[D'rek]

twelve, on 25 February 2020 - 03:09 AM, said:

Free refreshes to whoever helps prevent Toaster from winning.

Does that include me? I can help!

[twelve]

D, on 25 February 2020 - 04:39 AM, said:

twelve, on 25 February 2020 - 03:09 AM, said:

Free refreshes to whoever helps prevent Toaster from winning.

Does that include me? I can help

Possibility. I'd like to know what this help is first. It is in your interest to stop Toaster as you can still win if that happens but this let's me score points before the round ends so sure if you do then yes.

[Imperial Historian]

D, on 25 February 2020 - 04:39 AM, said:

Discounting the 5-tech-planet objective entirely, as none of us are even close to achieving it:


Toaster
Current VP: 10
Wins this round if: scores the <spend 6 CTs> PO in status phase

IH
Current VP: 8
Wins this round if:
> Fulfills an action-phase SO; and
> scores the <spend 6 CTs> PO in the status phase; and
> fulfills a status-phase SO; and
> Toaster does not reach 12 VP

D'rek
Current VP: 7
Wins this round if:
> Plays IMPERIAL for 1 VP (while still holding MR); and
> While playing IMPERIAL fulfills a 2VP PO (spend 16 influence or spend 6 CTs; and
> Fulfills another 2VP PO in the status phase (or a 1VP objective and fulfills an SO); and
> Toaster and IH do not reach 12 VP

Twelve and Morgoth win if they score an SO and score a 2 vp objective. Twelve has 3 tech planets so that's feasible for him.

It would br great if I had the right SOs.

[ToasTer86]

D, on 25 February 2020 - 04:39 AM, said:

Discounting the 5-tech-planet objective entirely, as none of us are even close to achieving it:


Toaster
Current VP: 10
Wins this round if: scores the <spend 6 CTs> PO in status phase

IH
Current VP: 8
Wins this round if:
> Fulfills an action-phase SO; and
> scores the <spend 6 CTs> PO in the status phase; and
> fulfills a status-phase SO; and
> Toaster does not reach 12 VP

D'rek
Current VP: 7
Wins this round if:
> Plays IMPERIAL for 1 VP (while still holding MR); and
> While playing IMPERIAL fulfills a 2VP PO (spend 16 influence or spend 6 CTs; and
> Fulfills another 2VP PO in the status phase (or a 1VP objective and fulfills an SO); and
> Toaster and IH do not reach 12 VP

Ok, nice summarize. Now that you got Imperial things change. Also since apparently everyone is still going to king make D'rek , I will help the table to king make D'rek

So let me summarize the flow of the game over the next round:

• So D'rek and IH and Khell are going to stop me with their plastic , with the help of the rest and their AC this will succeed.
• Then we as a table should stop IH, lets say we maybe get to his HS or can stop him from scoring.
• Then the table should stop D'rek, but around this time I guess we will not have enough tokens and resources to do this.
• Even if this works out Who will stop Morgoth after this ?

But I think in the end we will fail with point 3. So how about we forgo point 1, I will not score, I will use my tokens to attack IH / D'rek.

Because otherwise I predict with the help of the table you WILL be able to stop me, if the table throws enough action cards/ tokens/ plastic at me I can't stop it. Bashing is bashing, and no one can survive a good bash.
So I will not win this round.
I will use my tokens to launch an attack on IH as he is now the leader and first in contention. If we stop IH I will try to attack D'rek (who will win this game)

So at everyone wondering what is going to happen

-----------> I WILL NOT SCORE THIS ROUND
-----> STOP
------------> I WILL USE MY TOKENS AND PLASTIC TO STOP IH
-----> STOP
------------> IF ANYTHING LEFT I WILL USE MY TOKENS AND PLASTIC TO ATTACK D'REK
-----> STOP.
------------> I WILL NOT, AND CANNOT SCORE THIS ROUND
-----> STOP.
------------> I WILL SPEND MY TOKENS IN THE FIRST 3 ROUNDS OF THE NEXT TURN
-----> STOP.
------------> I WILL NOT HAVE SIX TOKENS AT THE END OF THIS ROUND

This post has been edited by ToasTer86: 25 February 2020 - 08:13 AM

[Imperial Historian]

