Winning Post

Drew · Post by **Drew** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:23 am

I would like to make what is known as the "winning post" from winning condition (2) from http://forum.longturn.org/viewtopic.php?id=616. I have built the Atlantic Telegraph Company. If no one with an alive nation objects within a week, the game will end. Perhaps no one will object because people are tired of dealing with caravan trade route logistics.

pipo · Post by **pipo** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:02 pm

akfaew wrote:Marking everyone as a winner is super lame in my book. To victory or death. I object.

Please retract your objection. The difference in power is too great for the game to be of interest for anyone including factual winners.

Forcing us (through ethical reasons) to play is not fair. Even in chess, one is allowed to resign.

I do not care for ranking so anyone can take my spot in the scores or in the game.

I actually do not even care about my 'in game' reputation since this is my last longturn game.

I only continue to play here by respect of LT traditions. I am ready to concede victory if that would help.

I do think that Drew deserves to be part of the winning 'pack'. I think that anybody that reaches the level he has, without artifices, deserves some recognition.

Please reconsider your objection or give us, the poor losers, an alternate quick ending.

edrim · Post by **edrim** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:50 pm

What about our NAP, is it ended in same turn you wrote winning post?
I dont get it, we cannot attack you because of NAP but should accept victory post even if we dont know what is the ranking of all players?
When you write a winning post somebody else can deny it and winning post is invalid, thats what is in this point about winning by Telegraph.

Drew · Post by **Drew** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:31 pm

Here is the ranking of all the alive nations on T83, by score:

Code: Select all

Drew      409
Akfaew    347
Wieder    309
Xercise   303
Soon      288
Pipo      285
Paavo     281
Cgalik    275
Edrim     265
Dvgo      261
Lord_P    257
Kryon     253
Bamskamp  229
Elrik     228
Teek      220
Kocurek   206
Wwqt      204
Temmikael 186
Zorn      180
Kull      176
Robotis   167
Sigur     166
Arkan     140
Asdema    132
Chill     130
Nicemicro 115
Mmultima  105

As far as I can tell, it doesn't matter who makes the winning post, so the game will be over within a week if no one objects to akfaew's winning post. If the game ends this way, all players with 40% of the top score (which comes to 164 or higher) will be considered winners, and all players with at least 32% of the top score (at least 131) will be considered survivors. If someone objects to akfaew's post within a week then it is invalid and we play on. Additionally, I consider NAPs unaffected by winning posts.

My winning post was not meant to be confrontational but only intended to see if people really want to keep playing this game, given that many players (if not most or all) believe trade routes make the game less fun, especially when some players do not know about them for some time. If you wish to keep playing, then object to the winning post, and the game will continue until either all nations who objected are dead, or some other win condition is met.

Wieder, please correct me if anything I said was incorrect.

Post by **wieder** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:21 pm

At the moment we don't have a valid winning post.

"My winning post was not meant to be confrontational but only intended to see if people really want to keep playing this game"

Yeah, the winning post is effectively a way to end the game while accepting to the list of winners. The next LT game will probably have the traditional allied victory but with LT36 the winners are decided by score and any player with an alive nation can object to the winning post.

edrim · Post by **edrim** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:49 pm

pipo wrote:I do think that Drew deserves to be part of the winning 'pack'. I think that anybody that reaches the level he has, without artifices, deserves some recognition.

Please reconsider your objection or give us, the poor losers, an alternate quick ending.

Come one, Drew was grow without any danger from any side, it is only simcity, all your ally set NAP's with all your neighbours and could grow without even think about defend or whatever. You guys took many players together to massive ally, grow ASAP and want to win with tech and production supermacy.
But now when it is opposite side to your, you are trying to play on emotions and ethics and try to end this game by writting winning post and ask nobody reject?
End games are never quic ending, but only one side are in good mood on it (except this freak game with T180 ending).
I doubt your wolfpack would even consider accepting such radicouls winning post as it could stay like it was prepared, you as a superrior 8+ members ally demolishing every other nation. LOL.

Last time when we has mass caravans in LT you have been in caravans abuse team, did you changed so well that now you are not accepting this way of exploits? And yes, we were 5vs15 nations.

