine the CBM 1.6 and Worthy Heros 1.8 mods. CBM comes with I think WH 1.6? already, when I overwrite with WH 1.8 the game crashes.

[Yskonyn]

Welcome! We are now at 10 players! Much quicker than I had anticipated and to be the bringer of bad news already:

I am out of the country due to work from tuesday till thursday. I will be back thursday night, so I would like to suggest holding off kickoff until thursday or early friday.
It's a bit of a drag to wait this long, I agree, but I had anticipated to be waiting longer for the game to fill up. Crappy planning on my behalf I guess. :)

Doo, wait with the loading of mods for now. The CBM / non-CBM camp is quite divided at this time, so the best thing is to have a vote by our 10 players indicating what they would like to play. The majority will have the final say.
If we go CBM then there's no need for the seperate Worthy Heroes mod. If we go vanilla we do it with WH 1.8 as the sole mod.

I am aware that the first post needs updating with the latest players. So don't worry if you're not listed yet. I will update the post when I have sorted a few things here.

Quitti, I understand the seemingly awkwardness regarding the stealth nations, but it was my sentiment that we should at least ban the stealth 'dependent' nations, which does not rule out stealth as a whole in this game. Anyway we're up to 10 players and I think the nations are quite nicely chosen, don't you? Thanks for the feedback anyhow!

[Swan]

So we are voting for CBM/vanilla?
C'tis, land of eternal sand, declare: VANILLA

[Doo]

Ermor, true followers of the New Faith say: Vanilla

[Yskonyn]

Marverni people vote for: Vanilla

Regarding the start delay I could also ask for a sub for the first few turns to do my bidding so we can start right away after all has been agreed upon.

[13lackGu4rd]

well, 3 votes for vanilla already, might as well vote for vanilla as well, and if it does get the majority than I'll stick to Kailasa.

[Quitti]

Quitti, I understand the seemingly awkwardness regarding the stealth nations, but it was my sentiment that we should at least ban the stealth 'dependent' nations, which does not rule out stealth as a whole in this game. Anyway we're up to 10 players and I think the nations are quite nicely chosen, don't you? Thanks for the feedback anyhow!

Well, I'd disagree on the dependancy of stealth for those, but stealth can be very well leveraged with them. But good luck with the game, I shall not bother you anymore in this thread. Have fun!

[earcaraxe]

The revered leader of the sauromatian tribe - having her people's blind confidence in victory- abstains from voting. :)

again: could u tell me why mictlan is banned?

[Dark Kitty]

I switched to Yomi so a "first time player" could have Lanka, but if nobody wants it and if it is ok with everybody, I would like to switch back to Lanka (sorry for the changes of mind :o)

I would like to hold my vote until I see if there is more arguments in favor of CBM.

[Euarchus]

I vote CBM - It seemed like such a necessity in this forum that I've never thought to play Vanilla. Also, my impression of CBM was that it was mainly about improving the gameplay by making more different strategies viable. This seems like a laudable aim.

[earcaraxe]

I change my vote to CBM. The reason is: i have the impression that CBM's aim is to improve gameplay (and i have the feeling that its quite successfull in it), and it is not any more difficult or more easy to play than vanilla.

[GrudgeBringer]

I vote CBM as it hinders exp players and won't hurt new players as they don't know the difference for the most part.

[GrudgeBringer]

Mictlan was deemed to stong a nation as was niefl, Hinnom etc.

[Silence0]

Well i've played most single player and even there i liked the overall cost reductions of almost everything in cbm so i guess i´ll vote for it... Vanilla is fun but lots of stuff(especially some really cool pretenders) just scream do not use me...

[Yskonyn]

That makes the voting in favour of CBM. I am swayed. So be it. Everyone load up CBM via the link in the first post and be sure to remove Worthy Heroes v1.8 otherwise your game will crash!

Like I posted before, due to misanticipation of the attention for this game I have put us in a rather unfortunate spot; I have to go abroad from tuesday till late thursday, early friday without access to the game. We have two options:
One, we go ahead with preparations, upload our pretenders and then standby until I am back, so in this case the game will fire off on friday most likely, but as we all hate waiting the better option might be to start the game asap and then I request a temporary sub to fill in my turns on wed and thu.

I will open de game on Llama server in a few minutes, so everyone can upload their pretenders.
Remember to NOT put a password on your pretender to avoid problems when another players has to sub for you!

EDIT: Oceans_of_Land is created on Llama!

[13lackGu4rd]

so, since we're going with CBM after all do I get my Sauromatia...?

[GrudgeBringer]

You get Kalisia as first asked for (see Pm I just sent). Welcome aboard!!

[Yskonyn]

Another player had Sauro as his first choice while you were on Kailasa, Black. So Sauro is taken. We can't go create a game with all kinds of nation dependencies for players I am afraid.
It makes dividing the nations amongst players needlessly burdensome.
I hope you have fun with Kailasa, welcome aboard!

Game name on Llama is: Oceans_of_Land. It is ready to accept a pretender for your nation.
I have updated the first post with a direct link to the game page on llama.

[GrudgeBringer]

Good Job, I will have my Pretender in by this evening. Remeber guys to use the underscore in the title

[earcaraxe]

little offtopic question, but is it possible to send PM to me? i cant find how it can be turned on/off. thx!

[Yskonyn]

Earcaraxe. no I have sent a PM test and introductory message to all players, but you and Doo are unable to receive PM's.

Please make sure you enable PM messaging by going to your 'User CP' in the horizontal navbar at the top of this page (the black line with the white texts). You can enable PM messaging in your User CP somewhere.

Doo, please do the same.

*shameless plug ON* Oh and why hasn't anyone thanked me yet for creating this? I am still at '4 times in 3 posts'? *shameless plug OFF* ;)

[Dark Kitty]

I for one wouldn't mind starting on friday. It would give everyone time to work on their strategies, pretenders, etc... get the changes in CBM for those who never played it. Not to mention it could be frustating for Yskonyn having his start not done the way he wanted it.

Plus it would mean we can do the first few turns during the week-end and not wait 24 hours each time to recruit 15 guys and a mage.

[Swan]

Ok guys, can you expalin me what have i to do?
i delete worthy heroes 1.8 and i use CBM with worthy heores 1.6right?
and worthy heroes is already within cbm or i have to download it?
Something i should know about name on pretenders or we have no limit?

[Dark Kitty]

Worthy Heroes (1.8?) is included in CBM 1.6 so you don't have to download or enable it, just enable CBM 1.6 ;)

By the way, will diplomacy be binding or not?

[Yskonyn]

Swan indeed, like DK said, all you need to do is delete WR 1.8(if you have that installed atm) download CBM from the link in the first post of this thread, install that, enable it in game and you're set.
I am not sure what you mean by a 'limit' on pretender names? As long as they're nothing offensive I'd say you can name him 'Snake on a Stick' if you wanted that.

Diplomacy will be diplomacy. I am in favour of roleplaying diplomacy a bit to add to the game. If you want to be known as 'Player X the Deceiver' after this game, be my guest.
But it's rather awkward if you have an alliance with someone to suddenly kill off all his troops, so in that respect, yes diplo is binding.
If you wanted to attack your ally later on, I think it would be normal to at least make it known to him/her prior to attack that you will not be allies anymore.
Roleplaying (lightly) or adding flavour to your texts in this case is a nice way to create a setting IMO. I'll update the first post to be a bit more clear on this.
Good question!

[Yskonyn]

Here's what has been ammended in the first post regarding diplomacy:

A bit more on diplomacy; I am in favour of roleplaying when engaging in diplomacy, but I am aware there are lots of players who don't like RP, so this is not required. But it does create a nice setting and adds to the atmosphere.
Because we are playing with new people I think we need to have a few diplomacy rules. In my last game diplomacy turned out to be highly unreliable which was quite confusing for me, so let us abide by some simple rules:
1 - Allies are not to be backstabbed. If you want to attack your ally, you first have to break your alliance with that player before attacking. So this means there is a one turn buffer limit between declaring the end of the alliance and the first attack. This is to prevent the new players from being confused about what happened. And it gives the players' mind some rest about who to trust for now (see rule 3).
2 - Same goes for a Non Agression Pact or other nice examples of an agreement of no hostilities between two nations, whatever you may call them.
3 - This does NOT rule out deceit. You can still catch your victim quite unprepared, so deceitful acts are allowed, but remember to abide by rule 1 and 2 at all times. If there's some sort of disagreement between two players please contact me or Grudge.

If there are questions about this or if you disagree or have a better idea, please feel free to express them!

[Trumanator]

Just as a suggestion to all the newbs here, diplo is much easier to keep track of if you use the forum message system, as then you have backups of all your communications.

[Yskonyn]

I for one wouldn't mind starting on friday. It would give everyone time to work on their strategies, pretenders, etc... get the changes in CBM for those who never played it. Not to mention it could be frustating for Yskonyn having his start not done the way he wanted it.

Plus it would mean we can do the first few turns during the week-end and not wait 24 hours each time to recruit 15 guys and a mage.

If the others would feel the same, then sure! It would solve a lot of problems, right there. I also know, however, that people do not like to wait and tend to drop out of a game when things are slowed down. :bug:

We are playing with new people, though, so the extra time available to think about a pretender and strategy for your nation might be a welcome oppertunity.

You can all make your wish known here.

[rdonj]

Actually it's not really necessary to delete WH 1.8, it just needs to not be enabled in your preferences. If I had to delete a mod every time I wanted to play CBM... ouch. You just need to never enable WH 1.8 and CBM at the same time.

[Yskonyn]

Yes but there might be one problem: CBM installs a folder called Worthy Heroes as well and it overwrites the seperate WH install. Some people have said CBM 1.6 comes with a WH older than 1.8?
If that's not true then indeed. No need to delete WH.