ToasTer86, on 25 February 2020 - 08:10 AM, said:

D, on 25 February 2020 - 04:39 AM, said:

Discounting the 5-tech-planet objective entirely, as none of us are even close to achieving it:


Toaster
Current VP: 10
Wins this round if: scores the <spend 6 CTs> PO in status phase

IH
Current VP: 8
Wins this round if:
> Fulfills an action-phase SO; and
> scores the <spend 6 CTs> PO in the status phase; and
> fulfills a status-phase SO; and
> Toaster does not reach 12 VP

D'rek
Current VP: 7
Wins this round if:
> Plays IMPERIAL for 1 VP (while still holding MR); and
> While playing IMPERIAL fulfills a 2VP PO (spend 16 influence or spend 6 CTs; and
> Fulfills another 2VP PO in the status phase (or a 1VP objective and fulfills an SO); and
> Toaster and IH do not reach 12 VP

Ok, nice summarize. Now that you got Imperial things change. Also since apparently everyone is still going to king make D'rek , I will help the table to king make D'rek

So let me summarize the flow of the game over the next round:

• So D'rek and IH and Khell are going to stop me with their plastic , with the help of the rest and their AC this will succeed.
• Then we as a table should stop IH, lets say we maybe get to his HS or can stop him from scoring.
• Then the table should stop D'rek, but around this time I guess we will not have enough tokens and resources to do this.
• Even if this works out Who will stop Morgoth after this ?

But I think in the end we will fail with point 3. So how about we forgo point 1, I will not score, I will use my tokens to attack IH / D'rek.

Because otherwise I predict with the help of the table you WILL be able to stop me, if the table throws enough action cards/ tokens/ plastic at me I can't stop it. Bashing is bashing, and no one can survive a good bash.
So I will not win this round.
I will use my tokens to launch an attack on IH as he is now the leader and first in contention. If we stop IH I will try to attack D'rek (who will win this game)

So at everyone wondering what is going to happen

-----------> I WILL NOT SCORE THIS ROUND
-----> STOP
------------> I WILL USE MY TOKENS AND PLASTIC TO STOP IH
-----> STOP
------------> IF ANYTHING LEFT I WILL USE MY TOKENS AND PLASTIC TO ATTACK D'REK
-----> STOP.
------------> I WILL NOT, AND CANNOT SCORE THIS ROUND
-----> STOP.
------------> I WILL SPEND MY TOKENS IN THE FIRST 3 ROUNDS OF THE NEXT TURN
-----> STOP.
------------> I WILL NOT HAVE SIX TOKENS AT THE END OF THIS ROUND

You are forgetting twelve. You and d'rek are the only ones who can win without an SO.

[Tattersail_]

Toaster you do that and you definitely don't win. You do something else and you might win. I think as long as you keep your home system you'll score won't you?

[Tapper]

Tattersail_, on 23 February 2020 - 03:07 PM, said:

I was hoping that you'd retreat from my home system to system you occupied last round. Youd keep that this round. I guess like you say it doesn't matter. I am going to take logistics but the table would prefer me to take Imperial to prevent Drek that scoring opportunity. Logistics gives me a better range of options. The only way I'd take Imperial if you agree to end hostilities, by retreating from my home system when I try to take it back. That way my force wont further threaten you or your home system which is possible through logistics.

It gives us both chances to score. Depends if you care or not?

So, basically, you fish for me to do you a solid with 0 concessions from your side while trying to threaten me with some (farfetched) scheme of destruction - again.
(and said request doesn't matter at all anymore since you chose Logistics - just like scoring doesn't matter at all anymore - whether I have 5, 7 or 8 points is for me immaterial as it's not enough to win)?

When it comes to your threat, I also think you are severely overestimating your options.
There's very little you can do to me as long as I manage to take out the carrier in Abyz/Fria and/or Tau Boothis before you have time to move them all to one hex within travel distance of my HW.

Even if you do manage that and hold, let's say, Plague:

* I will always have a build option at 0.0.0 before you can invade it (for 7 infantry),
* you cannot bombard 0.0.0 without an additional action card to remove my PDS (you discarded 5 cards last status phase),
* I have a PDS with 2 dice thanks to Plasma Scoring that might snip one of your infantry before the fight.

Why do you insist on playing poker with what is at best a long shot?
Seriously, your better option would have been to say "Tap, whatever you do, I am taking Imperial to stop D'rek. You proved your point, I cannot stop you from kicking my ass, but I hope you'll do the right thing."

That would have gotten you somewhere.

This post has been edited by Tapper: 25 February 2020 - 09:41 AM

[Tattersail_]

I know all this. I didn't play the long game with you as a neighbour. So when I mention the Imperial strategy card I wanted to see your thoughts, if you'd have been slightly amenable and say asked for something in return then there would have been discussion but you basically shot me down and bragged about you winning the war. You've been lucky with action cards to get in the position you are in. I still think I'd have negotiated well with Jazz and been in a position to win or contend a win without you going a different route. 9 VP I reckon going into this round and a slight outside chance of stealing victory. I already know I have no chance so whatever you do is up to you. What I think though is when you took over your objective was completely different to Jazz's which is understandable. He was going for points whereas you're going for a lesson/fun. Fair play, you do you.

[ToasTer86]

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 08:41 AM, said:

Toaster you do that and you definitely don't win. You do something else and you might win. I think as long as you keep your home system you'll score won't you?

When 4 people unleash all plastic/tokens and action cards I wont be able to hold my HS.
I don't know what they all have, so I think my best chance is to get in a position where I am not the leader/ first to score/ seem like the person to stop.

If I prolong the game by 1 round there will be 6~7 people that can score and win. I think I will get better chances to win then.

[Tattersail_]

ToasTer86, on 25 February 2020 - 10:11 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 08:41 AM, said:

Toaster you do that and you definitely don't win. You do something else and you might win. I think as long as you keep your home system you'll score won't you?

When 4 people unleash all plastic/tokens and action cards I wont be able to hold my HS.
I don't know what they all have, so I think my best chance is to get in a position where I am not the leader/ first to score/ seem like the person to stop.

If I prolong the game by 1 round there will be 6~7 people that can score and win. I think I will get better chances to win then.

Can people bring enough infantry to take your HS, you gofirst don't you?

[Khellendros]

Leadership, Tech, Diplo, Politics, Construction...I’ve never had such choice!

I imagine Diplo is the sensible one to pick so that Toaster can’t have it, and Morgoth has basically said he doesn’t care if Toaster wins this round.

Or are we believing Toaster’s promise to not score this round?

[Tattersail_]

Khellendros, on 25 February 2020 - 10:25 AM, said:

Leadership, Tech, Diplo, Politics, Construction...I've never had such choice!

I imagine Diplo is the sensible one to pick so that Toaster can't have it, and Morgoth has basically said he doesn't care if Toaster wins this round.

Or are we believing Toaster's promise to not score this round?

Fixed that for you.

[ToasTer86]

Khellendros, on 25 February 2020 - 10:25 AM, said:

Leadership, Tech, Diplo, Politics, Construction...I've never had such choice!

I imagine Diplo is the sensible one to pick so that Toaster can't have it, and Morgoth has basically said he doesn't care if Toaster wins this round.

Or are we believing Toaster's promise to not score this round?

Leadership is taken by Tapper by using Political stability.

[Tapper]

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 10:03 AM, said:

I know all this. I didn't play the long game with you as a neighbour. So when I mention the Imperial strategy card I wanted to see your thoughts, if you'd have been slightly amenable and say asked for something in return then there would have been discussion but you basically shot me down and bragged about you winning the war. You've been lucky with action cards to get in the position you are in. I still think I'd have negotiated well with Jazz and been in a position to win or contend a win without you going a different route. 9 VP I reckon going into this round and a slight outside chance of stealing victory. I already know I have no chance so whatever you do is up to you. What I think though is when you took over your objective was completely different to Jazz's which is understandable. He was going for points whereas you're going for a lesson/fun. Fair play, you do you.

Throughout last round, the status phase and the agenda phase I have consistently asked you to make a concession to prevent or stop our war.
You never made a single realistic proposition (like: "OK, I will start the turn by evacuating from A/F to Q/R and give you 3 or 4 TG, let's call it quits" - which is what I would have accepted during the Strategic card selection last turn before we started the whole circus), instead, you always bounce back to "I'd have negotiated with Jazz".

Yet you're not even willing to hint at what you're willing to offer or you make offers that just do not match the table (like demanding my Ceasefire last ropund, or now scaremongering about taking my home world, and when I point out how that's unlikely, you say "I know all that" - so, if you do, why make the point in the first place?).

When all that fails, you argue about how you didn't start this (first it was Jazz who threatened to take 'your' planets, never mind Khell was on them. Then it was me for the action card, then it was me for attacking your HW, now it is me bragging instead of negotiating).

And now we're in a situation where it just really doesn't matter anymore.

FYI:
If you had allowed me into A/F on the deal above, I would have likely either attacked or approached Nom for a turn's lease of Arinaam/Meer: 6 influence would have helped me a long way toward the 16 required for 2 VP, and would have immediately granted the 4 planets of the same type, off-setting the SftT I would have lost.

[Itwæs Nom]

Imperial Historian, on 25 February 2020 - 12:04 AM, said:

Nom are you planning to research instinct training? Let's you sabotage any sabotages Toaster plays.

Can't tell yet but it's a possibility

[Tattersail_]

Tapper, on 25 February 2020 - 10:49 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 10:03 AM, said:

I know all this. I didn't play the long game with you as a neighbour. So when I mention the Imperial strategy card I wanted to see your thoughts, if you'd have been slightly amenable and say asked for something in return then there would have been discussion but you basically shot me down and bragged about you winning the war. You've been lucky with action cards to get in the position you are in. I still think I'd have negotiated well with Jazz and been in a position to win or contend a win without you going a different route. 9 VP I reckon going into this round and a slight outside chance of stealing victory. I already know I have no chance so whatever you do is up to you. What I think though is when you took over your objective was completely different to Jazz's which is understandable. He was going for points whereas you're going for a lesson/fun. Fair play, you do you.

Throughout last round, the status phase and the agenda phase I have consistently asked you to make a concession to prevent or stop our war.
You never made a single realistic proposition (like: "OK, I will start the turn by evacuating from A/F to Q/R and give you 3 or 4 TG, let's call it quits" - which is what I would have accepted during the Strategic card selection last turn before we started the whole circus), instead, you always bounce back to "I'd have negotiated with Jazz".

Yet you're not even willing to hint at what you're willing to offer or you make offers that just do not match the table (like demanding my Ceasefire last ropund, or now scaremongering about taking my home world, and when I point out how that's unlikely, you say "I know all that" - so, if you do, why make the point in the first place?).

When all that fails, you argue about how you didn't start this (first it was Jazz who threatened to take 'your' planets, never mind Khell was on them. Then it was me for the action card, then it was me for attacking your HW, now it is me bragging instead of negotiating).

And now we're in a situation where it just really doesn't matter anymore.

FYI:
If you had allowed me into A/F on the deal above, I would have likely either attacked or approached Nom for a turn's lease of Arinaam/Meer: 6 influence would have helped me a long way toward the 16 required for 2 VP, and would have immediately granted the 4 planets of the same type, off-setting the SftT I would have lost.

You are on 5 VP because you forfeited points to get one over me. You knew what action cards you had, and what position you had. You could have just laid a deal on the table, which is what I asked, but you were vague, hardly negotiative. Just because you "could" unleash your wrath, didn't mean you "had" to. By doing what you did, you did screw me over, but you also screwed yourself over, you could have been in a great position to not only win the game but influence it in a big way. I offered you 4 TG's and A/F but before we could even hash that deal out, you used an action card that meant I could not retreat out of A/F. You gave me less options. That card could have come in handy this round no? Not to be used on someone who is middling pack but a competitor for the win. I always intended to negotiate withdrawal with Jazz, and valued it at 4 TG. I never got use out of those planets except to complete the PO.

My gripe/issue is that you, as a player, forfeited your chance at winning/scoring PO's, in order to go to war with me. Let's be honest and say it didn't work out for you. Yes you prevented me from scoring points but you also made yourself come near the bottom points wise. Last round you could have scored 2 VP's, not used all those great action cards and had major impact this round.

[Tattersail_]

Tapper, on 15 January 2020 - 12:16 PM, said:

Tattersail_, on 15 January 2020 - 08:59 AM, said:

Tapper, on 15 January 2020 - 08:51 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 14 January 2020 - 03:27 PM, said:

Tapper what would you like to amend our relationship?

- Evacuating Abyz/Fria on your first action + your Trade Agreement.

If you have already dealt your Trade Agreement:

- Evacuating Abyz/Fria on your first action + your Ceasefire.

And "evacuating" means moving all ships and infantry to your homeworld or QQ/Rarron.

Moving out of Abyz will not be a problem, as for the second part of the deal how about we amend that bit. I was planning on making myself speaker, what can you offer me to make Nom speaker so you get second pick?

In all honesty: going second is not a big deal. Picking last (if/when you'd make yourself Speaker) would suck, but I think I can weather it. I think Nom should be the first person to talk to to see if you can iron out a deal

This was us negotiating.

Then you just went and hit me with that action card, and had formulated your plan for that round. This is where you decided not to negotiate or play politics and forfeit chance at points score.

You knew you had political stability, then instead of thinking fuck it I can get leadership again, you could have held onto that card, took first pick this round and planned for political stability next round, where there's a chance you could win.

So i'd have retreated, you would have gained 4 TG's, and at the time you had 10, so it wouldn't have been a stretch for you to get 16. You decided against it because IH was offering you a free refresh for your votes on an agenda. You declined.

So fuck off thinking this is my fault, nothing I can do when someone wants to do what you did at a cost to themselves.

[ToasTer86]

Itwæs Nom, on 25 February 2020 - 10:51 AM, said:

Imperial Historian, on 25 February 2020 - 12:04 AM, said:

Nom are you planning to research instinct training? Let's you sabotage any sabotages Toaster plays.

Can't tell yet but it's a possibility

I wont score next round, so wasting a token to stop me attacking D'rek or IH seems a bit counter productive.

[ToasTer86]

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 11:03 AM, said:

Tapper, on 25 February 2020 - 10:49 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 10:03 AM, said:

I know all this. I didn't play the long game with you as a neighbour. So when I mention the Imperial strategy card I wanted to see your thoughts, if you'd have been slightly amenable and say asked for something in return then there would have been discussion but you basically shot me down and bragged about you winning the war. You've been lucky with action cards to get in the position you are in. I still think I'd have negotiated well with Jazz and been in a position to win or contend a win without you going a different route. 9 VP I reckon going into this round and a slight outside chance of stealing victory. I already know I have no chance so whatever you do is up to you. What I think though is when you took over your objective was completely different to Jazz's which is understandable. He was going for points whereas you're going for a lesson/fun. Fair play, you do you.

Throughout last round, the status phase and the agenda phase I have consistently asked you to make a concession to prevent or stop our war.
You never made a single realistic proposition (like: "OK, I will start the turn by evacuating from A/F to Q/R and give you 3 or 4 TG, let's call it quits" - which is what I would have accepted during the Strategic card selection last turn before we started the whole circus), instead, you always bounce back to "I'd have negotiated with Jazz".

Yet you're not even willing to hint at what you're willing to offer or you make offers that just do not match the table (like demanding my Ceasefire last ropund, or now scaremongering about taking my home world, and when I point out how that's unlikely, you say "I know all that" - so, if you do, why make the point in the first place?).

When all that fails, you argue about how you didn't start this (first it was Jazz who threatened to take 'your' planets, never mind Khell was on them. Then it was me for the action card, then it was me for attacking your HW, now it is me bragging instead of negotiating).

And now we're in a situation where it just really doesn't matter anymore.

FYI:
If you had allowed me into A/F on the deal above, I would have likely either attacked or approached Nom for a turn's lease of Arinaam/Meer: 6 influence would have helped me a long way toward the 16 required for 2 VP, and would have immediately granted the 4 planets of the same type, off-setting the SftT I would have lost.

You are on 5 VP because you forfeited points to get one over me. You knew what action cards you had, and what position you had. You could have just laid a deal on the table, which is what I asked, but you were vague, hardly negotiative. Just because you "could" unleash your wrath, didn't mean you "had" to. By doing what you did, you did screw me over, but you also screwed yourself over, you could have been in a great position to not only win the game but influence it in a big way. I offered you 4 TG's and A/F but before we could even hash that deal out, you used an action card that meant I could not retreat out of A/F. You gave me less options. That card could have come in handy this round no? Not to be used on someone who is middling pack but a competitor for the win. I always intended to negotiate withdrawal with Jazz, and valued it at 4 TG. I never got use out of those planets except to complete the PO.

My gripe/issue is that you, as a player, forfeited your chance at winning/scoring PO's, in order to go to war with me. Let's be honest and say it didn't work out for you. Yes you prevented me from scoring points but you also made yourself come near the bottom points wise. Last round you could have scored 2 VP's, not used all those great action cards and had major impact this round.

I agree with your statement, but coming to a conclusion in trading is kinda hard when typing it through a forum.
you guys just had a bad start with it. Tapper joined when you were already invading his stuff.

[D'rek]

ToasTer86, on 25 February 2020 - 12:16 PM, said:

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 11:03 AM, said:

Tapper, on 25 February 2020 - 10:49 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2020 - 10:03 AM, said:

I know all this. I didn't play the long game with you as a neighbour. So when I mention the Imperial strategy card I wanted to see your thoughts, if you'd have been slightly amenable and say asked for something in return then there would have been discussion but you basically shot me down and bragged about you winning the war. You've been lucky with action cards to get in the position you are in. I still think I'd have negotiated well with Jazz and been in a position to win or contend a win without you going a different route. 9 VP I reckon going into this round and a slight outside chance of stealing victory. I already know I have no chance so whatever you do is up to you. What I think though is when you took over your objective was completely different to Jazz's which is understandable. He was going for points whereas you're going for a lesson/fun. Fair play, you do you.

Throughout last round, the status phase and the agenda phase I have consistently asked you to make a concession to prevent or stop our war.
You never made a single realistic proposition (like: "OK, I will start the turn by evacuating from A/F to Q/R and give you 3 or 4 TG, let's call it quits" - which is what I would have accepted during the Strategic card selection last turn before we started the whole circus), instead, you always bounce back to "I'd have negotiated with Jazz".

Yet you're not even willing to hint at what you're willing to offer or you make offers that just do not match the table (like demanding my Ceasefire last ropund, or now scaremongering about taking my home world, and when I point out how that's unlikely, you say "I know all that" - so, if you do, why make the point in the first place?).

When all that fails, you argue about how you didn't start this (first it was Jazz who threatened to take 'your' planets, never mind Khell was on them. Then it was me for the action card, then it was me for attacking your HW, now it is me bragging instead of negotiating).

And now we're in a situation where it just really doesn't matter anymore.

FYI:
If you had allowed me into A/F on the deal above, I would have likely either attacked or approached Nom for a turn's lease of Arinaam/Meer: 6 influence would have helped me a long way toward the 16 required for 2 VP, and would have immediately granted the 4 planets of the same type, off-setting the SftT I would have lost.

You are on 5 VP because you forfeited points to get one over me. You knew what action cards you had, and what position you had. You could have just laid a deal on the table, which is what I asked, but you were vague, hardly negotiative. Just because you "could" unleash your wrath, didn't mean you "had" to. By doing what you did, you did screw me over, but you also screwed yourself over, you could have been in a great position to not only win the game but influence it in a big way. I offered you 4 TG's and A/F but before we could even hash that deal out, you used an action card that meant I could not retreat out of A/F. You gave me less options. That card could have come in handy this round no? Not to be used on someone who is middling pack but a competitor for the win. I always intended to negotiate withdrawal with Jazz, and valued it at 4 TG. I never got use out of those planets except to complete the PO.

My gripe/issue is that you, as a player, forfeited your chance at winning/scoring PO's, in order to go to war with me. Let's be honest and say it didn't work out for you. Yes you prevented me from scoring points but you also made yourself come near the bottom points wise. Last round you could have scored 2 VP's, not used all those great action cards and had major impact this round.

I agree with your statement, but coming to a conclusion in trading is kinda hard when typing it through a forum.
you guys just had a bad start with it. Tapper joined when you were already invading his stuff.

And I disagree with his statement, as well as the thinking that without the conflict with Tapper Tatts would somehow be in a top-scoring position right now.