Now when you are quiting from playing LT you are trying to ruin other pleasure and trying to create bad spirit here.

Should we write to rules that if one team will get supperior over rest of a board then all others deserved do win should ask about stop game because of nosense of ending a game.

I have played couple of times to the end in loosers side, this is very painfull, but there is three ways: you can keep playing doing everything to die hard, just quit playing logging one time for 10 turns not to be idled, or trolling on forum to have own pleasure and destroy mood of winners (I used to combine first and third way).

But now lots of players can take it like admins do something bad, they put exploits to ruleset and use them in special ugly way. Now we are not. As i told caravans was invented in our team by accident because of strange behaviour. I will always do anything I can to win against coallition with doubled of size then other alliances ingame. So now we have spent a little more time to think how to win with you. There was only one ally with 8 members, and other alliances was at least half of yours and have wars for all the time. But you have NAPs with anyone else and could grow to have superiority.

pipo · Post by **pipo** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 7:14 pm

akfaew wrote:What? This is nonsensical. If that is the case then I object to my winning post.
Code: Select all
When life seems hard, the courageous do not lie down and accept defeat; instead, they are all the more determined to struggle for a better future.
- HM Queen Elizabeth II

There is no need to insult me here I am just trying to save time. I also worked hard for 3 months, so is most of the other players.

You know that, at a certain point, the score will grow exponentially. In another week I do no expect that more than 50% will
make the final 40% of the high score.

Quoting my own Queen to call me a coward shows a very aggressive attitude. I also think that your quote does not apply. Knowing when to retreat is a very important part of conducting a war. Did I offended you somewhere in the past? If so, I regret it.

Post by **wieder** » Sun Mar 27, 2016 8:08 pm

I wish people would be able to say how they played hard for few months. Working hard sounds like... How should I put it? Work?

I play on LT because this is fun and it's about getting there. Of course sometimes there may be some disappointments and there are also times when this really feels frustrating. I like to think that all that makes the game like a real journey and the experience may become truly memorable.

Unfortunately the game didn't happen quite it was planned to happen and that's a real shame. All we can do is to fix the problems and prepare for the next game. Meanwhile LT36 is not yet decided and I honestly think that we haven't seen the winner yet. LT36 is a massive game with lots of great players. Almost anything can happen. In some of the past games the game was often decided once the players gave up after some unfortunate events and not really because the no longer had options to play with.

It's of course understandable if someone wants to quit playing. If anyone wants to do that, please as your teammates / someone else announce it on the forum and we will try to looks for a replacement player. You can hide the identity of the player wanting to quit by asking for someone else to tell about it on the forum. You can also looks for a replacement player by yourself.

I wish we could improve the game so that people would like to play another LT game and you can always send suggestions for improving LT. You can do that on the forum or by sending a private message to the admins. There has been some attempts to make the politics less important part of the game and while some attempts were successful some were more like failures. It's hard to tell beforehand how something works out.

People play LT because it's nothing like playing against AI and that's how it is in good and bad

cgalik · Post by **cgalik** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:39 pm

edrim/akfaew/wieder/xercise/team, You have lots more techs than anyone else. I have been outsmarted. I would like to concede defeat.

I do not want to ruin other's LT pleasure. But I hope that if we end LT36 now, LT37 can start sooner. I'm hoping that this will actually create a good spirit around this game by the leaders graciously allowing the game to end. And like as to akfaew's Queen quote, I am hoping this will help create a better LT future in this way.

Anyways, if we go against you, edrim will endlessly mock us for our team size against you.

And like Pipo, I would not like to ragequit as that is super lame, and disrespectful to LT. So I also beg for mercy from the winners to let this game end per the way the rules have been established.

edrim, I ask that you not personally attack Drew's playing style on his second LT game. Especially when you are the one who agreed to NAP with him. And I see no way where you could have any idea how he actually played.

I too will also give up my spot as a winner, especially if it helps end LT36. So I beg that you retract your objection.

pipo · Post by **pipo** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:51 pm

Edrim, your point would be valid if Drew didn't have consistent results accross various circumstances.

