[D'rek]

 Khellendros, on 05 November 2018 - 10:17 PM, said:

 D, on 05 November 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

 Khellendros, on 04 November 2018 - 10:16 PM, said:

Action plan guys, which seems better in terms of slowing Tapper down:

Taking out Tapper's fleet in MR, including flagship?

Or going through the wormhole (next turn)?

First one, then the other?

If you want to go for MR, I think it has to be right away. If you wait, Tapper will probably put a PDS on it, which I don't think you can overcome even with Chaos Mapping.

I certainly can't re-take MR, I don't have enough troops even if I created another with Chaos Mapping. I can, I think, take out that fleet though.

@D'rek, Nom: Any chance you won't fire on me with your PDS when I move to MR? I plan to leave the area next round so one you will be able to try and take it without a fight from me (you'd still have to contend with Tapper's Spec Ops).

I'm not certain that would be in my best interests...

[twelve]

 Galactic Council, on 06 November 2018 - 12:29 AM, said:

Game map has been updated to the end of Morgoth's turn.

I'm not complaining but I think I should still have a token on Daemon for activating it even though Gnaw used his Nullification field.

[Galactic Council]

 twelve, on 06 November 2018 - 01:34 AM, said:

 Galactic Council, on 06 November 2018 - 12:29 AM, said:

Game map has been updated to the end of Morgoth's turn.

I'm not complaining but I think I should still have a token on Daemon for activating it even though Gnaw used his Nullification field.

That is correct, I had also forgotten to take a token out of Gnaw's strategy pool. Both will be on the next map update. Thanks for pointing it out!

[twelve]

I think Gnaw also has to use a strategic token to use his nullification field as well

[Gnaw]

Nom or Morgoth.

AB | Economic Initiative | Play as an Action | Ready each cultural planet you control.


I'll trade you for an AC that I would find useful and you pick up Tatts' fee.

[Morgoth]

 Gnaw, on 06 November 2018 - 03:42 AM, said:

Nom or Morgoth.

AB | Economic Initiative | Play as an Action | Ready each cultural planet you control.


I'll trade you for an AC that I would find useful and you pick up Tatts' fee.

Yeah, I think I have a few you'll find interesting.

[Tapper]

 Tapper, on 11 August 2018 - 04:17 PM, said:

 Khellendros, on 11 August 2018 - 08:36 AM, said:

Yep to Trade PNs twelve. And I'll give you my votes for Ixth...

Unless...

The first three people to give me all their (substantial) votes for Ixth and if I get Ixth, ensure that I will never encroach on their territory

Sure. Define substantial, though.

See, Khell, this is why I wrote that long argument: I thought you were deliberately/ out of anger ignoring the deal you proposed.

I think now you just forgot it, which is less problematic, just a little embarrassing

[Tattersail_]

I have this action card

AF | Industrial Initiative | Play as an Action | Gain 1 trade good for each industrial planet you control.


Nom I see this would be beneficial to you, what can you offer me for it?


Not only does this give you 4 TG's but you also stall an action which is 1 CT. I'd be looking for a stall card minimum, plus either 2 TG's, or another action card that you think I'd like, or the same card but for hazardous planets if you have that.


Anyway, you can send me a card privately to peruse if you have something that can aid me.

[Khellendros]

 Tapper, on 06 November 2018 - 08:24 AM, said:

 Tapper, on 11 August 2018 - 04:17 PM, said:

 Khellendros, on 11 August 2018 - 08:36 AM, said:

Yep to Trade PNs twelve. And I'll give you my votes for Ixth...

Unless...

The first three people to give me all their (substantial) votes for Ixth and if I get Ixth, ensure that I will never encroach on their territory

Sure. Define substantial, though.

See, Khell, this is why I wrote that long argument: I thought you were deliberately/ out of anger ignoring the deal you proposed.

I think now you just forgot it, which is less problematic, just a little embarrassing

Oh no, I did not forget. I'm just breaking the deal. I'm not upholding my end of a deal which is no longer sensible for me to do so. The Saar would throw me out of the airlock if I did. And as far as I understand it, breaking deals is as much part of this game as making them.

In any case, I had hoped to avoid such an outcome by placing so many troops on MR as a deterrent. But I should have stationed a fleet there too, in hindsight.

