I wanted to make it clear to superdeath that he should not answer your question. Yes, I could have posted in both your threads instead of publicly, but superdeath might read and answer the tech thread before reading his own thread. If you thought SD forgot to hit enter then your question was phrased poorly in addition to being poorly asked. Not that you should have asked whether SD forgot to hit enter, because it's not like he forgot to hit enter while being last to play. In the scenario where he forgot to hit enter, he would check for a new turn within the next 24h and notice that he didn't end turn, and thus he'd be able to end turn without slowing down the game.
Either way you've made repeated posts about lurkers not revealing things when you've revealed the most things with your posts. It was completely needless for you to post the bit about "If it leaves anybody at disadvantage they can do this a few turns later." All you had to do was wait for Charriu to get the game reloaded, and then you post that and are forced to answer Elkad's question, revealing yet more information.
(October 1st, 2020, 15:44)NobleHelium Wrote: I wanted to make it clear to superdeath that he should not answer your question. Yes, I could have posted in both your threads instead of publicly, but superdeath might read and answer the tech thread before reading his own thread. If you thought SD forgot to hit enter then your question was phrased poorly in addition to being poorly asked. Not that you should have asked whether SD forgot to hit enter, because it's not like he forgot to hit enter while being last to play. In the scenario where he forgot to hit enter, he would check for a new turn within the next 24h and notice that he didn't end turn, and thus he'd be able to end turn without slowing down the game.
Either way you've made repeated posts about lurkers not revealing things when you've revealed the most things with your posts. It was completely needless for you to post the bit about "If it leaves anybody at disadvantage they can do this a few turns later." All you had to do was wait for Charriu to get the game reloaded, and then you post that and are forced to answer Elkad's question, revealing yet more information.
I'll assume good faith although it's costing me. I think we are talking about different turns here. I was asking when superdeath was last to play t39, he was showing online on the forum, and it was getting pretty late in Iowa.
When you posted, superdeath had rolled into t40 (an hour after my post) and for a second time didn't hit enter on the new turn. If you assumed I was referring to that turn because you didn't know the timeline then yes, that would be pretty problematic and absurd on my part.
With respect to posting it on t39 when he was last to play, I was pointing out a fact that was visible to everyone, I was asking for something that had happened before, clearly in an attempt to avoid an unnecessary delay of the turn roll. And the question is not unusual in tech threads. But yes, as I wrote in my previous post, it potentially brings players' attention to what's happening on PBspy and that's not ideal so as I said I will refrain from it in the future.
Now if people assume my question was asked for the reason it gets asked usually, with your post making it look like something bad they may think again. And of course there is no need for SD to answer my question, why would he need you to tell him that?
How is asking if he did on purpose not play the double turn any different to asking if he forgot to hit enter? If he didn't forget, it's because he didn't want to play a double turn, both statements are equivalent.
I have no idea what kind of information I would have revealed with my post wrt the bug. GKC made it clear with his proposed solution that it was about people having to lose commerce (again, clearly with no ill intent). I thought his solution was good (in particular better than working commerceless tiles that we don't have), also wanted to not go on with the discussion, so I approved it. I was thinking that somebody who is just researching a tech to the beaker may object, hence my additional sentence. Consider that at the time we didn't know that there would be the clean fix that was eventually implemented.
Everything that was revealed was apparent from GKC's post (players affected by the bug need to destroy beakers by rounding, that means the bug gave them undeserved commerce), if more cryptic than when I spelled it out to Elkad. Crucially, we avoided mentioning trade routes.
What is it costing you, lol? You are discussing the game with a lurker. It is not costing you anything.
(October 1st, 2020, 03:05)Miguelito Wrote: SD, was no double turn deliberate?
SCENARIO 1
You posted this when it was still t39. Why are you asking about a double turn when SD is last to play on t39? That makes no sense.
SCENARIO 2
You posted this when it had rolled over to t40 and you were asking why SD did not immediately play t40 after playing t39 last. This is the scenario I assumed you asked the question under. You should not have asked the question under this scenario.
SCENARIO 3
Some other scenario that I don't understand. I just don't understand what you're trying to say.
(September 25th, 2020, 10:20)Charriu Wrote: After looking at everything I think we can go the easy way here. We reload back to T34 Miguelitos turn and play on. I send Ramk the updated mod and he will most likely inform you about how to proceed further.
Charriu already posted saying that a reload would fix the issue.
(September 25th, 2020, 13:28)Miguelito Wrote: I think this solution (lose commerce to rounding) is workable and fair. If it leaves anybody at disadvantage they can do this a few turns later. I'd like for further details of the bug not to be revealed please.