About "Big Alliances";
I didn't start this game by saying to myself "Hey I will get the biggest alliance possible.". It just happenned that way. Yes, I tend to be friend with my neighbors but there are conditions.
I usualy initiate contact. If I get no response, I automatically attack, because I see no other options and there is no point in postponing.
If I get a response, it normally ends with a NAP (explicit or implicit) or
an alliance.

Also, small alliances are useful to players who care about ranking. I do not.

I do not think that the fact I used caravans in the past is relevant here.

Also, to be very clear.

I do not think this game is bad and I do not wish to bring down the spirit.
I only think that I already got the bulk of what this game can offer ME.
I would suggest to everybody I know to play Longturn for a while. I think it is very enriching.

I DO NOT think admins did something bad. I trust ALL admins not to cheat and I certainly NOT considering the use of caravans/capture in this game as cheating. I think finding a glitch in Longturn/Freeciv is fair play, and I CONCEDE the game to the players who used that better than me.

Trolling is not my cup of tea. But I admit that making a winning post was half driven by a quest for informations.

Do not worry about me. If I am forced to continue to play, I WILL find a way to make it interesting other than messing around.

edrim · Post by **edrim** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:19 pm

I dont speak about it with my other allies, but I will ask them about it - it would be fair to end game if you havent started your own caravan rushing.
So maybe I will try to force them to not to decline winning post if you say thay nobody of you started caravans mess after you knew an idea what is going on, because it is not ethic to use them in this game or anything else brought you not to use them.

Because if you didn't started producing caravans for your own grown it would be fair to end a game as it is, of course if any other alliances is not against it (ending game before it enter to end stage wars).

pipo · Post by **pipo** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:03 pm

Ok, we (our team) have a very loose organisation. We do not have any leader, per se. We work by consensus and up to the
caravaning, it has worked great for us.

I, personnaly discovered that trading was possible on March 1st. (around T60) by doing some tests on my home server.

It took ME, another 2 weeks to figure out the 'capture' trick. Some of my teammates are saying that we learned it from
some other groups. That is possible. I am not sure yet, when that happened.

As of today, I am not aware that we have used the 'capture' trick. I am not complaining here, just explaining.

Personnaly, I am not asking to end the game based on the fact that it is unfair. I am just saying, this is not the game
I signed up for. Bravo to the people who used that flaw better than me and let's get it over with.

Caravaning is a LOT of work/time/play that I am not prepared to do. Specially that Spring (in my country) is coming very fast
and I have a lot of 'unwinterizing' things to do.

These are the reasons I would prefer that game to finish rapidly.

The way I see it, also, is that I can write a winning post at every turn until everybody gets tired of objecting. haha

I am just realizing that there might be more players that want to finish this game that there are that want to continue.

Is there a way we can have a vote somehow?

Post by **wieder** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 8:47 pm

T60 and this?

"I do think that Drew deserves to be part of the winning 'pack'. I think that anybody that reaches the level he has, without artifices, deserves some recognition."

pipo · Post by **pipo** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:17 am

wieder wrote:T60 and this?

"I do think that Drew deserves to be part of the winning 'pack'. I think that anybody that reaches the level he has, without artifices, deserves some recognition."

Although I sent caravans his way to establish trade routes around T66-67, he hasn't established himself until arounf T75 I think.
Before that he managed to stay in top 3 Demographics (and most of the time first) in pop, settled area, research speed and production.
He is still first (T85) at these.

I find it strange that my single phrase about Drew attracted so much attention.
For me, that was only a detail in the whole process.

Most of the veterans in our group do not care about scores or ranks.

I would like our 'newbies' to have the option of caring or not about scores/ranks, that's all.

What about the other issues? Are we terminating? Can we have a vote? How can we organize an end to this?

This is a very big map, We are a very big group. This 'false' game could very well last until next winter. Do we all really want that?

Maybe I should hire a consultant on trading from the warclient/warserver bunch? hehe

zorn · Post by **zorn** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:15 am

It seems that Akfaew, at least, wants to continue until he is a clear winner, defeating Drew, for example. That means any "winning post" will be objected to. If other players accept that victory, they could speed up the process by either disbanding their cities or leaving them open so that the winners can take them over. Then the game could end fast. If only a few players want to quit, perhaps there are others who would be interested in taking their place.

Drew · Post by **Drew** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 7:56 pm

Since the winning post has been objected to, I'll keep playing. At the least I'll get some experience in a game that will probably go to nukes (LT35 ended before nukes). Additionally, I don't request to be a part of the group of winners without being in accordance to the winning conditions.

For the record, my I established my first two trade routes at T72. As for the comment from Pipo that's been getting so much attention: For most of the game I was first in most demographics, and I've been 1st in production since the early game. I don't claim this to be due to great skill alone, since my neighbor Goody was pretty much a hut, and Lord_P wore down El_perdedor enough so that when we split him up I got my half pretty easily. The rest of my neighbors have been peaceful, also allowing me to grow my cities early. Additionally, I may have gone up in demographics when other players started switching production to caravans, though without knowing when trade routes were discovered, I can't be sure

I'm pretty sure neither me nor anyone in my alliance will win this game, as we failed to catch on to the "capture-a-caravan" game. Even when I first heard of it I failed to grasp the significance of it and probably would have been better off if I had sent warriors to far away lands immediately. Despite the fact that I will probably lose, I'll play this game out to the end, hopefully learning some good lessons in late-game strategies that I can apply to future games

Thanks to everyone for playing and thanks especially to the admins for making it all possible. Even though I (like most people) have found this game to me less fun with trade routes (becoming quickly uneven and requiring more time for caravan logistics) it's still been a fun game.

edrim · Post by **edrim** » Fri Apr 01, 2016 11:13 am

Guys, if you dont have time for playing and winning (loosing takes much less time) try to focus on LW, there are only 8 cities games and nobody is going to micromanagment 50+ cities.
All LT games in the end are horrible to do all moves propely, if they Caravans or not. Winners usually spending an hour or more per day to get it to the end.

Please hands up who didn't know that in end stage this game takes much more time then in the beggining.

cgalik · Post by **cgalik** » Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:32 am

like akfaew, I make the winning post.

Post by **wieder** » Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:43 am

I know playing with caravans may be frustrating but winning posts should be easy to understand and find. It makes no sense if a winning post is "hidden" on the replies or it's hard to understand if it's a real winning post, a joke or something else.

Another problem is that since English is a second language for many of us it's not always obvious to everyone how to understand posts like "I make the winning post." To me it sounds like that person is planning to make the winning post in the future but I can understand how someone could understand it as a winning post.

I don't think this thread has a valid winning post. If you are planning to make a winning post, please open a new thread and make the winning post easy to understand. Drew made an excellent winning post in the first message of this thread.

cgalik · Post by **cgalik** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 2:38 am

wieder, who is frustrated playing with caravans? You've invaded my land with alpines, killing and stealing and my caravans. So I don't even have any to play with to be frustrated with! lol But seriously I'm not mad or frustrated. You guys got it figured out while the rest of us don't. You win.

I feel picked on.

You didn't say the same thing about your own teammate who posted.

I did not try to be deceptive in any way. I tried to be as clear as possible. I apologize if it appeared as hidden, I put it under the topic "Winning Post". If you'd like me to start a new thread I sure can. If there's a separate template you'd like me to follow I can do that too. Maybe want me to try finish? Is "i tehdä paalu" correct? (Google translate, no idea what it says lol)

Post by **wieder** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 5:56 pm

I decided to say about that once the same words were used twice to "make" a winning post.

Some players have told me that this feels kind of frustrating. Feel no doubt, it's frustrating to see how unintended features change the gameplay to something completely different. I assume this is the case for many players. Of course there is a difference between getting really frustrated, frustrated and slightly frustrated. To me it would be more fun to play with a balanced ruleset.

"Tehdä paalu" means "make a pole" and not a pole as a geographical area or as a nationality. paalu = stump, pile, pole, post, stilt, pale, picket, stanchion according to my mobile dictionary. Some people could also understand it as making some serious money.

I will be back = Minä (I) teen (will make) paluun (return). We have this way of combining words into one and that makes it sometimes complicated for Google Translate.

In German it might be something like this: Ich werde wiederkommen. The German speaking players will probably correct me about that