[Khellendros]

 D, on 06 November 2018 - 12:38 AM, said:

 Khellendros, on 05 November 2018 - 10:17 PM, said:

 D, on 05 November 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

 Khellendros, on 04 November 2018 - 10:16 PM, said:

Action plan guys, which seems better in terms of slowing Tapper down:

Taking out Tapper's fleet in MR, including flagship?

Or going through the wormhole (next turn)?

First one, then the other?

If you want to go for MR, I think it has to be right away. If you wait, Tapper will probably put a PDS on it, which I don't think you can overcome even with Chaos Mapping.

I certainly can't re-take MR, I don't have enough troops even if I created another with Chaos Mapping. I can, I think, take out that fleet though.

@D'rek, Nom: Any chance you won't fire on me with your PDS when I move to MR? I plan to leave the area next round so one you will be able to try and take it without a fight from me (you'd still have to contend with Tapper's Spec Ops).

I'm not certain that would be in my best interests...

It would be. I have no plans to attack your systems (now that I've had to change plans anyway ), and the more ships I have left the better for you.

[Tapper]

 Khellendros, on 06 November 2018 - 09:13 AM, said:

 Tapper, on 06 November 2018 - 08:24 AM, said:

 Tapper, on 11 August 2018 - 04:17 PM, said:

 Khellendros, on 11 August 2018 - 08:36 AM, said:

Yep to Trade PNs twelve. And I'll give you my votes for Ixth...

Unless...

The first three people to give me all their (substantial) votes for Ixth and if I get Ixth, ensure that I will never encroach on their territory

Sure. Define substantial, though.

See, Khell, this is why I wrote that long argument: I thought you were deliberately/ out of anger ignoring the deal you proposed.

I think now you just forgot it, which is less problematic, just a little embarrassing

Oh no, I did not forget. I'm just breaking the deal. I'm not upholding my end of a deal which is no longer sensible for me to do so. The Saar would throw me out of the airlock if I did. And as far as I understand it, breaking deals is as much part of this game as making them.

In any case, I had hoped to avoid such an outcome by placing so many troops on MR as a deterrent. But I should have stationed a fleet there too, in hindsight.

Aha. Well, considering my efforts in the deal were up front, that will be a lesson learned for the future.

[Tattersail_]

I wonder though if that deal includes letting someone attack you, you took his former home world, much of his territory and then kicked him out of Rex, he should be allowed to respond to that sort of behaviour deal or no deal.

Edit;

I hope you kick his arse in the battle as he ruined my game plan

Edit 2

I'm loving your whole gam,e so far Tapper, you only have people worried because you've played well. Do you think you moved too early this round or not?

This post has been edited by Tattersail_: 06 November 2018 - 10:23 AM

[Tapper]

 Khellendros, on 06 November 2018 - 09:13 AM, said:

I'm just breaking the deal. I'm not upholding my end of a deal which is no longer sensible for me to do so. And as far as I understand it, breaking deals is as much part of this game as making them.

While I am not offended by you doing this (after all, I am the aggressor here), I am seeing potential meta level consequences (not specifically against you).

As you break the deal "since it is no longer sensible", you seem to say that you made the deal in mala fides by specifically including the word never. Upholding your end of the bargain ended being sensible for you the exact moment you were voted to be the holder of the Prophecy. I've played quite a bit of Diplomacy, both here and tabletop, where breaking promises/ alliances is required to win and people are super careful with such words because they tend to have meta consequences - also because other wordings are readily available that do leave the option of a stab open without breaking your word.
Even then, I'd find breaking of a 'never' perfectly reasonable if you were more or less forced into the agreement you're breaking by another player, but this was your own proposal.

If this because commonplace, I think we're going to see a lot more complicated deals with tit for tat clauses in which each participant will only gradually fulfill their side of the deal, which slows the game to a crawl (and is less fun). I would not be a fan of that, especially when vague phrases like 'unless it (or you) harms my interests' are so easily available and yet readily understood by everyone.

[Tapper]

 Tattersail_, on 06 November 2018 - 10:21 AM, said:

I wonder though if that deal includes letting someone attack you, you took his former home world, much of his territory and then kicked him out of Rex, he should be allowed to respond to that sort of behaviour deal or no deal.

Edit;

I hope you kick his arse in the battle as he ruined my game plan

Edit 2

I'm loving your whole gam,e so far Tapper, you only have people worried because you've played well. Do you think you moved too early this round or not?

