[Gnaw]

Imperial Historian, on 16 March 2019 - 08:06 PM, said:

Gnaw, on 16 March 2019 - 07:45 PM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 16 March 2019 - 07:35 PM, said:

Yeah I know

Of course. 3TG towards that new agenda.


Your offer ref: Politics. I can contribute 2TG and the promise of the card of your choice.

Sounds good but how are you going to manage that without your trade PN?

I have it this round. Going to give it to Morgoth for the next one. Along with 1tg this round.

[Imperial Historian]

D'rek are we bound for conflict? From your suggestions it seems we are so for me it would make sense to attack you as it would set you back significantly and secure my borders. If you want to make a deal for peace so I can concentrate my attention elsewhere hurting your rivals I'm open to offers... Otherwise I'm almost certainly going to take bereg lirta. Totally understand if you want to end up in a sustained conflict with me though as I am the points leader.

[D'rek]

Imperial Historian, on 16 March 2019 - 07:17 PM, said:

Gnaw wants some eres siphons methinks

Then he should have said so

twelve, on 16 March 2019 - 07:19 PM, said:

Gnaw paying Morgoth for agreeing to a deal that takes something away from Morgoth? Why don't we just declare him the winner and start a new game why don't we. Morgoth made a deal for votes. It worked.He won the agenda. You made a side deal, Gnaw that strip him of that power but gained you tech. Thems the breaks sometimes. Don't reward the holder of Rex who is near the points lead for expending resources for something that ultimately didn't work out. And for the only benefit you gain is to make nice. Why?

I know, right? Back when *I* had Mecatol Rex I don't remember anyone paying *me* after they voted against me... and Morgoth won *both* agendas, too. He hardly needs recompense.

[Gnaw]

D, on 16 March 2019 - 08:22 PM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 16 March 2019 - 07:17 PM, said:

Gnaw wants some eres siphons methinks

Then he should have said so

twelve, on 16 March 2019 - 07:19 PM, said:

Gnaw paying Morgoth for agreeing to a deal that takes something away from Morgoth? Why don't we just declare him the winner and start a new game why don't we. Morgoth made a deal for votes. It worked.He won the agenda. You made a side deal, Gnaw that strip him of that power but gained you tech. Thems the breaks sometimes. Don't reward the holder of Rex who is near the points lead for expending resources for something that ultimately didn't work out. And for the only benefit you gain is to make nice. Why?

I know, right? Back when *I* had Mecatol Rex I don't remember anyone paying *me* after they voted against me... and Morgoth won *both* agendas, too. He hardly needs recompense.

I have zero chance of winning if I’m in a 2 front war. Especially considering they’re the two most warlike.

All y’all gave him the shard. Go take it away from him.

[D'rek]

Imperial Historian, on 16 March 2019 - 08:16 PM, said:

D'rek are we bound for conflict? From your suggestions it seems we are so for me it would make sense to attack you as it would set you back significantly and secure my borders. If you want to make a deal for peace so I can concentrate my attention elsewhere hurting your rivals I'm open to offers... Otherwise I'm almost certainly going to take bereg lirta. Totally understand if you want to end up in a sustained conflict with me though as I am the points leader.

Don't be silly, IH. You aren't able to take Bereg/Lirta in this round, and a prolonged multi-round conflict would just strip away the resources you would otherwise put towards objectives, letting Morgoth and perhaps Tapper take the lead away from you.

I absolutely welcome peace. I think both of us will benefit from peace, while war will stymie peace. But I won't be paying you for it.

[Imperial Historian]

D, on 16 March 2019 - 08:29 PM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 16 March 2019 - 08:16 PM, said:

D'rek are we bound for conflict? From your suggestions it seems we are so for me it would make sense to attack you as it would set you back significantly and secure my borders. If you want to make a deal for peace so I can concentrate my attention elsewhere hurting your rivals I'm open to offers... Otherwise I'm almost certainly going to take bereg lirta. Totally understand if you want to end up in a sustained conflict with me though as I am the points leader.

Don't be silly, IH. You aren't able to take Bereg/Lirta in this round, and a prolonged multi-round conflict would just strip away the resources you would otherwise put towards objectives, letting Morgoth and perhaps Tapper take the lead away from you.

I absolutely welcome peace. I think both of us will benefit from peace, while war will stymie peace. But I won't be paying you for it.

I'm pretty sure I can...

And I know you well enough to know if I do not attack you I'll only get attacked later on if I do look like winning so I may as well attack you now whilst you are weaker rather than when you are in a good position if I'm not getting paid not too.

[D'rek]

I don't think so. Guess we'll see.

[Tapper]

Gnaw, your total # of TG during the agenda phase was 2, right?

[Galactic Council]

Tapper, on 16 March 2019 - 09:10 PM, said:

Gnaw, your total # of TG during the agenda phase was 2, right?

Plus one commodity.

[Tapper]

Galactic Council, on 16 March 2019 - 09:20 PM, said:

Tapper, on 16 March 2019 - 09:10 PM, said:

Gnaw, your total # of TG during the agenda phase was 2, right?

Plus one commodity.

Yeah, but he cannot use that to pay for QDN, can he? All he can do is give it to another player, but the tech says you need to transfer 3 TG.

This post has been edited by Tapper: 16 March 2019 - 09:22 PM

[Imperial Historian]

How exciting, wonder what action cards you have. Parley I guess? Maybe a few good combat cards...

Well I guess we dance then if you aren't willing to make any more substantial offers for peace.

[Galactic Council]

Commodities turn into TGs when given to another player so I said it was alright. If it’s a mistake that’s my bad, but I don’t really see the difference. I know that Gnaw would have done something else to make sure he had 3 TGs for this phase if I hadn’t told him it was okay to have 1 commodity and 2 TGs, so it’s on me.

[Tapper]

Galactic Council, on 16 March 2019 - 09:24 PM, said:

Commodities turn into TGs when given to another player so I said it was alright. If it’s a mistake that’s my bad, but I don’t really see the difference. I know that Gnaw would have done something else to make sure he had 3 TGs for this phase if I hadn’t told him it was okay to have 1 commodity and 2 TGs, so it’s on me.

It says "your trade goods" in the text, so imho, you already need to have 3 TG, not 3 commodities or a mix of TG and commodities adding up to 3 - not in the least since commodities do not count for piracy.

No crying over spilt milk, so let me say the least you could have done is inform me about this ruling when I submitted my provisional, if not when you answered Gnaw.
I was going by having a 90%+ chance at Tech and only an off-chance of picking Trade, not a 100% guarantee of Trade, not Tech as things stood.

[Galactic Council]

Tapper, on 16 March 2019 - 09:37 PM, said:

Galactic Council, on 16 March 2019 - 09:24 PM, said:

Commodities turn into TGs when given to another player so I said it was alright. If it’s a mistake that’s my bad, but I don’t really see the difference. I know that Gnaw would have done something else to make sure he had 3 TGs for this phase if I hadn’t told him it was okay to have 1 commodity and 2 TGs, so it’s on me.

It says "your trade goods" in the text, so imho, you already need to have 3 TG, not 3 commodities or a mix of TG and commodities adding up to 3 - not in the least since commodities do not count for piracy.

No crying over spilt milk, so let me say the least you could have done is inform me about this ruling when I submitted my provisional, if not when you answered Gnaw.
I was going by having a 90%+ chance at Tech and only an off-chance of picking Trade, not a 100% guarantee of Trade, not Tech as things stood.

Quite honestly it didn’t even occur to me that that was the reason for your provisional, apologies.

I did try to find a ruling for it before answering Gnaw, and when I couldn’t, I went with what seemed sensible to me. If you can pay people in commodities at other times so they get Trade Goods, I didn’t see why they would suddenly be inapplicable here.

[Gnaw]

Gnaw, on 13 March 2019 - 05:03 PM, said:

Tapper, on 13 March 2019 - 03:47 PM, said:

@ D'rek:

my suggestion for your Racial PN, going by a valuation of 7 TG for the racial:

I offer my Trade Agreement PN and I will throw my 9 votes on an agenda of your choice this round - believe me when I say either one is very much worth your while.
We can trade 2 of my TG for your 2 commodities (one of which IH will pillage from me, so I pay 1 for the privilege).

If you prefer an agenda phase trade: I am more than happy to wait until then, but I will spend some TG on the Influence objective.

Btw, Tapper. I'm not after Technology this coming strategy phase.

[D'rek]

Galactic Council, on 16 March 2019 - 09:41 PM, said:

If you can pay people in commodities at other times so they get Trade Goods, I didn’t see why they would suddenly be inapplicable here.

Rules-wise, you can't. Technically (by the wording of the rulebook and components' text) there's a difference between "I give [player X] a commodity" and "I give [player X] a trade good", even though the commodity becomes a trade good once it reaches the other player. It's just not very noticeable since there aren't any components/actions/abilities that cost commodities.

Which is the whole point... other than giving them to other players (through transactions, not through abilities) commodities are supposed to be useless.

[Gnaw]

Twelve, a couple of turns ago will you trade me thst single TG you have for my 1 commodity please.

[twelve]

Gnaw, on 16 March 2019 - 10:16 PM, said:

Twelve, a couple of turns ago will you trade me thst single TG you have for my 1 commodity please.

I should have done it because I knew IH would have pillaged it.

[twelve]

That was back when you had rex.

[Galactic Council]

D, on 16 March 2019 - 10:04 PM, said:

Galactic Council, on 16 March 2019 - 09:41 PM, said:

If you can pay people in commodities at other times so they get Trade Goods, I didn’t see why they would suddenly be inapplicable here.

Rules-wise, you can't. Technically (by the wording of the rulebook and components' text) there's a difference between "I give [player X] a commodity" and "I give [player X] a trade good", even though the commodity becomes a trade good once it reaches the other player. It's just not very noticeable since there aren't any components/actions/abilities that cost commodities.

Which is the whole point... other than giving them to other players (through transactions, not through abilities) commodities are supposed to be useless.

That’s my bad then. I’m leaning to letting Gnaw use a commodity in this one instance as he kept it completely on my advice from quite a few turns ago, so he’d be penalised for my mistake.