[earcaraxe]

i guesss i managed to turn my PMing on.
and btw: thanks for creating this! :)

[Doo]

I have turned PM on. I thanked you in post #61 Yskonyn, cheers for setting this game up.

I'm all for starting ASAP, but am happy to have more time to plot your downfalls :). I like the feedback about CBM, I thought Vanilla better because its easy to find all the info about it on the wiki, eg what Construction 4 allows you to forge. Does anyone know if this info for CBM 1.6 is around?

[GrudgeBringer]

There is a post in the Forum called 'Naps", A number of vetern players give examples of Naps and different results, I reccomend you read it...it could make or break your game, AND reputation in the game.

Following is MY post in that discussion

Wow.....Nap's, it seems like it comes up every now and then and after that we get a bunch of angry players.

I will give you some options and then what I do personally.

1. MAKING A NAP.... Some people (like myself)think it is best to 'register' a nap in the forum. Something very simple (Arco and Ulm agree to a 3 turn nap)clear up to a three paragraph document where they (I actually have seen one of these)spell everything out agreement.

Others think it wise NOT to list it as it may give away where you are (if Arco has a Nap with Ulm and you know where Ulm is...then you can approximate where Arco is). As well as being able to ask for Arco's help if you want to break the Nap with Ulm.

Canceling a Nap...

All the options in the above posts are 'Correct' as there is no absolute right or wrong.

I always cancel a Nap in the forum but I don't always notify the person by PM. Some cancel by PM but do not put it in the forum.

Let me explain the 2 differences...

1. Cancel in the Forum..if you cancel it in the forum it is there for all to see, I feel that you should run by the forum everyday to see what is going on, extensions, wars, etc (a lot of good info). I also feel it is not my fault if you DON'T read the forum and all of a sudden you are attacked.

However, if you post in the forum, the others may see an opportunity to wait a few turns and pile on, Guess the choice is yours.

There is ALWAYS a question of what '3 turns' is and they can be crucial. You read the example's in earlier posts, now let me give you one some of the older guys have used before, (and it makes perfect sense...but it is REALLY a LOT different).

Announcement in forum...

"Arco breaks nap with Ulm turn 21 hostilities may begin on turn 23." Think about that for a moment, if it is before the turn hosts then 21 is turn 1 and 23 is turn 3. Some have different feelings of what 3 turns are and when you can attack...but if they spell it out in the forum and there is no rebuttal...then on turn 23, they fire away, 1 turn earlier than others may feel is right (AND catch you unaware).

Not saying it is right, but it iS right there in the forum for you to dispute.

I think everyone will agree that ANY troop of any kind (Skeptic, Stealth Troops, even an Arco Oreo that can cause damage to a nation can NOT go thru the nation without permission and CERTAINLY not have Stealth armies in position INSIDE the borders of your foe when the nap expires.

I saw a mention of 'official' nap breakers (Arcane Nexus, Burden of time, Utter dark, etc (and there are more)....

But let me pose a question (this is actually happening in a game on here (starting of end game)right now.

There are about 6 nations left, 4 are very strong and vying for position and short treaty type agreements. 1 almost dead and ONE that is right in the middle and has no army to speak of or any deterrent at all, EXCEPT..he IS in the middle and separates the potential warring factions (kind of like Switzerland in WWII).

He cast Arcane Nexus and there was an uproar, but he asked this simple question...."Would you rather I had it with enough gems that it cant be over written or dispelled, Or would you guys rather one of the other nations have it (of course he promised not to give, loan to or help a faction in any way).

I suppose if he was attacked he could wreck the game by casting some pretty nasty spells (I think they call this the 'Doomsday Defence). But he couldn't win it anyway.

So before you lock in what a Nap is or isn't in your mind...what the conditions are or start declaring war brcause someone cast something...think about what works for you.

I personally have a reputation that I will NEVER stab anyone in the back, Makes it pretty easy for me in early game and midgame. Some will stab you in a heart beat or just take a Nap so you quit preparing to attack them while they start preparing to attack you...

So make your decisions based on your play style and how YOU want to play the game...just remember, although they say it stays inside the game, people remember when they play with you agian.

Hope this helps some of you, MY way isn't the best way...it it just one way

[13lackGu4rd]

yeah NAPs are a very complicated issue, especially when it comes to stealthy units(somewhat avoided under these settings but not entirely), say scouts, black servants, etc. for example, if you have some black servants equipped as thugs, you send them deep inside your NAPed neighbor, than at some point you tell him you cancel the NAP, than after 3 turns you attack with the stealthy units you sent deep into his territories. would that be called a violation of the NAP if he never caught your forces before hand(patrols, PD, etc)? what can be done in this case? personally I think that in this case it isn't cheating unless you get caught, and if you do than well, the NAP ends anyway...

[Euarchus]

I would be happy to start on Friday. I don't have a clue how to set up Caelum, especially expansion. Also, is independent strength 5?

[rdonj]

Yes but there might be one problem: CBM installs a folder called Worthy Heroes as well and it overwrites the seperate WH install. Some people have said CBM 1.6 comes with a WH older than 1.8?
If that's not true then indeed. No need to delete WH.

I'm pretty sure worthy heroes is more out of date than cbm is, and cbm is using all the WH heroes. But, if you are worried about it, there's an easy fix. Just attempt to copy all WH images into the WH folder that comes with cbm. Then delete the WH image folder, and use the one from cbm. This will not cause any problems ad will ensure than you have all the images from both mods.

[GrudgeBringer]

Scouts are non combatants, and as such are no problem or danger.

A black servant, Skeptic or anything with a stone idol etc IS doing damage anyway and if caught (and there ARE ways to catch them...I will let you guys work on that between now and Friday as your homework assignment)I would say you are free to attack right away.

You are best to ask permission or announce that you are running a (whatever) thru their territory and will do no damage or linger.

Again, personal opinion but this ISN'T the NFL. Where there is holding on every play and it is only holding if you get caught.

If you have a NAP then someone is putting their trust in you...Break that trust and be prepared to be bombarded with spells, stealth units and sneak attacks every time they play you.

It is supposed to stay in the game, but I have never seen someone just say "Good Game and GREAT backstabbing" to a person (unless the game is based on it in the description).

I know people who actually keep a list of Honorable and dishonorable players and in other games have their allies target them also OR won't play in a game with you. If you don't care, then more power to you. But if you DO value your reputation, then I suggest you take pains to protect it.

Again, just an opinion.

[13lackGu4rd]

well, if no damage is done during the NAP, so Skeptics, Harvester of Sorrows, etc are out of the question, than was the NAP broken if I just positioned stealth troops for future damage once the NAP breaks? a black servant with some equipment isn't spreading unrest, disease, or whatever, so why is he actually causing damage, before the NAP is over that is...?

[Doo]

To celebrate Earth Hour I have uploaded an environmentally friendly Pretender. Name is Getafix.

Should be enough clues there for you to work out what it is.
Actually I'm expecting somebody to say "The number of games I've played with an X Pretender called Getafix....." :)

[GrudgeBringer]

ANY unit that can cause damage to a Nation whether it is overt or covert is breaking the nap if you have it in their lands.

It is no different than having a NUKE in the middle of London Just IN CASE we might go to war with them.

If you want to do it...go ahead. But be prepared from then on though in any game you play to have more Skeptics, Black Servants, Assassins, and anything else that can hide and wait because it will flash around this community like a lightning bolt that you are untrustworthy.

For the most part, this isn't a win at all costs game (though I suspect some do it).

Do you really think that people will trust someone that did that once, or even play with them.

They won't be feared, they will be shunned.

[GrudgeBringer]

I am for waiting until Friday if everyone else is..

[SciencePro]

yes, NAP's are a complicated issue and there is plenty of disagreement about what is and isn't okay. I am happy with whatever rules the admin decides on - just please put them in the first post and explain exactly what you mean.

Something like this (change around as you please but please be specific so we won't have arguments later):
Non aggression pact / alliance agreements are binding. When you enter one, you should specify a number of turns of warning such as a NAP-3 or NAP-5.

You are not allowed to make any direct attacks against that player until the warning is given by PM or forum and the warning period is passed. Direct attacks include:
1. An move-attack with units carrying your flag
2. A assassination by a unit carrying your flag
3. A global enchantment with a harmful effects
4. A ritual attack spell that informs the victim of who sent it

These are not considered direct attacks:
1. Anonymous spells or anonymous actions like inciting unrest
2. Non-harmful global (such as gem generators, gift of health, etc...)
3. Dominion-related actions such as preaching, stealth-preaching, or blood sacrificing
4. Moving stealthy units through an allies' territory
5. "Attacks" that have been agreed up on in advance as territory trading or unit suicide.

If one member of the NAP feels that the other is behind indirect attacks then they always break the NAP, but the appropriate warning must still be given.

[GrudgeBringer]

I disagree about stealth preaching (and I play Arco) or moving stealthy units thru a territory during a nap without permission. If you have no nap with a nation, have at it.

I find a stealth preacher messing with my dominion or an army going thru my lands with a nap in effect and I will attack without warning.

Agian, do you think that causing unrest or inciting to riot in London who is in a peace agreement with the USA is OK?

spells that attack you and you have no idea who they are, well you don't KNOW it is them.

I Guess I am saying, if you can't trust the guy you made a nap with, and I have seen his tactics before, I won't abide by it...I will sneak him in a heartbeat.

[SciencePro]

ANY unit that can cause damage to a Nation whether it is overt or covert is breaking the nap if you have it in their lands.

It is no different than having a NUKE in the middle of London Just IN CASE we might go to war with them.


Well its your game so you can make whatever rule you want (just put it in the first post please).