If you read back, you will see that Khell abandoned his home world as well as most of his territory, when Khell decided to play Saar ball and go hopping systems looking for TG. Tar'mann for example changed hands in a deal between the two of us which was initiated by Khell himself.

As for this deal: you actually asked Khell what would happen if someone who he made the deal with took his territory, and he answered he wouldn't take it back:

 Khellendros, on 13 August 2018 - 08:28 AM, said:

 Tattersail_, on 13 August 2018 - 08:23 AM, said:

 Khellendros, on 13 August 2018 - 08:22 AM, said:

 Tapper, on 13 August 2018 - 07:21 AM, said:

 Khellendros, on 12 August 2018 - 07:07 PM, said:

 Gnaw, on 12 August 2018 - 07:00 PM, said:

My votes are cast.

Any bets on how long before Khell breaks his word?

I will not.

But I would like to know if Tapper is in on this deal.

I am. But I hadn't submitted the votes as such until my 'I guess you do per now'.

Ah I see. Well, in case you need it, I give you the same personal agreement I gave to Morgoth. If the Ixth law passes, you three will have successfully also passed the No-Saar-Zone amendment as well. Another demonstration of the prejudice we face daily in our lives

Not that I'm jealous of them or anything but how does this benefit you? Does the agreement work still even if they take your systems? It also does not leave you much wiggle room.

Yes. If they kick me out of somewhere, I can't try to reclaim it. Why did I do it? Well, I was happy enough to do it with Morgoth and Tapper, because the Arborec and Sol seem best-suited to me to defending against Saar - their special abilities to produce GFs makes taking their planets particularly difficult for me, so they would never have been my first-choice directions. The fact that Gnaw is the third is much more problematic for me, yes, at least in the short-term, but I'll just have to deal with it and hope Ixth was worth that trouble.

On the other hand, should I not win Ixth, there's no harm no foul and I just go back to plan A.

[Khellendros]

 Tapper, on 06 November 2018 - 10:53 AM, said:

 Khellendros, on 06 November 2018 - 09:13 AM, said:

I'm just breaking the deal. I'm not upholding my end of a deal which is no longer sensible for me to do so. And as far as I understand it, breaking deals is as much part of this game as making them.

While I am not offended by you doing this (after all, I am the aggressor here), I am seeing potential meta level consequences (not specifically against you).

As you break the deal "since it is no longer sensible", you seem to say that you made the deal in mala fides by specifically including the word never. Upholding your end of the bargain ended being sensible for you the exact moment you were voted to be the holder of the Prophecy. I've played quite a bit of Diplomacy, both here and tabletop, where breaking promises/ alliances is required to win and people are super careful with such words because they tend to have meta consequences - also because other wordings are readily available that do leave the option of a stab open without breaking your word.
Even then, I'd find breaking of a 'never' perfectly reasonable if you were more or less forced into the agreement you're breaking by another player, but this was your own proposal.

If this because commonplace, I think we're going to see a lot more complicated deals with tit for tat clauses in which each participant will only gradually fulfill their side of the deal, which slows the game to a crawl (and is less fun). I would not be a fan of that, especially when vague phrases like 'unless it (or you) harms my interests' are so easily available and yet readily understood by everyone.

When I made the deal, it was with absolutely no intention of breaking it. Quite honestly, I believed I would have no reason to have interactions with you or Morgoth throughout the rest of the game, because of my plans at the time (which involved going further south towards Twelve and Tatts). I was sore about including Gnaw, and actually thought that might be the one to give me problems in the future. But I guess I was naive when I made that deal, and certainly won't be doing the like again. I'm putting it down as a learning experience - if it makes deals in future far more complicated, then I'm sorry for that. But neither am I the first to break a deal in this game.

This post has been edited by Khellendros: 06 November 2018 - 11:19 AM

[Morgoth]

 D, on 05 November 2018 - 03:48 PM, said:

 Tattersail_, on 05 November 2018 - 02:55 PM, said:

 D, on 05 November 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

 Khellendros, on 04 November 2018 - 10:16 PM, said:

Action plan guys, which seems better in terms of slowing Tapper down:

Taking out Tapper's fleet in MR, including flagship?

Or going through the wormhole (next turn)?

First one, then the other?

If you want to go for MR, I think it has to be right away. If you wait, Tapper will probably put a PDS on it, which I don't think you can overcome even with Chaos Mapping.

Does Khell have enough to take on Tapper's fleet? Morgoth must be licking his lips though

With Chaos Mapping, he might. Which is probably why he wants the TG loan so he can build something better before the fight. Not sure how the odds will play out.

As for Morgoth, well, plants don't have lips But either way, I don't think he's too happy. Those last 2 PO VP for him are going to be hard, unless the "own 3 unit upgrade techs" objective is flipped next. I think giving away his trade agreement and everyone not granting a refresh so it still hasn't come back to him messed up his plans to prepare for the res/inf/tg stage II objectives, and he still needs 2 more rounds to achieve the stage II technology objective.

As untouchable as he may seem at the moment, his diplomacy has also more or less stuck him in a corner where he's reliant on a lucky PO draw to continue gaining points. The only other option is MR, already quite taxing for him to get to, and furthermore if Khell does retake it (or even just gets ships over a Tapper-owned MR), then Morgoth is losing a VP for trying to take it himself.

So no, I wouldn't say licking his lips. He's probably fretting quite a bit. Shaking his little leaves. Quivering his roots.

That being said, I'm not advocating any lessening of our worries towards Morgoth. Even if it's only a 1-in-8 chance, the mere possibility of a stage II PO he can immediately fulfill being drawn next and hence him winning the game next action phase is a chance we cannot take.

This is all disturbingly accurate. Get out of my head, woman!

[Tattersail_]

BTW Khell what are you waiting for?

[Khellendros]

And just so it's clear, I'm not heading to MR for 'revenge'. Tapper has given me an unforeseen opportunity to achieve a secret objective.

[Tapper]

 Tattersail_, on 06 November 2018 - 10:21 AM, said:

I wonder though if that deal includes letting someone attack you, you took his former home world, much of his territory and then kicked him out of Rex, he should be allowed to respond to that sort of behaviour deal or no deal.

Edit;

I hope you kick his arse in the battle as he ruined my game plan

Edit 2

I'm loving your whole gam,e so far Tapper, you only have people worried because you've played well. Do you think you moved too early this round or not?

I am not sure how a space battle for Mecatol will go. I think I will lose. Early game I was planning a cheap carrier/fighter strategy with Carrier II and Fighter II for my fleets, instead, I just end up turning my fleets into ground transports - Fleet Logistics and Light/Wave turned out to be much more useful for me than Fighter II, so far.

As for making the move too quickly: I think not. I could not risk stalling as the flagship and the infantry on Mallice were key to the plan, and IH seemed less than happy with me there and he did rebuild his fleet. If IH had taken Diplomacy instead of Construction (thus moving before me) I'd have offered him my Trade Agreement with the promise to refresh commodities, just for him to stall, but since he didn't, moving out asap seemed the best option.

If anything, right now I regret playing Plague as it might be used against me on MR just after we next draw action cards. I'd probably have won the ground fight quite easily without it.

as for your compliment: thanks. I think I've made the best of a bad hand: late strategy selection for several rounds, bad expansion options. The saving grace there was that the starting sectors Khell and I got were so terrible in terms of production/influence per system that no-one wanted to over-extend into it and compete for it. When Khell left (a bit too soon perhaps, or perhaps not quick enough - Lodor would have been a fabulous 'home planet' for him) I got breathing space and I have been making the best of it, but the first four rounds really felt like I was an also-ran (it didn't help that I never reliably could get rid of commodities). Only when Gnaw threw me a VP and I drew into those Flanking Speeds I used, did I feel like I might have a chance.

Incidentally, that also meant that the current opposition also got to me a little (when you plan your moves at 3 AM over poopy diapers or with your wife asking why cooking water for a warm bed flask for the baby or opening the cat flap took ten minutes, investing your pet projects is somewhat hard - you probably now how it feels ). All game, I had no stable trade agreements, no allies, a disagreeable sector and now that I climbed out of that pit, people want to kick me back in, with a real risk of ending middle of the pack instead of with the 12 VP and the sense of accomplishment I think I can get at the end of the game.

[Khellendros]

 Tattersail_, on 06 November 2018 - 11:29 AM, said:

BTW Khell what are you waiting for?

I didn't realise it was my go till about twenty minutes ago - I thought I was planning well in advance!