RBP2 Lurker Discussion Thread - No Players!

[novice]

Square Leg: Nothing is that simple. With that rule, all wars would start with the attacker declaring war after the unsuspecting defender has ended turn, and the attacker would start every war with a double move.

Seems to go against the intention of double move rules...

[Square Leg]

Square Leg: Nothing is that simple. With that rule, all wars would start with the attacker declaring war after the unsuspecting defender has ended turn, and the attacker would start every war with a double move.

Seems to go against the intention of double move rules...

Granted, I overlooked that...

I'll go back to being quiet on this matter again!

[Ruff_Hi]

Square Leg: Nothing is that simple. With that rule, all wars would start with the attacker declaring war after the unsuspecting defender has ended turn, and the attacker would start every war with a double move.

Seems to go against the intention of double move rules...

That is very true. I suppose the rule is ... if you want the first half - attack in the first half. If you want the second half - attack in the second half. If you attack in the second half and claim the first half your name is MUD. If you attack in the first half and claim the second half ... you, sir, are a prince among men!

[regoarrarr]

That is very true. I suppose the rule is ... if you want the first half - attack in the first half. If you want the second half - attack in the second half. If you attack in the second half and claim the first half your name is MUD. If you attack in the first half and claim the second half ... you, sir, are a prince among men!

Isn't that essentially the rbp3 rule? Attacker can choose what half they want but have to attack on that half of the turn.

[meatbalz]

The simplest rule would be: Attacker goes first (after all, they can then use the promotions) and Defender goes Second.

End of. If you are the attacker and feel your attack isn't going to work - bring more troops.

The worst rules are ambiguous rules that try and be "Fair", the best rules are unfair but WORK!

Keep it simple.

seeing as it has been coined on numerous occasions "That's my 2 cents!"

would work if, as suggested in RBP3, the attacker begins respecting the turn order 1 turn before declaring war

[Ruff_Hi]

Isn't that essentially the rbp3 rule? Attacker can choose what half they want but have to attack on that half of the turn.

would work if, as suggested in RBP3, the attacker begins respecting the turn order 1 turn before declaring war

except in the situation that the person who might be attacked sniffs out the attack and pre-empts with their own war declaration. Then there is a bias towards declaring ... and war will be the tune of the day in PB3.

[Krill]

Can someone do me a very big favour and list, in one post, all of the advantages (real or perceived) of going first in a turn, or going last in a turn?

[Ruff_Hi]

Can someone do me a very big favour and list, in one post, all of the advantages (real or perceived) of going first in a turn, or going last in a turn?

And post it to the new hot thread debating the whole double move phenomenon.

I'll start ...

When you are a few turns into a war, then the only difference between two battle turns (your go, my go, your go, my go, etc) is that one of the 'breaks' has a game 'turn end' between it (units produced, healed, available to promote, tech finished, etc). Given that (first stab) ...

Going First
- units with victories in the last defensive battle are available to promote

Going Second
- Items whipped in your half are produced prior to the other team getting a go
- one turn of healing for units you didn't move before they have to fight again

[Ruff_Hi]

Jowy... openly admits he's been lying to us for the past dozen turns?!?! Wow... Speaker's right, this guy is a total jackass. Yeah, I know you're going to read that eventually when the game closes, Jowy. Doesn't change my opinion. You've acted like a jerk in this game, and I can't wait to give you your comeuppance.

Hey guys, glad to see you doing so well in this game and appreciate all the info in this thread!

However, i think we should perhaps step back and realise Jowy is trying to do what *he* feels is best for his civ. Maybe he's wrong, maybe he's right. Time will tell.

I don't think getting personal with him is particularly appropriate. Yes, he is using ridiculous amounts of taunting right now (i said a similar thing to him in IT thread) but that's just the general bluster used to try and liven things up. It's a game and he's doing his best to win. I think you are taking his tone in the wrong fashion. You could have either laughed and made a witty comment back, but instead you became insulted.

A 2v1 does indeed suck but don't let it get you down. It's hard when the game is such a huge time-sink, sure, but you're bigger than that

Well done Kyan - very nicely said. How often have we seen his draft emails said one thing and then his comments say "Obviously, we aren't going to do this" (or similar)?

[BobRoberts]

Well done Kyan - very nicely said. How often have we seen his draft emails said one thing and then his comments say "Obviously, we aren't going to do this" (or similar)?

A fair point!

And IIRC, have also have been caught out talking up both sides of a situation when the sides have compared notes... just looks bad!

A fine example is that latest note to Dantski about DMOC/Nakors settling. IMO, it seems unwise as it's just the kind of thing that could upset a budding relationship... even if the situation is different than it appears from their point of view.


I was also thinking that they know Kathlete and Jowy are aligned now. And they were leaning quite hard on Jowy to give metal to the byzantines... that's a reasonable case for a Kathlete revenge war IMO?