However, I think that an all-out ban on "any unit that can cause damage" really messes up the game balance. First off there is no such thing as a non-combatant in the game. Even an indy scout can take a province or kill some units under certain circumstances. However, some nations' default scouts have abilities such as assassination or incitement or stealth-preaching. By forbidding these, you are seriously weakening these nations - especially since indy scouts are not always easy to find.

It makes more sense to me to say that just having stealthy units in an allies territory is fine as long as they don't attack. That seems consistent with the way its been in the games I've played so far. Sure this means you could launch an attack at multiple points when the NAP ends instead of just walking in through a choke-point. But you can do the same thing with flying, teleporting, and remote attacks anyway so its not that big of an advantage.

And, no, from an role-playing perspective doing a bit of sabotage or heresy is hardly the same as having a nuke in someones' territory. Whether in a fantasy setting or in real-life nations with peace agreements or alliances have spies, saboteurs, and heathen preachers in each others' territories all the time doing all kinds of crap. As long as you can't officially trace it back to the allied government, it's all part of the "game."

[GrudgeBringer]

I agree with part of what you say....what I don't understand is why you would make a nap and then try and undermine him. Or better still PREPARING to undermine him.

Take a Skeptic...as long as he is on the move he doesn't cause harm. but say I put 7 skeptics and 3 stone idols in your cap and in about 5 turns you have over 100 unrest, just so you can't recruit and then I move them out and go to another of your forts, just to keep you weak, it is OK? Maybe I have it wrong, but if you have a Nap with me, you can pull your troops away from the border and use them somewhere else, where they are needed.

[Doo]

Technically nothing stealth should be in my lands if I have a nap and its a 100% honorable game.

In a game where nap's are not set in stone then if I found a Scout in my lands I wouldn't get too cranky, because I would most likely have Scouts in theirs. I might ask for no more Scouts in the future or if I'm doing well ask for tribute for the infraction. I wouldn't class this as cause for immediately ending the nap.

However, if any army of any size or a stealth dominion influencing unit or whatever found the nap can be instantly dissolved.

[13lackGu4rd]

well Grudge, even the CIA has operatives in London and MI5 in Washington, despite Britain and the US being close allies for a long time now... also I think you misunderstood my line of thought, I gave these things as an example of things you can/can't do during a NAP but in preparation to break it, say you signed a NAP-3, now you decide to terminate the NAP, instead of waiting 3 turns before you start moving stealthy units inside your soon to be enemy you're sending them in advance, but actually using them(aka causing harm) only after the NAP actually ends. no trust issues there, your intentions are very clear, it's just the matter of what a NAP does or does not include/allow during its fading turns...

[GrudgeBringer]

Well (lol) as you can see there are a LOT of different interpretations of a nap and how people will react to them....Science Pro has a good point about CTing in vs stealth armies already in your territory.

Just do what you feel is right and people will take it as they will I guess. I will take it different than alot of people but I also treat naps different than a lot of people.

[Swan]

Just saying i'm ok starting fryday

[Yskonyn]

This question probably shows my noob status: But aren't the only units able to move into territory of other players the stealth units?
As far as I know you can't designate an ally or a NAP in game so the game knows what is friendly territory, can you? It's only between players via a message or out of game comms. I thought moving an army into another players territory will always start a battle if there is a defending force present?

Am I missing something here?
(Good morning, by the way! :) )

[Doo]

I'll agree to starting Friday then as well.

As for "I thought moving an army into another players territory will always start a battle if there is a defending force present?" yes this is true.

As way of further explanation: CTing vs stealthing in. To start a battle in a distant province on the turn a nap ends you could either spend the remaining turns of the nap to slowly move a stealth army to the province and unstealth once the nap ends, or on the last turn you can use the Cloud Trapeze (http://dom3.servegame.com/wiki/Cloud_Trapeze) spell to "teleport" there. One way contravenes the nap, the other way doesn't.

[Yskonyn]

Like Grudge said; NAP's are a very complicated thing and we'd have a hard time to make specific rules up for it outlining what will be deemed fair and what not. As seen from the discussion a few posts back people have different sentiments about it and what one does find appropriate, the other doesn't.
So I guess we will have to freewheel a bit here, but remember what Grudge told you; people will remember.

I do, however, want to outline a few basic points as I already did in the first post. But I feel it's incomplete or not correct as it is now.
What is the common 'buffer' used in games after a break of any pact/alliance and before the fighting can start? 3 turns? It's now listed as only 1, which I made up myself.
I seem to gather from your discussions here that a 3 turn buffer is more common?

[GrudgeBringer]

Any amount of turns is OK, some like 3 and others like 5. I have even seen a 10 turn no attack rule for the first 10 turns (I think David and Golith was like that) because it was a noob game and they wanted everyone to expand freely, to give them a chance to get their feet on the ground.

I played in that game and I like that rule for new guys.

But I would let nations set there own time frame.

[Yskonyn]

Ok I hereby confirm the buffer is set to 3 turns. So when you declare an alliance is void you cannot attack the victim for three turns.
On the matter of NAP's we need to keep it simple; IF the NAP is registered here on the forum it is binding. If you have secret agreements (ones not made public here on the forum) they can be broken at your own risk.

Secondly, how do you guys feel about a player vs player hostilies-ban for 10 turns? This mean people can build up their empire for 10 turns where you are allowed to expand and attack independents, but are not allowed to attack other players?

Also the first turn will commence on friday. So everyone has enough time to think about pretender and his/her strategy with the nation played and I can go abroad without having to worry about my first turns being played out like I want. Many thanks for the consideration.

The first post is updated accordingly. :)

Oh and one question I missed earlier: Yes, independents are set on 5. ;)

[rdonj]

We also had a no attack for 10 turns rule in NvV2, which was thoroughly abused by the vets to destroy one of the players' potential economies. :)

As far as NAPs go, most tend to require 3 turns before hostilities can commence. But I've signed an NAP 10 before (never again), and shorter ones occur as well. Generally these are based on the needs of the individual nations. For the record, as some of you seem to be thinking of NAPs as quasi-alliances, I don't think that most players think of them like this. Whatever the case for this particular game, you should go into most games with the expectation that, at some point, the guy you have an NAP with may try something funny even if you are still under the NAP. Usually you will not get attacked under the flag of an NAP with no warning, but there are players who will ignore this even in binding diplo games.

[Yskonyn]

That's why I only listed the 3 turn limit rule for Alliances. Maybe we should up that to 5, to indicate its significance in relation to NAP's.
See the first post for the current 'rules'. NAP's are only binding if they're made known publicly here in this thread. Any secret agreements are at your own risk.
I've seen NAP's been signed with a specific turn count right from the start; say player A and B agree upon a NAP-5. This means, afaik, that for 5 turns they will not attack or otherwise harm eachother (including economic harm). After 5 turns it ends and it should be renewed by both players to keep it intact. Now, if this agreement was registered on the forum it is binding. If it is not, they're on their own when one decides to backstab the other.

Of course there is no game system in place to limit players from doing stuff to other players even when we say here those agreements are binding. But there is no way to counter this anyway. Like Grudge said, people will remember.

[SciencePro]

On the matter of NAP's we need to keep it simple; IF the NAP is registered here on the forum it is binding. If you have secret agreements (ones not made public here on the forum) they can be broken at your own risk.

That is a good policy i think.

Secondly, how do you guys feel about a player vs player hostilies-ban for 10 turns? This mean people can build up their empire for 10 turns where you are allowed to expand and attack independents, but are not allowed to attack other players?

that's fine by me.

The first post is updated accordingly. :)

Thanks!

[GrudgeBringer]

I think the forum binding rule is a good thing..I am all for it.

I think if a person wants a shorter nap, that it be left up to the player's doing the nap. We don't want someone NOT making a nap because they think 3 or 5 turns are to binding.

I have no problem with the 10 turn rule (we had that in David and Goliath and it worked very well) But I think you have to make a stipulation that you can NOT take a province in those 10 turns that border another nations Capitol. If you don't have that provision, I may take 2 provinces bordering your Capital and stock them with troops, on turn 11 I attack your cap and besiege it. You are done for the most part.

If you take it by accident (can't always see whats next to it), you must back out leaving NO PD in it...if it has not been taken back by turn 10...its yours.

Friday is fine for the start wth me.

[Doo]

Can we have renaming ON please?

[Yskonyn]

Great idea Grudge, I will update the first post accordingly!

Doo, renaming has already been enabled on Llama. So yes, you can have it. :)

To clarify a bit more in the 'buffer' I was talking about a few posts back (and as explained in the first post of this thread):
The 'buffer' I was talking about was the amound of turns you cannot commence hostile action against the other player after you have broken an alliance.
So if you want to cease having an alliance with player X, you notify him or her, then the 3 turns start where you cannot attack player X so he has some time to prepare and settle for the broken alliance.

This has nothing to do with NAPs. You make and brake NAP's just like Gudge suggested. You agree with the other player how you want your NAP and if its then registered on the forums its binding, if not you're on your own.
How many turns you want the NAP to hold is entirely up to the two players to decide amongst themselves.

First post is ammended accordingly. Feel free to post any questions.

I am all for the first 10 turns no hostilities pact myself as well. Including Grudge's tips to prevent the abuse rdonj was talking about.

[Yskonyn]

Ok people a few things:

First, I've misunderstuud the common NAP practise and to prevent us new players ending up in discussions over this in other games, the NAP rules are a bit different than what I have outlined before.
I thought if two players would agree on a NAP-5, for example, this was a non-agression pact for 5 turns. After this you either renew or you cease to have it.
It turns out that the most common use is different:
If two players agree on a NAP-5 those two players have a NAP until either of them cancel it, but then those 5 turns start where you are NOT allowed to attack still. Only after the 5 turns have passed you can commence hostilities.
For a NAP-3 this would be three turns and so on.
My appoligies for the confusion. The first post is ammended.

