Wrote this e-mail to Arki. I left you out since you're the voice of reason in this whole thing.
Hey Arki - I saw your post in the tech thread and I'm sorry that you feel the game has not helped you learn more about Civ4. I would encourage you, however, to take some responsibility for your own behaviour during this game and your own role in learning.
I also only started playing Civ4 one year ago. I started this game as a dedlurker and became a player only when HBHR and Kurumi disappeared. I hate doing diplomacy, but I understood that it was an important part of the game. I invested my free time in writing messages: I felt I did my best to communicate clearly my expectations and to meet the expectations of the players who took the time to write to me.
That's why I was so angry when I thought LP broke our original agreement - an agreement clearly documented over several e-mails. It made me feel like I had wasted my time and that another player simply wasn't paying attention. It's also why I felt very bad when I realized you had taken over for LP and were just doing your best.
But as the game progressed it seemed to me that you were not doing your best. Why hadn't you simply reviewed the e-mails I had previously written to LP? Or asked for clarification when you took over?
It also made me feel like I had wasted my time when I made a trade with you in the game and it took you a full 30 turns to deliver on your end of the bargain. I continuously had to revise my game plan for what appeared to be your convenience. And I couldn't say anything for fear that you would just change your mind and never follow through.
And presently I have no idea what you mean when you say you are in a "fucking awkward position where 5T means nothing unless explains what it means". You yourself signed this agreement:
(1) Both parties agree to a NAP ending T150 unless renegotiated on or before t140.
(2) Both parties agree that so long as the NAP is in effect, neither party shall settle more than 5T from its capital in the direction of the other without first coming to a mutual agreement.
If you didn't understand it, why not ask for clarification at the time? It means exactly what it says.
I acknowledge that I haven't been a friend to you - I don't think we need to be friends in order to play a game. But I certainly don't believe you have somehow been treated unfairly.
Be well - suttree
I also only started playing Civ4 one year ago. I started this game as a dedlurker and became a player only when HBHR and Kurumi disappeared. I hate doing diplomacy, but I understood that it was an important part of the game. I invested my free time in writing messages: I felt I did my best to communicate clearly my expectations and to meet the expectations of the players who took the time to write to me.
That's why I was so angry when I thought LP broke our original agreement - an agreement clearly documented over several e-mails. It made me feel like I had wasted my time and that another player simply wasn't paying attention. It's also why I felt very bad when I realized you had taken over for LP and were just doing your best.
But as the game progressed it seemed to me that you were not doing your best. Why hadn't you simply reviewed the e-mails I had previously written to LP? Or asked for clarification when you took over?
It also made me feel like I had wasted my time when I made a trade with you in the game and it took you a full 30 turns to deliver on your end of the bargain. I continuously had to revise my game plan for what appeared to be your convenience. And I couldn't say anything for fear that you would just change your mind and never follow through.
And presently I have no idea what you mean when you say you are in a "fucking awkward position where 5T means nothing unless explains what it means". You yourself signed this agreement:
(1) Both parties agree to a NAP ending T150 unless renegotiated on or before t140.
(2) Both parties agree that so long as the NAP is in effect, neither party shall settle more than 5T from its capital in the direction of the other without first coming to a mutual agreement.
If you didn't understand it, why not ask for clarification at the time? It means exactly what it says.
I acknowledge that I haven't been a friend to you - I don't think we need to be friends in order to play a game. But I certainly don't believe you have somehow been treated unfairly.
Be well - suttree
OVERVIEW:
CITIES:
