[pb40 spoiler] Götterdämmerung: Destruction Is The Masses' Entertainment

[OT4E]

He must be attacking this turn. Lets just wait and look.

Do you think you can just win doing better than others. Nah.. Neighbor factor was always entirrly decisive. And no matter whether it is active effect that somebody got attacked or passive that somebody became easy target or didnt do shit against farmer gambit or express his noobdome in some other unpredictable way. The situation grows worse when you play on so called balanced maps. I really dont understand why people keep playing it over and over getting frustrated in the reward of their efforts.

S_t is doing better now partially because he tamed his neighbors so they do not attack him but attack you. Not his blame of course. But not an achievement you can brag with also. The only satisfaction I can find here is that his victory can happen without a single shoot while you have chance to recover and break someone's neck.

Funny thing that I got in similar situation in pb38. Elkad attacked me without any potential gain from his side. Needless to say that after smth like 20 turns of siege he got capital size of 1 from where he was kicked in 2-3 turns after.

[Coeurva]

Amen. I don't want to play Civ again: play badly and you probably just wreck someone else's game; play good and you either get lucky, or you get wrecked. I long to see what kind of diplo shield shallow_thought put up that he gets away with 10 cities, and 100 Crop Yield, and Gardens + Currency + Hinduism pursuit (lol what else might he be doing?), but the 7-city dude who built the Oracle is supposedly a runaway who must be suicide rushed.

If you wanted, you can argue that these are just deserts due to... uh... the game I wanted not to mention again. Fine, if you hate me. Charriu sure does, evidently. I still don't see why he can't wait for us to get Currency and extort us for the gold tile's gpt or happiness with his stack then, which actually gets him an economic benefit, for which he doesn't even need to maintain an apparently "aggressive" border city, but rather makes us pay (maintenance) for that on top. (Or is it any less "aggressive" if he holds it, seeing as it's (more or less) equidistant from our caps? Does Charriu even respect this fact?)

Here, he has nothing to gain. I keep repeating this but it's what makes me so utterly mad at him. He is throwing 600h into a foodless size1 autorazing city and even on the off chance of success, will lose most of this immediately. You know what benefits he could get for that price. If he expects total war to autoraze Schilda can end in any permanent settlement by force between us, well, he is sorely mistaken.

Yeah, I saw the Elkad situation. What I don't see is who will attack Charriu. RFS or superdeath won't, they'll attack us. s_t can simply run away now economically as his neighbours aren't interested in stopping him at all, as it seems. Maybe Magic Science is, but Magic Science has a rational reason to pile on (he can actually capture good cities!!)

Going to finish the turn now.

[WilliamLP]

Amen. I don't want to play Civ again: play badly and you probably just wreck someone else's game; play good and you either get lucky, or you get wrecked.

For me, taking a break for several years helped a lot, haha. Only downside was forgetting most Civ mechanics.

The above is why the track record of TBS and Mack is so amazing. Their skill must go far beyond mechanics but into the psychological realm of knowing their enemy. E.g. against who or in what situations can you get away with building a wonder in a close border city. In this calculation, what the opponent's game theoretical optimal play actually is, has little to do with predicting how they will react.

[Coeurva]

We can get away with building a wonder in a close border city because he cannot physically capture the wonder, only raze it.

Charriu has 15/16 odds to lose everything, it's not my problem that he wants to gamble 600h on a 1/16 rather than simply build a library. I can't predict insanity by definition.

Again, the idea of Stonehenge provoking this is laughable. We built that after his power spike. It's essentially +8 culture walls. If you think I'm bad at predicting my opponent, we can play Pokemon lol (no, that game is just as degenerate) -- I predicted Iron Working, I predicted Charriu attacking, or we would have nothing in Schilda. And most of the time, he can't take the city and loses everything, but he gambles like his civ means nothing anymore.

Hi

I just noticed that the timer has run out for you. I think we are in the same timezone CEST if I'm not mistaken. On week days I have to work from 8 to 17 and can't play. So take your time, I won't be home until 18 o'clock.

Bye

Also received this PM. Kill this sanctimonious asshole. Timer was 11:30 when I played btw.

I'm a student during the holidays, and I'm much smarter than you, Charriu.

[WilliamLP]

Well I just played a game vs the guy where he left two border cities defended by single axes, when there were tiles out of his vision for chariots to attack from! I think you could have known going in that you weren't up against a perfect rational actor with full knowledge of the game.

[Coeurva]

I do think you have a point, William, "reading" opponents is key, but even TBS and mack had some complete mispredicts in PB38 (spoiler).

E.g. TBS on Commodore's willingness to throw over settling the New World -- possibly -- and mack over naufragar's willingness to attack. It simply didn't matter for mack, though, partly because naufragar made tactical mistakes to lose his main offensive army.

I maintain that I did actually read Charriu here, or where have our defenses been going? I simply couldn't do anything more without wrecking our economy vis-à-vis MSci or shallow_thought. The whip is a dangerous carnivore, feed it sparingly or it takes over your empire management. If I hadn't built Stonehenge, all our units get -20% defense compared to now against an attack that happens regardless.

But by your argument, Charriu could likewise surmise that I am not a perfect rational actor with full knowledge of the game, and didn't know founding this city was supposedly so aggressive towards his position. Especially now that he can see its surroundings, foodless desert everywhere. If he doesn't try to read my actions, such as why I built Stonehenge (hint: not to claim tiles because he can easily counteract that with his own culture, but rather to stabilize the border) -- then he treats me as AI. The reading you describe has to be mutual -- otherwise it's also fruitless, you have to ask each other. That's the only way to resolve conflicts... at parity. If Charriu continues the war, the next turn is set up such that our soldiers rating will probably surpass his, btw. He might not even realize that I'm still interested in holding back strategically, even if personally I'd like nothing more than to make him pay.

