View Full Version : Col v Erikk SPOILER
Well I really ought to keep my pbem reports up to date and I'm sure Erikk has detailed his side.
I've taken out the Iros and am most of the way towards taking out the Ottomans before they get Sipahi. I have more land area potentially but Erikk is way ahead on tech and infrastructure.
He is dropping none too subtle hints that he might invade. I'm going along with it but its not really an option. Any naval invasion can be stopped by a handful of troops pre-marines simply by occupying the landing squares (no vikings in game). Its a weakness of Civ that 20 workers can stop 10 boatloads of cavalry but thats the reality. Providing I see him coming he has no real chanhce of a successful invasion by sea. The only land route is via a choke point of mountains. He would have to go via two other civs. Unlikely prerails. He is therefore largely bluffing.
My plan - such as it is - avoid education at all costs - ie no research at all. Lightning grab of the Great Library from France. which is reachable and pull techs right up to the modern era.
Winning? Problematic - dom is the only possiblity and I doubt if Erkk will allow me to land grab enough to do that. I'll never beat Erikk in a space race. A leader to get UN is possible once GL catapults me to tech equality.
Short term then - BIG army and [estwing] and watch the coastline. Erikk believes that because I have agreed no MA with the AI that I will stick to that. This may or may be the case ;)
Map to follow. ;)
quote:Erikk believes that because I have agreed no MA with the AI that I will stick to that
[goggle]
Did you agree to that *before* the game started or after it already started as part of an in-game negotiations ?
[scratch]
I regard anything 'agreed' before the game to have the same status as anything agreed inside the game. Negotiations that take place before the game are no different in principle than negotiations that take place during the game.
Of course, I dont expect Erikk to feel that way. ;) I wouldnt therefore resort to breaking 'agreements' unless the situation was desperate and some might feel it was 'cheating'.
To be quite honest, I cant remember what our initial agreement was and I cant find any record of it anywhere. Erikk doesnt have an open thread with it in so I'm guessing what the actual agreement was. I'd just finished a game with Killer where I got attacked by 5 AIs + Killer at the same time so I probably agreed to some form of restriction. I'd better check with Erikk. I like to know when I'm a double dealing back stabbing bastard.
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/col/20031210164314_colerikk.JPG
78.16KB
quote:I regard anything 'agreed' before the game to have the same status as anything agreed inside the game
Wow ! thats really extreme and I dont think anybody can agree with you on that one !
With your logic, an agreement that you would not cheat by reloading is also a pre-game agreement which can be broken if needed to. Also exploits and bugs are pre-game agreements !
If you did not want to have the restriction to not use MAs you should have never agreed to them in the first place : these agreements are binding and I would consider it a "lost game" if my opponent broke one of these. It would be interesting to know what the ladder admins think about this....
I DO agree that issues outside the game like reloading are simply cheating and they are non negotiable. I think its a little greyer about negotiated agreements like no MAs. The key here is negotiated. I think we all accept that any in-game agreement is free to be broken any time we feel like it. Why is one agreement sacrosanct and the other not? I didnt agree not to break my agreements ;)
I wasnt expecting much agreement here and its not something I'd do lightly. I just thought it an interesting point that some agreements can be broken and others cant. Thats counter to the spirit of the game isnt it?
Discussion with Erikk shows that he regards pregame agreements as fixed parameters. I've never made pregame agreements before so I wasnt entirely sure of their status. I'll respect his view but Erikk generally regards agreements rather more strongly than I do. I generally regard them the same way countries do ie you break them if youre prepared to accept the consequences.
No MAs and no MPPs at all.
This would seem to favour strong armies - since you cant bring another country to your defence - over skilled diplomacy so I may have shot myself in the foot a little here since I know Erikk is a better Civ players than I but I'm a sneakier, more devious, back stabbing bastard.
Thats what I was trying to warn you about in my clumsy, arrogant way...[blush2]
I am sure you can still win this one ! Come on !
Well I sure havent given up yet. I've nearly finished taking out the Ottomans. Then a lightning raid for the Glibrary might just surprise Erikk. I'm sure he is rather complacent about his tech lead.
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/col/20031211212314_erikk.jpg
9.89KB
Erikk has integrated his empire while mine is still fragmented. I have a couple of Ottoman cities to take and still get one or two flips. These are non trivial now that riflemen are around. I'm close to cavs but my military advisor suggests that Erikk is pulling ahead.
Our plan proceeds. We stop all research short of education and build as many cavs as we can. Erikk is confident in his tech lead. The ottos are reduced to one city in the south of france. The French are duly raped and the Great Library is now ours. This should give us a shitload of tech next turn which may come as a nasty shock to Erikk.
Fuck Fuck Fuck
Stupid stupid stupid
I get a shitload of techs from the GL that catapults me into the modern age and tech equality. I'd planned to raze Paris that turn but forgot and pressed space. Paris flipped on the second turn taking a rider army and 8 cavs with it - most of my offensive force at that juncture......
Typical - just when I was getting back into the game, I blow it.
quote:Originally posted by col
I get a shitload of techs from the GL that catapults me into the modern age and tech equality.
The modern age [hmm] Don't you mean the Industrial Age? Otherwise I wouldn't understand why ERIKK didn't invade with tanks!
Um - yes the industrial age!
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.