We have about half of the players now who like the idea of the 10 turn no hostilities pact at the start of the game, but I need you all to cast a vote please so we can decide if we add it to the game or not. Most votes wins.

Finally, I will be out of the country from now on, so Grudge is the man to turn to.
He ammends any rules might there be any changes needed and otherwise the game starts like we have decided upon now. The latest version of the first post in this thread should always be leading. (Except we are waiting for the 10 turn no attacks upon start at the moment).

Good luck with your preperations and I will see you all on friday!

[Doo]

10 turn no hostilities: Yes

[Trumanator]

Far be it from me to tell you guys how to run your game, but imo a ten turn no-rush rule is warping the game experience and simply putting off the need to learn how to defend against a rush. Since you lack experienced players, presumably any early rushes that do happen will be fairly straightforward and should be perfectly counterable. There really aren't many rushes that can happen inside ten turns anyway, and your settings have left out many of the nations capable of them, so I feel that the rule might not be necessary.

It is of course your game, and feel perfectly free to ignore me at your own discretion. :)

[Dark Kitty]

I'm also in favor of no hostilities during ten turns.

[earcaraxe]

I oppose the 10-turn no-hostlities rule. My reasons are:

1) won't help you significantly (or at all) if you are on the receiving side of rushing.
2) takes out excitement from the first 10 turns.
3) its an extra rule with very minimal effect (and it will make our game even more special).

and in my opinion these outweight the benefits.

...

I think the same (3rd point) about "overmaking" the rules of NAPs, for instance: making it mandatory to announce on forum or making it "binding", etc.. to sum up: making it an "official" term with given rules.

A NAP-breaker will be "punished" - given publicity - by community (for example with loss of popularity which i consider important in a game with diplomacy), just like it happens with breakers of given words in life. Of course, one can get away with it with skill and under some circumstances (just like in life), but this natural reaction adds price to agreement-breaking. My opinion - which is based on my experience ofc - is that its rare enough case for one to break his word to consider alliances and NAPs unstable (and im not living in some utopia).

To sum up: i think the argument (about NAPs) is about this: is it worth to improve reliability of NAPs (and other in-game agreements) by adding new rules?

[Squirrelloid]

Just a quick note on offensive global enchantments and NAPs.

Something like Utterdark and BoT will almost always be seen as a violation of a NAP and justification for immediate reprisal, but something like Wrath of God may not be, and something like The Wild Hunt or the admiral guy almost certainly won't be. It is of course best to talk with your treaty partners before casting a global which will negatively impact them, but if your ally does drop something kind of inconvenient, you might consider your allies intentions in casting it and his ability to target it.

(Wrath of God is strongest in caster's dominion, so if his dominion doesn't impinge on your lands, its not as threatening to you. Wild Hunt cannot be steered at all, and effects random commanders, so he isn't trying to specifically attack you. it may be worthwhile in such cases to formally announce ending the NAP instead of considering it broken, or it may be worthwhile to press your ally for an accomodation regarding it - such as a fee every time the global targets you.)

[GrudgeBringer]

Earcaraxe, I understand your point and sometimes you can OVER CORRECT for anything.

However, The binding part of the nap. You have never been in a game that an argument goes on in the game forum for 3 days and gets VERY bitter because someone has broken or misunderstood a Nap in the amount of turns or the provisions etc. It spoils the game for the rest of the people and sometimes brings in other comments that start bad blood.

So, most of us have found that the 'easiest' way to stop those kind of arguments is to put the Nap provisions (if any) and the amount of time in the forum for all to see...IF you want it to be 'binding'.

Just because it is in the forum doesn't mean someone WON'T break it, it just means that the Nap breaker is exposed for who he is, and some of the people will either put 'Sanctions' Financial or otherwise, hit him with spells like hurricane, monster boar, or outright take the side of the other Nation and break off ties and attack.

Depends on your outlook, but for the most part it goes to how you view that person when playing with him agian. I mean, even if you think it is ok to break a nap, you will still keep an eye out for him in another game. I guess that is all it does.

As far as the 10 turn rule goes, it is a 2 sided coin. Example, my first MP game I got the bad luck to be placed close to Argatha. I played Marverni and had Baal's guide in my lap and eager to go. On turn four, while my army was trying to get my expansion going and was away....Argatha stumbled upon my capitol and I was for the most part out of the game (I managed to last 12 turns). It was a miserable experience for a first game and I learned absouletly nothing except to perhaps be too cautious.

I have played in 2 10 turn Nap at start games, and both I think went well. While I agree with my friend Trumanator, I also think that it gives a new guy at least a chance to get going and maybe defend himself a little and see what it is all about.

Early rushers are early rushers, and they will just have more time to prepare. Turtles will still turtle and give them more time to prepare. And new guys will stumble around some and give them more time to find there balance.

So I guess it took a dissertation to say I agree with Yko's thinking. IF the majority wants it, we will have it, I can take care of myself either way so I have no axe to grind.:up:

BTW, it is not MANDATORY that you put the Naps in the forum, just no whining if you get stabbed in the back if you have a private Nap. I myself usually have both kinds.

[rdonj]

Here is another For the Record moment: For the record, most games do not specifically intend to operate like this (this being grudge's above post). Some games do, like this one. Most games with binding diplo don't tell you to post NAPs on the forum though. So if you do this in a normal game, don't be surprised if you're the only one ;). Even if you do that though, it could be awfully hard to prove that the person actually attacked you without ending the NAP properly first.

[13lackGu4rd]

I also disagree with this 10 turn no rush rule. 10 turns might not sound like a lot, but in a game like this that doesn't offer much room for expansion, 10 turns can be enough to get you stuck if you can't attack anybody but indies. also all of the "powerhouse nations" have been banned from this game, barring Sauromatia. so it's not like there is some crazy dual blessed jags/niefel giants/palashankas/etc to fear... moreover, such a rule is almost non existent in most other games out there, if you want this to be a learning experience you need to make it as close as other games, not impose tons of special rules that are very game specific...

[GrudgeBringer]

These are the rules he wants, it is his game and I have had conversations about them, some supportive some corrective.

You signed up for THIS game, so I guess the rules will apply to this game, If you feel you can't or don't want to play by them as you will not receive anything beneficial out of it, then I suggest politely that you withdraw and look for a more experienced game that will suite your needs.

The rules are there and the vote looks like it is in favor of a 10 turn no war start. I am just his spokesman, and as I said, I can take care of myself so I could really care less if I am rushed, I am more concerned with the other new guys in here to give them a chance.

This isn't directed at you specifically, it is just answering your post.

Look guys, this is a little different game, check the threads as EVERYONE is trying to make a game that is not the same old thing. Ysk is doing his best to accommodate everyone while making a fun game, give him a chance before judging this as it could turn out to be really fun. This isn't RTW or SP, and as you play this you will have to adapt because it is somewhat different.

I think this will make it easier to play the next 'normal'game. So, for those that want to continue, we start Friday, for those having second thoughts, we have an alternate list waiting to see if a spot opens up.

Just let me know if you have changed your mind. Thanks and I think you will get a kick out of this game if you give it a try.:up:

[13lackGu4rd]

jeez Grudge, I was simply replying to this post:

We have about half of the players now who like the idea of the 10 turn no hostilities pact at the start of the game, but I need you all to cast a vote please so we can decide if we add it to the game or not. Most votes wins.

he wanted everyone's votes, I put mine up... oh and so far those who voted on the forums are tied 2:2 so unless it was all via PMs, aka behind the scenes, than the votes are tied. well, I guess you 2 are for it but you guys are the admins...

[GrudgeBringer]

We are also players....and we vote also.

Admin simply means we are there as a courtesy to give you extensions, take holidays off, rollbacks (if needed), knowing you have not ever staled and are about to so we give another 6 hours and PM you so you WON'T stale.

And I am NOT admin...I am backup only because I am on the forum a lot and check the site so I WILL catch all those that ask questions, or extensions.

Please Understand...

These are the rules, this is how he set up the game and how it will be played unless you can convince HIM (not me) that it needs to be changed. He is out of the country without Internet access and will be back late Thursday. First turn goes out Friday, so you have about a 12 hour window to convince him of your preferences.

Vote on the forum is 4 to 2 FOR 10 turn No attack Nap to start turn (and 1 PM vote for as they don't want to be involved in all this drama). It was this vote when he left and I suspect it will stand when he gets back, so lets just get ready to enjoy ourselves and learn some stuff.:)

[Swan]

Just posting to remember you to send your pretender

[GrudgeBringer]

Thanks Swan....

YEP, tomorrow is Friday and first turn (we should be able to get a few turns in over the weekend (I know it is Easter) but we have to have all our Pretenders in to start the game...so look at them agian, redo them if you want...but get them in...PLEASE.

The vote was pretty overwhelming FOR the 10 turn no fixed NAP between all nations at the start (Hostilities can begin on turn 11).

This is pretty straight forward and common sense AND accidents will happen (such as 2 armies not seeing each other and both attack the same indie province that there is no remedy for).

The 2 most important things are...

1. No outright attacking of each other or provinces already claimed by another nation.

2. You can not attack a province that borders another nations Capitol. Agian, accidents happen as we are flying pretty blind at the start. IF that would occur the attacking nation MUST withdraw the next turn and leave NO PD in it. On turn 11 if it is still under your Banner you may fortify it and claim it as your own.

In order for it to qualify being next to your Capitol, you must be able to move DIRECTLY into the province from your CAP. Mountians and Rivers may block that movement and does NOT count as being next to Capitol, so use the button (I forget the number) that turns ON the lines that radiate out of any province you click on.

