No Sign-Up Required!
Play Now!
Is Barka bad? Or complicated 4 party battle on a single territory.
In a World Powers game, there are 4 players including me and Barka. Barka offered agreements to all 3 other players, and stay idle building force throughout the beginning, causing unrest between 3 other players who were fighting each other. So we decided to gang up on him before it's too late. And yes, he's eliminated by 3 players' tanks sitting on his capital at the same time. I've never seen such a furious revenge operation :)
While waiting to be eliminated, he tried many times to deceive people into thinking that I'm cheating them. Especially a message where he blamed me of my tanks sitting on his capital "largest force is the defender - that would be Nguyen". AFAIK, I'm the strongest force, but he is still presence on his capital, so he is the defender. Defender here is about using defensive stat (30% with tanks) or offensive stat (50% with tanks), not who is attacking who because I see the number of casualties of each of 4 parties involved is unpredictable. Is my knowledge correct?
Any way, I'm not the "defender" in that territory, but Barka blamed me so. He is bad, very bad :)
I'm confused... blamed you for what?
Not sure I understand the situation, but if the owner of the territory has any units present, then they are the defender and everyone else attacks. If the owner has no units present, or the territory is neutral, then the foreign invader with the most units is supposed to roll as the "defender" and all other players roll as "attackers" for hit % calculation. Except of course, in naval battles, at sea everyone uses the attack %, there is no defender %. That's why the attack/defend % is the same on all naval units (this rule does impact air units though, fighters and bombers always roll with the attack % in naval battles).
yeah, I'm confused as to what you're complaining about nguyen. and how does you getting the defender roll mean you're cheating on the other 2?
He claimed that I fooled them into sending army into his capital so I can secretly destroy large parts of their army without breaking the alliance. He meant every casualty of 3 other players are caused by me single handedly just because I have the strongest force.
I know it's not true, what I observed was that everyone was killing everyone.
If I was the sole defender in one turn my remaining 6 units registered 7 kills - impossible. So the other 3 allies must have been killing each other. I never said you did anything secretly - that's your own language.
I never said Nguyen was cheating them but helping a stronger player attack a weaker player is always very risky. This is demonstrated in that a couple of turns after my death one of the other players has already expired.
I would never trust Nguyen's version of anything.
I think this was covered well in the test games we ran... with multiple players in combat, they all hit each other. Players A, B, and C all combat in C's territory. Player A records 7 hits. Those hits will be randomly attributed to both B and C, so both will lose units due to player A. The fact that the nature of the combat dictates players A and B are designated "Attackers" and C "Defender" is for die roll attack/defense %'s only. So even though there's 2 "attackers" and 1 "defender" for hit % calcs, for any individual players A, B, and C, they each have 2 "enemies" that will take hits from them.
Barka and Broomley heavily depend on diplomatic deception to win their games. This is not unfair but sometimes does feel like a bad sportsmanship. Yet again in 18th century the British thought of americans as beign a bad sportsman when they hid in the bushes and killed off their infantry.
>Broomley heavily depend on diplomatic deception to win their games
Not sure that's quite correct. Sure, I've been deceptive (like when I let kdlover think we were allied :) ) and I regularily use diplomacy to improve my situation, but I don't think I'm particularly deceptive about it. Certainly my diplomatic deals usually offer the other guy exactly the same chance to benefit and I very rarely try to coerce someone.
mateus, The British only have themselves to blame for that. I mean they marched in straight lines down well lit, open roads, wearing bright red uniforms whilst singing the British fight song, which goes something like "shoot me, shoot me shoot me...." lol
I stole that quote from somewhere, but I don't remember where I got it.
It's from "The Dilbert Future"
....
....
....
WHY DO I KNOW THAT!!?!??
because you have great taste lol.
Thanks for reminding me
broomly, i hope you don't take me in a wrong way. i don't think diplomatic deception is a bad thing. it adds flavor to this game.