You posted this responding to GKC's post, but it was three hours after Charriu's post which made GKC's post irrelevant. Why did you post this? Did you not see Charriu's post, even though it was three hours before your post?
OK, now I perhaps understand better. I guess it was SCENARIO 1 and you were asking why SD did not play at the beginning of the turn when he was last to play on t38? Was that your question? Then like I said, if you had said "SD did you forget to end the turn?" then you would be drawing less attention to the possibility that SD may have chosen to not play a double turn. There was no reason to phrase the question that way, because any possible response from SD (or even a nonresponse really) provides information. Whereas asking about forgetting to end the turn is more of a neutral question. I would not have jumped on you had you asked the question that way. And you may notice that I asked a similar question in PBEM78 where I asked whether SD forgot to send the save, which is equivalent to forgetting to end the turn in a Pitboss. And that game doesn't even have any possibility for a turn split revealing information.
(October 2nd, 2020, 08:32)Rusten Wrote: You make some good points on sailing, but pottery comes first whichever way we go so there's no rush to decide.
I know it's minor, but do you agree with not roading the cow for now?
As I said I feel quite torn about tech. Making purple holy does sound pretty glorious.
But yeah, let's wait till we actually have to decide.
Sure, we don't care about health, it was rather about defensive logistics and mostly about having the worker just 1 turn not working due to moving. But the copper mine a turn earlier is better, just wanted to make sure.
Btw after finishing the copper mine I feel like roading it (the mine) would be wise because an English attack would very likely go that route. Or if things stay peaceful we may get TRs without Sailing that way.
(October 1st, 2020, 17:44)NobleHelium Wrote: What is it costing you, lol? You are discussing the game with a lurker.
I wish I were! But no, we're discussing tech thread semantics. Because we both want the tech thread to be part of the game as little as possible.
(October 1st, 2020, 17:44)NobleHelium Wrote:
(October 1st, 2020, 03:05)Miguelito Wrote: SD, was no double turn deliberate?
SCENARIO 1
You posted this when it was still t39. Why are you asking about a double turn when SD is last to play on t39? That makes no sense.
(October 1st, 2020, 17:48)NobleHelium Wrote: OK, now I perhaps understand better. I guess it was SCENARIO 1 and you were asking why SD did not play at the beginning of the turn when he was last to play on t38? Was that your question? Then like I said, if you had said "SD did you forget to end the turn?" then you would be drawing less attention to the possibility that SD may have chosen to not play a double turn. There was no reason to phrase the question that way, because any possible response from SD (or even a nonresponse really) provides information. Whereas asking about forgetting to end the turn is more of a neutral question. I would not have jumped on you had you asked the question that way. And you may notice that I asked a similar question in PBEM78 where I asked whether SD forgot to send the save, which is equivalent to forgetting to end the turn in a Pitboss. And that game doesn't even have any possibility for a turn split revealing information.
Ok, we're getting towards a resolution I think. So your issue is with me using the phrase "double turn"? I assume that is because in your book it has the same meaning as what I only know as a "double move"? Now it would of course make absolutely no sense to ask superdeath if he did purposefully not break the rules.
I refer to a double turn as being last to play, rolling the turn, then immediately after playing the turn and hitting enter. I have used that term repeatedly in this thread when I myself and other players did that. I believe I've seen it used commonly in other threads but not going to dig for proof, so I may be wrong.
There are three reasons why a player would not do that:
turnsplit, which is why the question is problematic, as has been admitted
want to consult with dedlurker
forgot to hit enter
So I defend that asking the question I asked is equivalent to "forgot to hit enter?". Because if that's a negative, it's one of the other two. But you could argue that the question should not be asked. It's different from asking in a PBEM because there there is no peril of bringing other players' intention to a possible turnsplit (which after looking at PBspy this turn again I'm 95% confident is what vanrober and sd are having).
Btw, after our profund exchange I now see that superdeath logged out 11 seconds after rolling the turn in question, so my question was indeed unnecessary, because he obviously didn't play that turn.
(October 1st, 2020, 17:44)NobleHelium Wrote:
(September 25th, 2020, 10:20)Charriu Wrote: After looking at everything I think we can go the easy way here. We reload back to T34 Miguelitos turn and play on. I send Ramk the updated mod and he will most likely inform you about how to proceed further.
Charriu already posted saying that a reload would fix the issue.