If anyone knows the number, feel free to chime in, otherwise it is in your manual.

If any questions, NOW is the time to ask...

Get ready gentlemen and lets all have an interesting and spirted game. Good Luck to all....:up:

[Euarchus]

It is "8"

[Yskonyn]

Ok people I am back!

RL statement:
A lot of things happen at the same time here and I am pleased to announce that while I was abroad we have received a new member in our family! My brother in law and his wife were blessed with their very first child. A boy named Sam and he weighs 3500 gr. Mother and child are healthy, although giving birth was a bit of a chore for the mother and they had to change from a normal delivery to a caecarean delivery.
She is recuperating in the hospital still, so that's where they keep the baby at the moment as well, but with a bit of luck both mom and Sam can go home tomorrow morning.
After I set all this up and fire up the game I go to take a first visit to meet the little one. I have become 'Uncle' for the first time!
I will be back tonight at the earliest to turn in my next turn if it would be there already, so there is not much delay -if any-.

Now for the game. I see the vote is in favour of the 10 turn no hostilities at the start limit. Grudge has lined out what can and cannot be done in these turns.
The reasoning behind this 'rule' is clearly put down here by Grudge so I do not feel the need to go over it again. The game will start in a few minutes.

I will focus on getting the game off the ground first now. So we are a go.

[Doo]

Congrats on the new family member :)

Looks like we are still one short. I would love to stay up and kick off the first turn but its 22:16 here and I'm stuffed. I'll stay up for 15 more mins and then go to bed.

[Yskonyn]

That's my pretender. It's on the internet highway as we speak.
First turn should be sent out in mere minutes.

[Doo]

Done my turn, emailed the .2h file back and off to bed.

Good luck everyone :)

[earcaraxe]

if i see it well, there are victory points on the map. thats something that is not in the description. are we playing for victory points? what are the parameters then?

[SciencePro]

The default settings for llamaserver are a standard victory which means you have to eliminate all the other players. The VP's always appear on the map regardless but in a standard game they don't do anything

[GrudgeBringer]

That is correct, last man standing will win:p

[Squirrelloid]

That's not quite true SciencePro - VP territories get a temple check for the VP.

[SciencePro]

i thought i read somewhere that the VP spread only happens in a VP victory game?

[Squirrelloid]

Watched it happen in Landlubber - i saw dominion spread from VPs where I had no temples in the area yet.

[SciencePro]

yup seems like you're right, squirrelloid. interesting...

[Yskonyn]

I have specifically told Llamaserver NOT to use VP's.
Grudge, do you have any input on this to clarify?

Does everyone have the game running properly? No issues so far?

[Swan]

isn't beatiful realising you already made a mistake?

[Yskonyn]

If its managing your empire, alas, that's the pressure resting on the shoulders of a leader.

If it's of any technical matter, please elaborate. Maybe we can fix it?

[Trumanator]

VPs are present on all maps regardless of victory conditions. They won't do anything that matters though, so don't worry.

[SciencePro]

VPs are present on all maps regardless of victory conditions. They won't do anything that matters though, so don't worry.

Well as squirrloid pointed out they do spread dominion. They don't actually lead you to victory however. Victory can only be achieved by eliminating all other players.

[Swan]

If its managing your empire, alas, that's the pressure resting on the shoulders of a leader.

If it's of any technical matter, please elaborate. Maybe we can fix it?

Don't worry, it's the pressure resting on the shoulders of a leader

[Yskonyn]

Ok good. :)

[GrudgeBringer]

No I don't, if you turned them off I have no idea.

Squirrelloid is probably morein tune to this than I am.

I thought That unless you had a VP designated win rhen they honestly didn't matter if turned off.

Sorry so late in getting back to you, had a Rugby Tourney (day 1) today, just got home and headed for the shower (for about an hour).

[Swan]

Ok good. :)

good :rolleyes:

[GrudgeBringer]

LOL, I have had a few of those 'GOOD' moments myself Swan...Hang in there;)

[Doo]

Wind Masters....

http://dom3.servegame.com/wiki/Wind_Master

Don't know they are part of indies until the joules are leaving your boots...

[rdonj]

Oh, I love those! I just recently experienced the joy of finding TWO groups of them right next to my capitol in a game... the hard way, of course. Those guys are strong enough to kill the vast majority of expansion parties a player would be fielding early on. Even the hinnoms and the niefels of the world have to be careful when tangling with the wind masters. And they like coming with items too! Like eye shields.

[SciencePro]

Its usually nice having strong indies close to your capital because once you beat them you will be able to recruit them yourself which can be a huge advantage.

[Trumanator]

Most mages you find w/indies are actually not recruitable.

[rdonj]

Wind Masters are no exception to this :). Also Bloodhenge Druids.

[Doo]

Wind Masters are no exception to this :). Also Bloodhenge Druids.

Guess who was hanging around with 2 Blood Vines in the next indie province I sauntered into? :)

I'm learning the value of direct scouting in this game...

[Yskonyn]

LOL, sounds like some serious work needed to get your empire to expand.
One other question: when scouting the game tells you roughly how many units there are and of which type, but is there a way to check those units' stats in game?
I don't really have a clue, for example, wether 20 cavemen are able to slap the living daylights out of my 40 man army or not...

[Trumanator]

LOL, sounds like some serious work needed to get your empire to expand.
One other question: when scouting the game tells you roughly how many units there are and of which type, but is there a way to check those units' stats in game?
I don't really have a clue, for example, wether 20 cavemen are able to slap the living daylights out of my 40 man army or not...

There is no way from the strat map if thats what you mean. However, you could just have your scout attack while set to retreat, then right click the cavemen.

Alternatively, you could look it up on the wiki.

[rdonj]

Wind Masters are no exception to this :). Also Bloodhenge Druids.

Guess who was hanging around with 2 Blood Vines in the next indie province I sauntered into? :)

I'm learning the value of direct scouting in this game...

Vines are ALWAYS accompanied by those guys in my experience. So if you see vines, assume bloodhenge druids. They also like to accompany woodsmen, so I always check woodsmen provinces to see if there are any vines or druids around before committing to an attack.

Cavemen! http://dom3.servegame.com/wiki/Caveman

But yes, if you want to check what's in a province, a scout set to retreat is a good idea. This also lets you confirm the exact numbers of units that are in the province. Of course, the scout needs a retreat route or it will die.

[Yskonyn]

Ah, attack and retreat. I've never thought of that. Thank you!

[Doo]

Of course there is the pressure to expand. Some nation guides I have seen say that by the end of the first year you should have around 10-12 provinces.

As to Blood Vines, I didn't send in a scout so on the map it looked just like a bunch of weakling forest dudes. Except in battle there were only about 8 of them and Blood Slaves made up the majority of units on the indies side. By the end of the battle this was not the case ;)

[Swan]

what "dominion" score means?
btw, i'm jealous of kailasa income

--edit
C'tis, land of the eternal sand, declare this: male beings of inferior races lock your mothers, wives and daughters because Niklatu, aka as "Animal kingdom's version of Chuck Norris" , is here.

[rdonj]

The dominion score is how many candles each person has (I think).

10-12 provinces should be fine for this game. In general it would probably be better to aim for 15-20, or just less than the leader if you want to ward off potential aggression. It's possible to get completely crazy, insane numbers (like LA agartha with 38, or MA ulm with 40) but that's never going to happen in an mp game and you shouldn't even try :P

[Yskonyn]

Is there any reason *NOT* to build a fortress in every province you own?

[SciencePro]

Is there any reason *NOT* to build a fortress in every province you own?

fortresses are expensive but yes, building them all over can be a good idea if you can afford it.

[Swan]

Is there any reason *NOT* to build a fortress in every province you own?

Because fort will be prevent resources "sucking" from other forts and sometimes is better a single fort with a lot of resources than more forts with less resources

[13lackGu4rd]

Is there any reason *NOT* to build a fortress in every province you own?

yes, the first is that forts are very expensive, so you usually can't afford it. the other is that forts have an admin value which controls the amount of resources and gold(I think) a fort can take from its neighboring provinces as long as those are fortless.

[Doo]

The dominion score is how many candles each person has (I think).

10-12 provinces should be fine for this game. In general it would probably be better to aim for 15-20, or just less than the leader if you want to ward off potential aggression. It's possible to get completely crazy, insane numbers (like LA agartha with 38, or MA ulm with 40) but that's never going to happen in an mp game and you shouldn't even try :P

How do you get so many in one year? Research Alteration and some Mages become indie crushing Thugs?

[13lackGu4rd]

The dominion score is how many candles each person has (I think).

10-12 provinces should be fine for this game. In general it would probably be better to aim for 15-20, or just less than the leader if you want to ward off potential aggression. It's possible to get completely crazy, insane numbers (like LA agartha with 38, or MA ulm with 40) but that's never going to happen in an mp game and you shouldn't even try :P

How do you get so many in one year? Research Alteration and some Mages become indie crushing Thugs?

nah, that only works for a few specific nations... your starting army+whatever you can recruit on your first turn should be a solid expansion party for most nations. than you can and should form another expansion party and continue expanding with both. if your nation has solid sacred units than you can use a bless, which makes expansion even quicker as you don't need that many units to expand, but your scales will be weaker than normal and your pretender would likely be imprisoned. there are also regular units that can expand very fast such as elephants, chariots(mainly the large Hinnom ones but even the regulars), etc, which allow you to form quick expansion parties too, and without the investment in the bless.

generally some nations can expand better than others, but having less than 10-12 by the end of year 1 is generally considered very bad, unless the map is small, crowded, you suffered unlucky indy events, etc.

