FFH II PBEM VIII Lurker's Lurking Thread (For Lurkers) [SPOILERS]

[Tasunke]

In other news, it looks like Ravus will find out Sareln's "betrayal" once he actually looks at his save.

Mr Yellow could still very well join in on the "kill Ravus craze" and I fear both Ravus's anger and the universal temptation to join in on a dogpile could cause Sareln to join in on the fun.

This means a dead ravus in 10+ turns, my best guess.

[Selrahc]

With Sacrifice the weak, the shrine and Ashen Veil spread complete I have no more reason or methods to raise the AC.

If Mr Yellow believes that, then I might see if he wants to buy the Sydney Opera House.

It might just be me, but I think Ravus has been pretty self defeating in his diplomacy. He's attempting to hide stuff that any reasonably aware opponent will easily pick up on. He's lying to his "allies" about fairly inconsequential things, and denying his AC plan in a half hearted transparent way.

For instance: Sareln was his firmest ally in the game. Sareln also happens to be in a civ that is pretty much awesome at battling armageddon. If a Horseman spawns near, and proves to be a *real* problem then he can trigger his worldspell. Bringing him on board with the plan would have prevented that catastrophic AC drop and Sareln becoming alienated and letting Mackoti use his land as a staging ground.

Instead, Ravus has just denied everything and *thanked* Sareln for the AC drop in an incredibly insincere way. Blatantly lying isn't going to get Sareln regretting his decisions.

Perhaps Ravus just doesn't realize how obvious his plans are? Events get broadcast to the world. Everybody knows he has been Prophecy of Ragnaroking and the strategy isn't exactly obscure. Everybody has picked up on it. Mackoti has even commented on it multiple times in the tech thread... But Ravus refuses to come clean to his potential allies and do some damage control.

[Mardoc]

It might just be me, but I think Ravus has been pretty self defeating in his diplomacy. He's attempting to hide stuff that any reasonably aware opponent will easily pick up on. He's lying to his "allies" about fairly inconsequential things, and denying his AC plan in a half hearted transparent way.

I see it as part of the same fundamental mistake - he thinks reaching Armageddon and winning are essentially the same thing.

If that were true, then no one would have any reason to cooperate, since that would mean they lose. But then - if that were true, he'd be just a few turns from victory at the moment, and would just need to survive until the horsemen win him the game. A breakdown in relations right now would be tolerable and expected, just like no one expects to remain at peace when they have four Towers built. The only reason it looks so bad to us is that we know it won't win him the game.

It's true, he could have done better diplo if he weren't treating Armageddon as his secret weapon - but then his whole game would be different.

[Tasunke]

yea, he should have been more open about it with his allies, and been more frank that its not to "destroy the world" but to get a cool super unit.

well ... I don't know how hammer heavy his Holy City is, so it might not have mattered anyways, but this unrealistic approach to the appocalypse is kind of unhealthy (although I have done it many times)

... you spend all your resources in trying to create the appocalypse, and you and everyone else thinks for some reason its an "i win" button so they all try to kill your civ ... although once those settings are set, and everyone is trying to PREVENT it ... I think you have the proper context for a true victory.

Meaning that even if you won the game, bringing the appocalypse against all odds was a victory among itself.

[Gaspar]

Meaning that even if you won the game, bringing the appocalypse against all odds was a victory among itself.

Yeah, much as I hate to agree with this, I fail to see why this whole lurker thread is treating Ravus as some kind of failure because he wanted to do something different. Maybe he never would have won, but I think having the cajones to try this in MP is definitely to his credit.

I do agree with Selrahc that his diplomacy has been lacking, he's definitely not giving his opponents sufficient credit for their intelligence.

Lastly, I'm surprised Sareln hasn't caught any flack in here for what is a pretty clear NAP-stab. They were under the terms of the current to 150 deal, which was for all intents an alliance, and they had reupped another 25t. I don't know anyone who wouldn't consider allowing an opponent to use their lands as a staging ground as a violation of a NAP. I guess I see why Sareln wouldn't care about his reputation given he wants out of the game, but I'd also expect better from him, honestly.

[Bobchillingworth]

I don't know anyone who wouldn't consider allowing an opponent to use their lands as a staging ground as a violation of a NAP.

Huh. Actually, I'd certainly be upset if someone used their NAP with me to allow an enemy to attack me through their territory, and it would be an abuse of the agreement, but I'm not sure that I would consider it outright broken.

[DaveV]

NAPs are pretty poorly defined, in general, and seem to rely on the good faith of the signees. Kind of like Humpty Dumpty said: it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.

The only solution I see is for one of the members who is Actually A Lawyer to draft up some boilerplate document that would be the default NAP agreement. That cure is probably worse than the disease, though.

Or, just play no-diplo games (my preferred choice).

[Gaspar]

I agree on both counts, that NAPs are poorly defined AND that no-diplo games is preferable, but this particular NAP extended beyond the bounds of normal non-aggression anyway - and is well reported since Ravus has included all the emails from both sides. Not really trying to argue the validity of NAPs in general, but rather the fact that Sareln has violated this particular one. At a minimum the map trade with mackoti violates a clause - no map trades with 3rd parties. Its irrelevant now, the game is over in mackoti's favor, but just thought it odd.

The only real drama left is to see how much damage Krill can do before mackoti wins.

[Mardoc]

Yeah, much as I hate to agree with this, I fail to see why this whole lurker thread is treating Ravus as some kind of failure because he wanted to do something different. Maybe he never would have won, but I think having the cajones to try this in MP is definitely to his credit.

Y'know - that's a good point. I reread a few of Ravus' opening posts, and nowhere does he say 'when I get to AC100 I win'. Just stuff like

I like the Orcs. I like raising the AC while playing the Orcs. It will be amusing to see if I can do this quickly enough not to fall to a dogpile once the others realise what is happening.

So yeah. Kudos! Ravus may not survive the attempt, but I think it's quite clear that Armageddon has been brought. Between the chaos of the wars breaking out, the horsemen and Krill well and truly loose in the world - they're not stuffing the genie back in the bottle.

[Tasunke]

The only real drama left is to see how much damage Krill can do before mackoti wins.

I dunno ... with demons being death immune, he'll be able to put up one hell of a fight. I think things could get interesting if say, Sareln decided to not let Mockoti have the win ... then it would be between Sareln, Mockoti, and Infernals.

but seeing as that might have to involve elves and demons working together ... might not happen eh?