I didn't read PB39 that closely. I just saw Charriu get whacked in the end by Dark Savant repeatedly using the same trick to lure his units in, so I guess I could have known, but I also assumed he'd want to improve his game. And if Charriu went in with PB37 expectations of my play, he should have seen that, from my thread, I was obviously not at all happy with the outcome, and would decide to take the metagame on much differently. As has been evident, I think.

[WilliamLP]

I think I need to avoid the spoiler about Mack Sword just to be on the safe side. Even though

my interactions with them are surely limited to the moves of a single work boat

Oh well, it will be fun reading in 2019 or whenever I'm knocked out of that game!

If you knew you could assign some probability that you were up against insanity, would it have been better to spend the 120 hammers on walls and/or units?

Anyway, really enjoy your thread with the thorough reporting and raw unfiltered reactions. I think all the vets here understand the emotions that come with the territory. I hope you keep playing games here, you obviously know it extremely well given the amount you've played.

[Coeurva]

Deleted previous post in the interest of composure re Charriu (subscribers will get to see EXCLUSIVE CONTENT I guess). Instead, I'll just say that I'm actually filtering a lot of my feelings on Charriu. Let's say that my tolerance for stupidity is extremely limited -- including my own.

Short, very calm response:

* We lack Masonry for walls and teching is nontrivial on this map, as shown by the GNP curves of our opponents not named superdeath, who has AGG ikhandas to help him. 20% to 9 units could be worth more than another 3 axes -- which we could have had if Charriu hadn't gotten so lucky that superdeath showed his impi on the exact right turn for us to have to address him. Since I'm already not filtering: I don't particularly like superdeath, either, but I don't hate him and after his apparently mandatory initial gamewrecker gaining him nothing, he has an interesting defensive approach to Civ.

* Insanity means that he also wouldn't have stopped the attack if the city had walls. You're arguing as though Charriu's current attack has decent odds to succeed. But it has 1/16 odds to succeed if he attacks on this turn; we will break through his siege ring in 2t and reinforce -- at least a hill adjacent to Schilda -- with 7 more units, btw.

I'm half willing to pull a Bacchus and bet that Charriu is actually also German, except bizarro reverse German (i.e. South German) where instead of never taking non-100% chances, he doesn't respect non-100% defenses because Benjamin Franklin also didn't get struck by lightning.

* Thanks for the compliment, yet I can't help but "read" as though you worded your reasons for enjoyment to mean that you were enjoying the thorough reporting and raw reactions to a vindicated strategy. If I gave you a lottery ticket that costs 600€ and has a 1/16 chance to reward you with emotional gratification towards someone you hate, and a 15/16 chance to reward you with your kitchen appliances all breaking down simultaneously, you would never take it. Charriu would, though. Demonstrably.

* Not only my stance on Civ, but also "the economy of ethics". If you always only prepare for everyone's envy and insanity (go to school every day with a Kevlar vest and assault rifle because, any day, some idiot might decide gunning down everyone solves all his problems), you only lose out on the lucky optimists who get to enjoy the paradise of children in their sandbox for longer due to what they can't control, but also shouldn't be blamed for. (Who brought the Politics thread in here?) If this game had been me vs. shallow_thought with a mountain range separating us, you would all have seen interesting strategy etc. I'm sure. Which of course isn't as entertaining as LOL BLOOD FOR THE LURKERS.

* Alas, I was assuming OT4E's presence in a thread automatically gives +12,000 soldier points (his own joke from some time ago).

[WilliamLP]

Full disclosure: Indeed I am biased toward "LOL BLOOD FOR THE LURKERS". This game is my reality TV right now, haha. Sorry for brevity of responses, but I do need to be careful what I unintentionally reveal.

[Coeurva]

Except -- of course -- that unlike reality TV, there are actual people involved. Charriu is dragging down 250 hours of my life into his abyss of stupidity, which I could have avoided wasting simply by assuming he was dumb from reasonable evidence (PB39). I gave him "the benefit of the doubt", though. Same for superdeath, btw -- pure luck saved me from not suffering the fate of Magic Science getting Ancient UU suicide rushed. Obviously I've noticed that superdeath has now done this in 3/3 games he has played (not really a spoiler I hope, the effects are long passé in PB38 and 39 both), but unfortunately for me, he seems to join every single Civ4 game these days, and he's at least a reasonable player after T60 or so. So whatever, sign up for this one.

While I understand that this is all very fun because lurkers view games like some sort of theater performance, as though the players were just arbitrarily filling in for higher-order roles, be assured that it has a very different tinge of reality from the inside (well... also like theater! I remember that you did mention "being as close to professional as an amateur can get" to singing opera -- I think you'll know).

I won't deny you all your enjoyment. Still, spare a penny for those who pretend to turn a fundamentally unfair game into a paradise of contending minds, when it's in fact usually just decided by getting lucky with only reasonable people in your vicinity where it matters; all you can strive for is being reasonable yourself. (Uh, philosophy thread.) I don't really mean you, William -- you won PB11, and survived PB13/18 -- but (potential?) others, who will know who they are, in particular anyone who has never played MP Civ. You can read every single RB game on this site and you won't know what it's like, not remotely. If there's something I can be sure is wise for me to say, it is this.

I dare you to say now that I can't read others, though. If you want, we can talk in full detail after the game is over, sure. Hopefully that will be soon so I don't have to waste more time playing an elaborate version of Roulette (chips translate to lifetime).