[rdonj]

Admin value does not cause a fort to grab gold from nearby provinces. It does, however, cause the province to produce a bit extra gold supposedly. I've not really noticed any significant increase in gold from building a fort though.

To achieve a ridiculuos expansion like the ones I was talking about earlier, you need an awake SC, the ability to make an expansion party each turn from turn 1, and a second fort coming out early in the year. It also helps to have a good start location, and you can't really afford to lose expansion armies if you want to hit a number like that. Seriously though, it's not even worth considering that you'll have more than 20 provinces by the end of year one in a real game.

[13lackGu4rd]

To achieve a ridiculuos expansion like the ones I was talking about earlier, you need an awake SC, the ability to make an expansion party each turn from turn 1, and a second fort coming out early in the year. It also helps to have a good start location, and you can't really afford to lose expansion armies if you want to hit a number like that. Seriously though, it's not even worth considering that you'll have more than 20 provinces by the end of year one in a real game.

I must disagree with you here. an awake SC is needed for nations that have crappy starting/national armies and can't otherwise expand fast enough(10-15 provs) and hold off an early rush. a ridiculous expansion, 20+ even 30+ if map allows, requires a new expansion party every turn, usually a very economic expansion party. for example Mictlan/Lanka who recruit their H1B1 mage and 8-10(depending on starting dom) Jags/Palashankas every turn. they'll achieve quite a nice expansion by the end of year 1, assuming the map allows it. a more radical example would be Baalz's EK(Eagle King) expansion with Caelum, that starts on turn 5! but on turn 5 you get 4 provinces, on turn 6 you add 5 more, turn 7 you add 6 more, etc, as much as the map allows you to. and with MM3+Flying you can really cover A LOT of ground, hypothetically on turn 12 you'll have 61 provinces!

but obviously such large expansions are usually impossible, because maps usually allow 10-15 provinces/player, not more than that. so in order to get those 20-25 provinces by the end of year1 you have to beat your neighbors to their own "natural" expansion territories, and perhaps even start an early war with a weak neighbor.

[rdonj]

Well, let me rephrase that, it's how I've seen them done or assume they were done :P I can't imagine most nations being about to pull off numbers in the vicinity of 40 or more without an awake SC pretender. An EA caelum eagle king blitz with no or almost no deaths is probably one of the few that could. Theoretically they could even go faster if they could get together armies to wipe out provinces the eagle kings skipped over for being too annoying (like lizards).

[Silence0]

I apologise for my stall this turn...Real life issues caught me...I ´ll try to not let it happen again...

[Swan]

Should the god of C'tis, who gives and takes lives as the river, concerned that those demonic rats from yomi or whatever gained a vicotry point?
or is it normal?

[13lackGu4rd]

seems to be normal, VPs are turned off so besides some dom spread it doesn't do anything... but if you wish to declare war on him than go ahead, Yomi should be pretty vulnerable in the early game, but than so should C'tis...

[Squirrelloid]

Should the god of C'tis, who gives and takes lives as the river, concerned that those demonic rats from yomi or whatever gained a vicotry point?
or is it normal?

The god of C'tis should be concerned that the above sentence has no verb.

[Swan]

Should the god of C'tis, who gives and takes lives as the river, concerned that those demonic rats from yomi or whatever gained a vicotry point?
or is it normal?

The god of C'tis should be concerned that the above sentence has no verb.

The god of C'tis will take it as a no.
btw, i will take your life too.

[Doo]

Ermor, land of delicious candy, would like to remind C'tis of the 10-turn peace accord. Attacking Yomi beforehand would be not advised.

[SciencePro]

The god of C'tis should be concerned that the above sentence has no verb.

The god of C'tis will take it as a no.
btw, i will take your life too.

Squirrelloid isn't playing in this game so you'll have to wait until another game to take his life.

You could send an assassin to his house I guess but that would be way overkill for forum trolling i think.

[Swan]

i admit my message was not clear.
it wasn't a declaration of war to Yomi, as i don't even know where it is, it was just a menace message responding squirreloid.
I repeat, i'm not attacking Yomi, and will not attack it even when squirrelloid will be back.

[13lackGu4rd]

Yomi is played by Dark Kitty, Squirreloid isn't even playing in this game, so no idea why you keep mixing him into this...

[GrudgeBringer]

Folks...some of you need to read your Privite messages ASAP.

[Squirrelloid]

Yomi is played by Dark Kitty, Squirreloid isn't even playing in this game, so no idea why you keep mixing him into this...

Squirrelloid has no nation.
Squirrelloid needs no nation.

[Yskonyn]

Grudge? What did that remark mean?

[GrudgeBringer]

I sent 2 privite messages to 2 nations and got one response.

I wanted to make sure everyone checks there PM's sot here isn't a bunch of trouble later.:up:

[Swan]

RL troubles, i will skip this turn

[13lackGu4rd]

RL troubles, i will skip this turn

you don't just skip a turn, you ask for an extension... tell Grudge how long you need and he'll give it to you. don't just stale turns for no reason...

[Swan]

no need to let 9 people waste 24 hour for the mistake of one, also it's just turn 9, i won't lose anything

[13lackGu4rd]

no need to let 9 people waste 24 hour for the mistake of one, also it's just turn 9, i won't lose anything

actually, turn 9 is still in the critical year 1 as far as getting your empire together via indy expansion... also this "waste" is very normal in PBEM games so don't feel bad about delaying the game for a bit...

[Doo]

Swan, I don't mind a delay.

[GrudgeBringer]

Gentlemen, part of my job as admin is to allow reasonable extensions so that the game stays balanced and we all have fun.

We don't need an extension every turn but EVERYBODY has to have them once in a while as life gets in the way.

Just PM me or post it in the Forum as I usually go by here 2 or 3 times a day.

We will be extending this turn 24 hours effective NOW.

Than you BlackGuard for bring this to my attention:up:

[earcaraxe]

Dear player-godwannabe-fellows!

I currently organizing a 3-day conference which started on friday, and it will end on monday in the morning. I thought previously that i will have the time to write my turns, but it seems it is highly unlikely that i can manage this (we sleep and live on the spot, with very little computer time for everyone). Its a once-in-a-year occasion for me. I have already sent my h2 file for turn 11, but i would like to ask for a delay until monday 23:00 greenwich time for the next turn.

awaiting your answer,

thanks

[Doo]

I'm ok with it.

[GrudgeBringer]

36 hour extension is granted

[earcaraxe]

36 hour extension is granted

thanks very much!

Now im back at home, the conference ended and im soon gonna issue my next turn.

[Euarchus]

I didn't answer the PM because I didn't really have anything to add.

[Swan]

Guys, i've some problems here, can i have 24 hours delay?
I'll be looking for a temporary sub until saturday, i'm sorry.

[Doo]

No worries

[GrudgeBringer]

24 hr extension grated to swan

[Yskonyn]

Swan the turn will host tonight if we don't do anything.
Will you make it or do we need to extend the window for you?

[earcaraxe]

Guys, are my sent mails supposed to go in the sent mail folder?

Mine is empty. I suspect that my last three PMs didnt arrive to the adressee (Yskonyn, Blackguard). Could you confirm? thx

[Doo]

You need to tick the box at the bottom of the message that says something like "Save message after send", otherwise they don't save.

[Squirrelloid]

Guys, are my sent mails supposed to go in the sent mail folder?

Mine is empty. I suspect that my last three PMs didnt arrive to the adressee (Yskonyn, Blackguard). Could you confirm? thx

You didn't realize you needed an eidetic memory to conduct diplomacy in this game? Sucker.

More seriously, true allies quote diplomatic agreements in responses so both parties have a copy. Friends don't let friends forget treaty terms!

[earcaraxe]

thanks guys!

[13lackGu4rd]

dont worry, your messages have been sent, at least to me...

[rdonj]

Also, when you are sending messages, if you scroll down to "additional options" you can save copies of the messages you send.

[Swan]

I'm back, just sent my 2h

[Yskonyn]

DECLARATION OF WAR:

Today, from our west, Kailasa has raided our lands. This unprovoked attack has nevertheless been repelled and resulted in a humiliating defeat for Kailasa,
Marverni is now in a state of war with the apes of Kailasa and hereby we send out a Call to Arms to all our allies to rid this world of the treacherous apes.

For glory and honour!

[SciencePro]

Pangea is pleased to announce a public NAP-3 with Marveni.

[Yskonyn]

Guys, I have unfortunate news (at least for you guys ;) ):
I will be going on a paragliding holiday next week. I will leave saturday and I will return sunday the week after. Unless we want to pause the game for a whole week, which I do not recommend now that hostilities have started, I am hereby looking for a temporary sub.

This also means that my admin duties will be gone for a week. Grudge, might I ask you to remain extra vigilant during this time?

I have altered the first post accordingly.

[GrudgeBringer]

If Sauro will do me the favor of taking my 2 last 2 provinces, I will watch over the game and keep all the piggies in the pen.

If he does it fast enough I may be able to sub for you although I have never played Marverni (I have fought Marverni but never played them) as long as you tell me specifically what you want done.

However, in any case...if you need something post it in the forum and I will drop by at least twice a day or you can PM me.

Any arguments or decisions on gameplay since I am out of the game, will be my decision during the time he is gone...from rollbacks to extensions. If that is agreed upon, I would be happy to help out.:up:


Guys, I have unfortunate news (at least for you guys ;) ):
I will be going on a paragliding holiday next week. I will leave saturday and I will return sunday the week after. Unless we want to pause the game for a whole week, which I do not recommend now that hostilities have started, I am hereby looking for a temporary sub.

This also means that my admin duties will be gone for a week. Grudge, might I ask you to remain extra vigilant during this time?

I have altered the first post accordingly.

[13lackGu4rd]

can I have a 6-8 hour extension please?

[GrudgeBringer]

8 hour extension granted for Blackguard

[Swan]

i'm sorry about last turn stale, i thought i had send the 2h but i didn't

[GrudgeBringer]

Gentlemen,

Marverni just left for a week to go Para-gliding and out of desperation has changed the game to me to try and muck it up for him until he gets back.

He has explained the diplomatic situation but I may be PMing a couple of you to find out what is exactly going on.

We have 1 small problem...I myself am leaving for Indy NEXT Friday to play in a Rugby Tourney next weekend. I will do the most current turn at that time and then extend it until Monday and he gets back to take it over.

If you hear a scream...that is him seeing how I have managed to destroy his nation!!

Remember, I am the admin while he is away...If you need an extension or have a problem leave a message here or PM me and I will try and get it resolved.

Thanks guys!!:up:

[GrudgeBringer]

I am putting a PM on the forum not to embarrass anyone, but rather to show how one persons attitude can really make some enemies in Dom 3.

You read it from bottom to top...I admit I will sound pretty petty to some...but he had an agreement with a player that will be gone a week and decided to 'just break it for some action'.

There is no reason for that, as I said "he could have waited If you had an agreement with someone that gave them a province, why would you break it and be so caviler about it, "just so you could get some action"?

It is Marverni for pitys sake, he can't stop you...he can't stop anybody. And for that matter he is out of town with 8 little provinces and I am just subbing for him. I asked permission to take 41 not out of 'fear' of you, but rather in the spirt of the game. You are the biggest in the game, you could have waited for him to come back and say it to his face.

Do what you will...

You are being arrogant, a bully, and a blatant backstabber.

I look forward to seeing you when you decide your NOT a noob anymore and want to play with the 'big boys'.

I am going to put this on the forum so the others can see what kind of attitude will get others to NOT want them in a game.

I saw this coming with Arco and made you and Caelem the same offer to just take me over so I could go on to my other games that are in the end game stage. For some reason Caelem didn't take me up on the offer.

Do what you will, I will not respond to you anymore.



Dear and wise Arco-born adviser of Marverni!

Nice to meet you again. :)

We had an agreement with marverni about him having 41. But I would like to have 41 this turn and im sending an army there as I would like some action.

with best regards

The Which Kings

Greetings from Marverni...

This is GrudgeBringer taking over Marverni for a week for while the leader goes Para-gliding.

he says you guys have had a conversation but didn't tell me what was said.

(congrats by the way, I see you are leading the pack)

If you have no designs on Marverni at the moment, do you mind if I 'try' and take 41 and will go no farther south and will leave no troops in the province.

I would appreciate a week long Nap while he is gone so I can 'try' and get him squared away. He will be trying to expand North so eventually he will be doing the work for you. He is no danger to you at all.

Look forward to hearing from you...

Thanks:up:

[earcaraxe]

Greetings!

In a nutshell: I agreed with marverni about 10 turns ago on our borders. No NAP, no timetable on it, it was about a two-two sentences long discussion.

I would like to provide my view on this:

1) I think Yskonyn being out of town should not play a role here. I acted independently of it (actually I planned the attack a long time ago, and then he went gliding unexpectedly). Do u guys think if someone is replaced by a temporaly sub means that he has to be treated (for instance not attacked) differently? I'm open to a discussion about it.

2) I dont consider my attack a backstabbing nor dishonesty. I agreed with marverni on our borders about 10 turns ago. We didnt make a NAP. My opinion is that agreeing on borders is not binding, as it would mean that I would not be allowed to attack him anytime without being a "backstabber". I consider my message to marverni as a declaration of war. I even informed Marverni about my attack which I think was not an obligation in the moral sense.

3) In my view: I didnt intend to do anything you (Grudgebringer) should (could) take personal. I consider all my acts in this matter to be within the boundaries of the game. And because its it is a strategic game, (declaration of) wars happen.

Please feel free to give feedback as I would like to have your opinions.

thx

The Which Kings/earcaraxe

[Euarchus]

I do not have a problem with earcaraxe's behaviour. If Yksonne did not get a NAP, that was a poor decision.

[Doo]

Without wanting to talk about my actual in game activities, I have found that in the diplomacy I have done with two players no real attempt on either side was made to lock in a NAP time-frame.

I guess we all have different opinions regarding this (from the OP):

"Who should join: Noobz, Internediate players, Vets who won't play agressively, but pose a helpful attitude towards the noobs in- as well as out of game.
-Who should NOT join: People looking for a no-holds-barred war, experienced players looking to win easily or agressively, people who definately want to play with nations that are banned; there will be no discussion."

Very open to individual interpretation.

[vfb]

(snip)
Do what you will...

You are being arrogant, a bully, and a blatant backstabber.

I look forward to seeing you when you decide your NOT a noob anymore and want to play with the 'big boys'.


Well, that's way out of line, firing off a personal attack because of an in-game situation. It looks even worse since, from reading the game thread, it appears that this player is the one who just eliminated you, freeing you up to sub.

And what's with the whining?

(snip)
BTW, it is not MANDATORY that you put the Naps in the forum, just no whining if you get stabbed in the back if you have a private Nap. I myself usually have both kinds.

You weren't even stabbed in the back. Your agreement was not posted in the game thread. He even gave you more-than-fair warning that he is attacking an indy province.

[GrudgeBringer]

1. This wasn't about me...I GAVE him my territoies without a fight(and also asked Calem if he wanted some also)as I am in 3 end games and honestly didn't have time to mess with it, I was just helping Ysk get this off the ground...

2. Not knowing the situation as a sub, I asked if it was ok to take a certain province, If he said No, then I would have backed off it.

In HIS words all he said was that he had agreed to give that province to Marverni, but now decided "he wanted some action" so he was going to run an army up there and attack that province.

I don't see how agreeing on boundries so you can expand in peace constitues a NAP...but it DOES convey a promise. A promise that can be broken for sure, but don't try and disquise it as because it was 10 turns ago and it isn't valid now.

Part of my tirade (if you want to call it that) was due to the same attitude I have had in discussions with him before. As you can see I tried to be civil when asking him about the situation.

There was no discussion, only a flippent comment.

I didn't ask if anybody agreed with me, nor do I actually care.
I stand by what I said and my opinion of his actions are not going to change.

VFB, you know I always keep my word and have no use for those that don't, so your particular comment suprises me. And whining...You don't hear me whining for myself, I could care less about this game, only my promise to YSK

NOW, I am supposed to be admin for this game until he gets back...The way I see it I can just put it on hold until he returns, or I can look in and make sure the game is running smoothly. Either way, I have had my say and will not discuss it furthur with anyone.

If you would like to wait for his return, then post it in the forum..otherwise I will try and keep this going as best I can.

We have both had our say and there is no need for further comment on the subject. There is no need for this game to go up in flames over something between two people.

[SciencePro]

You are being arrogant, a bully, and a blatant backstabber.


yeah that kind of name-calling is totally uncalled for. You would do better to treat players with respect, especially since you are admin (co-admin, acting-admin whatever).


We have both had our say and there is no need for further comment on the subject. There is no need for this game to go up in flames over something between two people.


Whenever you use language like you did in your post, you can expect to start an argument. It's just the way things go on internet forums. If you don't want drama then don't start things up.

Also, you should know that posting PM's without permission is against the forum rules (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/misc.php?do=cfrules).

[GrudgeBringer]

OK, whether you like, don't like, agree, disagree, or just don't care, this is over.

Science pro,I appreciate you showing me a link to the rules and will be sure to read it this evening. VFB has already posted on here and I find that sufficient.

As I said, I am not going to change my mind about this situation, but there always are two sides to the story.

Lets get on with the game as we have taken enough time for this.
I am trying to be a friend to YSK and look after this game until next Monday, and even tho I have no interest in playing...I am subbing.

I'm sure earcaraxe and I will work this out in our own way in the future.

Soooooooo, unless you guys want to wait until Monday when YSK gets back...lets just stop this here and continue on.:up:

[Euarchus]

Hi all, I was just reviewing the rules, and I realise I've broken one - I've colonised one water province. I'm really sorry about this, I just didn't realise. I'm not sure what I can do about it, but it has no PD so hopefully it will get an event?

[13lackGu4rd]

Hi all, I was just reviewing the rules, and I realise I've broken one - I've colonised one water province. I'm really sorry about this, I just didn't realise. I'm not sure what I can do about it, but it has no PD so hopefully it will get an event?

set taxes in the underwater province to 0 so you won't gain gold form it. don't produce any units from it and don't site search it. if you happened to have found a level 0 gem producing site than build 1 commander in that province along with a lab and put all the gems you get from that site alone on your commander each turn. say it's a Kelp Forest that provides 1 Nature gem, each turn you put a single Nature gem on that commander, so you won't be able to use an advantage gained illegally.

[Doo]

Hi all, I was just reviewing the rules, and I realise I've broken one - I've colonised one water province. I'm really sorry about this, I just didn't realise. I'm not sure what I can do about it, but it has no PD so hopefully it will get an event?

Stick the Tax up to 200 and raise some unrest. Or set Tax to 0. What do others think?

*edit* Do you have a castle adjacent to the water province? Then you get a little bonus resource in the castle.

[GrudgeBringer]

I think in the long term (and less micro-management) if you set the taxes to Max (200 I think) it will give you no benifits in a short period of time and the effects you get now will be negligible.

The big thing is if you get gems from the province, you will just have to be on your honor about that. One vanilla province is not a big thing, 3 or 4 would be.

[Euarchus]

I've stuck taxes up to 200, built a commander and will give him 7 water gems (I think I've had the province 6 or 7 turns), will keep giving them as time goes on. The province is next to a fort, but I don't really use resources, I don't think they've ever been a limiting factor on my build queues. Hopefully this will sort the problem out promptly.