(September 25th, 2020, 13:28)Miguelito Wrote: I think this solution (lose commerce to rounding) is workable and fair. If it leaves anybody at disadvantage they can do this a few turns later. I'd like for further details of the bug not to be revealed please.
You posted this responding to GKC's post, but it was three hours after Charriu's post which made GKC's post irrelevant. Why did you post this? Did you not see Charriu's post, even though it was three hours before your post?
Hm, looking at it now it makes less sense than it seemed when I wrote it. I guess at the time I had understood Charriu in a way that the bug was fixed, but not that the unwarranted commerce that was already produced was taken care of. Specifically we were pretty certain that other players should have benefitted from it earlier because our second city was relatively late and there are quite a few IMP players in this game. I maintain that I did not reveal any information that was evident already, but it caught Elkad's attention and that led to more discussion about a topic that I had tried to shut down, so duh. Whether it warrants
Quote:Either way you've made repeated posts about lurkers not revealing things when you've revealed the most things with your posts.
is up to you.
Off to the t41 report! (I had expected for this to be a double turn once the kids were in bed and chores were done, but vanrober is letting the timer run down and as we now are prety certain superdeath has to wait for him)
Quote:Southern scouting and dotmap:
Supports the theory that the shiny stuff is hidden on islands.
That theory collapsed quickly:
which brings up the question why gira has a silver peninsula and we don't. There might be a world where we can snatch that with IMP, but we don't want him to tilt before our guilds push.
I turned research back on so the capital can start to grow on a granary once it finishes the next settler.
Graphs, because we got gira's this turn (he went back to spending on us, currently 4 per turn, hope he remembers to turn it off so we can start getting naufragar's and have all of our neighbours'). I somehow had the scoreboard off on all my screenshots, he has two cities, unsurprisingly.
nothing to worry about, I hope?
Doing well in this department
Elkad now has a size 5 capital, no 2nd city, and is the only one with no slavery yet (Cairo switched 2 turns ago). Apparently he has some mines down? Which isn't as good for him as it would be for us, as he's Washington without worker bonus. We're still top of the neighbourhood in terms of foodhammers, and have whipped 3 pop already.
Not competitive for obvious reasons. We have 3 cities and are paying higher costs, no seafood, Cairo is FIN, and Elkad and gira both have storng culture sources. Eventually we'll get a lot of commerce out of that river, but right now the workers are all about food and hammers.
t42 was very boring, but together with t43 there's some interesting scouting at least at gira's:
So, gira settled for double shared food, although he only claims a plains sheep and a lighthousable lake (the sheep isn't pastured yet and nobody has sailing yet). Also on flatland (not claiming that on one of the hils would have been better). He'll need another, foodless city to claim the horses. To the south it seems he'll have to rely on lighthousing the other lake tiles as well, if there isn't some deer to the SW. Overall his close by food situation seems worse than ours (which isn't exactly *lush* either), but that might be different for his west. Of course he also has one cap food more. Copper is in his borders but not mined yet)
This picture means that Cairo has mined but not connected copper, correct?
Domestic picture:
Magistranoi (cap) whipped the chariot this turn, and will 1turn the settler for purple dot the next. My idea is to scout and cover with the first chariot, and have the chariot from Akritai in range as well. I think we're lucky and gira's scout is heading south, so he will not witness the moves.
Delaying pottery paid off somewhat, as we got an additional KTB source.
My rival land tile counting has me estimating 9 rival cities built (as I said, I could be off 1-2), which is consistent with Elkad still playing no-whip OCC. It's not unklikely though that one or more of the other IMP players have planted 3rd already.
Rusten, I have a few questions regarding granaries:
all of the cities will finish their build during the next few turns. Which of these would you put on a granary immediately? Of course every one of them should have one eventually, but where do you see priority? Alternative builds are more chariots, warriors for MP, finishing the monument in Akritai, and in 4 turns axes/spears.
More generally, here I'm lacking civ 4 fundamentals - what cities would you say need granaries the most, those with low or those with high food? Those with low food typically get some hammers and can just build stuff, but then you can never whip them, and after a few pop they just grow too slow. Those with high food need them for efficient whips, as they don't get a lot of hammers by themselves. I would only argue that a city so full of food that it can regrow 2 pop within 10 turns (i.e. >=5food surplus at size 2 and 3) probably doesn't need the granary as early?
Also general knowledge gap, your take on whipping granaries? Always/never/in which cases? I guess a city like Akritai surely would not, and rather build it on natural hammers.
once the kids were in bed and chores were done, but vanrober is letting the timer run down and as we now are prety certain superdeath has to wait for him)