[GrudgeBringer]

I think that will satisfy everyone, and thank you for pointing out the mistake and coming up with a soulution.

If anyone has a better plan, please speak up now..

[earcaraxe]

Hi all, I was just reviewing the rules, and I realise I've broken one - I've colonised one water province. I'm really sorry about this, I just didn't realise. I'm not sure what I can do about it, but it has no PD so hopefully it will get an event?

Stick the Tax up to 200 and raise some unrest. Or set Tax to 0. What do others think?

*edit* Do you have a castle adjacent to the water province? Then you get a little bonus resource in the castle.

So one has to own a neighboring province for his castle to be able to suck production from it?

[Doo]

Yup, thats why on turn 1 you can't recruit much but as you conquer the indies adjacent more can be recruited.

Test it with EA Abysia :)

[Graeme Dice]

*edit* Do you have a castle adjacent to the water province? Then you get a little bonus resource in the castle.

Water provinces do not provide resources to land provinces and vice versa.

[GrudgeBringer]

Thank you, as I have never had the occasion to play a water nation or go into the water I did not know that.

that is good to know!!:up:

[Doo]

Thats really good to know. I wondered about maps where 1 water province is connected to something like 8 land provinces and a couple of water ones.

[GrudgeBringer]

As you know I am subbing for Ysk this week while he is Para-Gliding.

I myself will be leaving Friday afternoon to play Rugby in Indy and will not be back until Sunday evening.

Depending on how turns are sent in I will be extending the last turn until Monday Morning.

If we hurry on our turns we can get 2 maybe 3 in by then...if not then the last turn will be extended and I will not be sending in the turn so there can't be a quickhost.

Ysk MAY be back before I do in which case he can do the turn and get you guys back on the road.

[Doo]

Cheers for the heads up :)

[GrudgeBringer]

Gentlemen, I am going to extend this turn until Monday afternoon as I am not sure when YSK will get back. IF for some reason he doesn't get back by the time I get back, I will force host and do the next turn also.

I am out of town for all concerned as of right now and YSK will be your contact for extensions etc.

Good Luck All!!:up:

[GrudgeBringer]

They had to cancel the tournament because of possible flooding so wwhen are turns are in I will force host and we will continue until Ysk gets back.

No use holding everyone up if I will be here.

[Doo]

Bugger about the tournament but good to have you back with us in Oceans of Land :)

[Dark Kitty]

The nation of Yomi is starting an exchange student program starting today. We are willing to invite young ladies (preferably virgin). Their job would be to assist in the study of one of the most forsaken paths of magic...

[OOC]
I am going to need a sub from this week-end until the next week-end at least. Where is the best place to post about it?

[13lackGu4rd]

start a new thread with the title "looking for sub" and add whatever you want to it. you can also add a post to the sticky.

[Ragnars Wolves]

wrong thread sorry

[Dark Kitty]

Thank you 13lackGu4rd

The nation of Yomi would like to exchange gems for earth gems and blood slaves.

[GrudgeBringer]

I told Ysk to not worry about heading back too quick as he was being attacked anyway and I would see to his nations funeral.

I havn't heard from hin at all, I hope he got back alright.

Anyway, Marverni is now done and I have fullfilled my obligation to him and you guys.

As of now you don't have an admin for extensions etc (unless Ysk wants to continue it and I really doubt that since he is out he will want to), so you might want to put your heads together and figure out what to do now.

Good luck to all and see you next game...files are being deleted.:up:

[13lackGu4rd]

ummm, Grudge, since you still have admin powers than can you please remain the admin of this game until we know for sure that Ysk has returned? or if not than give someone else the admin password so he can act as co-admin in case we need extensions and stuff... or heck, since Ysk's nation is gone we can't really expect him to stuck around as admin. so, anybody volunteer to take on admin duties...?

[Yskonyn]

Here I am to save the day!!
It all took a bit longer than expected cause my boss decided he needed me right after I returned from my trip. Effectively making my absence longer cause I was put in a hotel again! ;)

Anyway here I am again. Marverni lies in ruin, alas.
Indeed now that I am gone I really have no wish to have to keep checking in here to admin the game, so i suggest you guys decide on who will be the new admin.
I will provide the password to that person and you can all go along your merry ways.

I wish to thank Grudge for being an excellent admin and standin as well as diplomat here on the boards!

[SciencePro]

i can volunteer to admin. I've done it a few times before and I check the forums at least 1/day

[Yskonyn]

Does anyone else want to volunteer or object to sciencepro? If not I will go ahead and make him the new admin. I will do so tomorrow if noone reacts here.

[Dark Kitty]

Hello,

I didn't find a sub in time, so I might have to stall two or three turns during next week. I apologize in advance for any inconvenience it might cause.

[SciencePro]

hmmm we can delay for a few days if you need it. Will you be gone an entire week or just certain days?

[Dark Kitty]

It's ok, no need to make everyone wait, as I am not sure which turns I might have to stall anyway. I'll try to get as much turns in as I can

[Yskonyn]

SciencePro is the admin from here on. Good luck and have fun!

[SciencePro]

Okay I am admin now. If Kitty or anyone needs a delay, let me know here or by PM please.

[earcaraxe]

i got two messages this turn: "... was mentally attacked by an enemy mage" Is it the mind hunt spell?

I have 3 neighbors with 2 of them (Kailasa and Caelum) I had an active NAP this turn, and beacause its a clear violation of it, it most probably came from my 3rd neighbor Pangaea. Its a conclusion i find a little hard to believe, because its a S4 spell (and there were 2 of it, so not just pretender), but i dont have many choices. Unless someone convinces me otherwise.

[13lackGu4rd]

i got two messages this turn: "... was mentally attacked by an enemy mage" Is it the mind hunt spell?

I have 3 neighbors with 2 of them (Kailasa and Caelum) I had an active NAP this turn, and beacause its a clear violation of it, it most probably came from my 3rd neighbor Pangaea. Its a conclusion i find a little hard to believe, because its a S4 spell (and there were 2 of it, so not just pretender), but i dont have many choices. Unless someone convinces me otherwise.

first of all, yes it's a mind hunt spell. second of all, it can be cast from anybody, even someone across the map from you. as you know, having scouts all over the place is common practice, so you can't really rule out anybody... also while not all nations have Astral, it's no impossible to bootstrap into it if you don't have it at all, and Astral is generally considered as the strongest magic path for spells(Death stronger for summons, mainly tarts), also remember that you can put Astral on pretender too, and it's usually very beneficial to do so.

[rdonj]

On the other hand, on turn 23 it is extremely unlikely that pangaea could have two such mages even if it did have astral on its pretender. It would have had to have gotten a lucky event bringing it a shadow seer or some such.

[earcaraxe]

On the other hand, on turn 23 it is extremely unlikely that pangaea could have two such mages even if it did have astral on its pretender. It would have had to have gotten a lucky event bringing it a shadow seer or some such.

thats why i wrote it was hard believe.

[earcaraxe]

i got two messages this turn: "... was mentally attacked by an enemy mage" Is it the mind hunt spell?

I have 3 neighbors with 2 of them (Kailasa and Caelum) I had an active NAP this turn, and beacause its a clear violation of it, it most probably came from my 3rd neighbor Pangaea. Its a conclusion i find a little hard to believe, because its a S4 spell (and there were 2 of it, so not just pretender), but i dont have many choices. Unless someone convinces me otherwise.

first of all, yes it's a mind hunt spell. second of all, it can be cast from anybody, even someone across the map from you. as you know, having scouts all over the place is common practice, so you can't really rule out anybody... also while not all nations have Astral, it's no impossible to bootstrap into it if you don't have it at all, and Astral is generally considered as the strongest magic path for spells(Death stronger for summons, mainly tarts), also remember that you can put Astral on pretender too, and it's usually very beneficial to do so.

Thanks. Altough I - of course - know that it can be cast by anybody. Since then I read it costs only 2 gems - and one mageturn -, which is not much if the mage doesnt get caught.

I still wonder who it was.

[rdonj]

If you're not sure who it is, the best solution is to pretend it's who you want it to be :)

[SciencePro]

it wasn't me.

i got two messages this turn: "... was mentally attacked by an enemy mage" Is it the mind hunt spell?

I have 3 neighbors with 2 of them (Kailasa and Caelum) I had an active NAP this turn, and beacause its a clear violation of it, it most probably came from my 3rd neighbor Pangaea. Its a conclusion i find a little hard to believe, because its a S4 spell (and there were 2 of it, so not just pretender), but i dont have many choices. Unless someone convinces me otherwise.

[Euarchus]

Wasn't me either. If you're looking for a nation with plenty of astral, then well... Also, a few of my eagle kings have been mind hunted too.

[Silence0]

Can i get a 24h extension please?

[SciencePro]

okay 24 hours added

[Euarchus]

In a week my university final exams start. They last a week (from Tuesday 25th May to Wednesday 2nd June). In that period, I would like 48 hour turn gaps, because I am going to be very busy and obviously these exams are quite important. Is this okay with people?

[Silence0]

Thanks for the extension... I had free time sooner than expected so my turn is already in...I would also prefer a 48h schedule...

[SciencePro]

interval changed to 48 hours

[earcaraxe]

Hi!

I have a great deal of earth gems i would like to trade. PM me if interested. (I will keep my trading partner's name secret)

[Doo]

Hi All

Can I get a 1 day extension please?

[SciencePro]

24 hours added

[earcaraxe]

I would like to know if copying Bogus's order a banned trick?

If it isnt set, i would like to know your opinion about this.

[Dark Kitty]

It seems Caelum has quit a few turns ago, I tried to contact him but got no response. Maybe we should think about finding a sub? or setting Caelum to AI?