Longturn Forum

Posted: **Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:31 pm**

This is the LW1a winning topic

Posted: **Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:10 am**

We (wieder and akfaew) claim victory of LW1a. We are allied and any nations not surrendering will be destroyed.

Posted: **Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:25 pm**

I accept defeat

Posted: **Sun Jun 22, 2014 4:58 am**

why accept defeat if all you must do is survive 5 more turns for a draw? why you would play 100+ turns for that, and all you must do is set to musket and go idle to draw...? me and stratthinker finsihed our ladder so fast to give noobs on other ladder chance to draw, but i guess they are either idle or winning doesn't matter. maybe we should bet with money, and then to see if players would accept loss instead of tie

(or maybe temmakiel is 1 or 2 cities from being finished?)...

Posted: **Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:09 am**

He is not, and i don`t think that he can be killed fast enough. He was just cooperating with them but was the part of their alliance.

Posted: **Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:36 am**

Define alliance.

Posted: **Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:48 am**

The end game rules do need some fine tuning, but it is nice to see players cooperating to smooth over the glitches.

Posted: **Sun Jun 22, 2014 4:03 pm**

With 3 winners and 2 points available, 2/3 point should be given to each winner. I like the idea in future games to have an available pool of points to take from, so the value of the win would decrease as more team members join the alliance who won. Ie, it makes no sense to me how a lone wolf winner in a big game LT gets same # of points as if a team of 16 would win each getting 1 point each?

It should be clear by now that limiting alliance size doesn't work - usually about 80% of the players are "vassal" players. They should be counted as winners too.

Posted: **Sun Jun 22, 2014 4:17 pm**

Another thing is that with the current rules it's hard to force anyone to win the game. In LT31 I ended up with more cities than anyone else but after the game had ended with the turn limit of 180 I simply accepted my defeat and made it possible for other players to claim victory of the game.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 2:01 am**

wieder, well I guess I was wrong. a win is a win, and it doesn't make sense to divide it. This is a small community and good sportsmanship is also important, so you have demonstrated this by forfeiting your win in Lt31. You are actually quite good with not doing end turn rta attacks compared to many others. It is much like fuball in world cup, if a player is willing to make a tackle to injure opponent if it's possible for referee not to see it. jhh, det0r, ifaesfu all quit because of injuries from these types of bad sportsmanship fouls.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 5:11 am**

I have done my share of tc rts on lw1a... But why? I have been hoping to see a random tc used for the next game in order to prevent the tc rts moves made in the last 60 seconds.

I haven't been doing the traditional rts.

This game has only few turns left. It's likely that this is a tie no matter what.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 6:39 am**

mmm2 wrote:You are actually quite good with not doing end turn rta attacks compared to many others.

LOL

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 6:45 am**

wieder wrote:Define alliance.

Code: Select all

Alliance: Group of players who are either allied directly or at least indirectly ingame  (player X allied with player Y; Y with Z; so X indirectly with Z)

Stick to our rules.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:13 am**

mmm2 wrote:why accept defeat if all you must do is survive 5 more turns for a draw? why you would play 100+ turns for that, and all you must do is set to musket and go idle to draw...? me and stratthinker finsihed our ladder so fast to give noobs on other ladder chance to draw, but i guess they are either idle or winning doesn't matter. maybe we should bet with money, and then to see if players would accept loss instead of tie (or maybe temmakiel is 1 or 2 cities from being finished?)...

Do you think you have mandatory to judge our game? What he is loosing accepting victory? nothing, he can only get one more point then 0 from being beaten. I am only curious why our victory pretenders made his topic in last hours of T113, for me it is stupid.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:15 am**

LOL? Not every game is played the same way. I tried to make a point with the TC stuff in lw1a but apparently didn't.

What's stupid in making a victory post when there is still a slight chance of winning?

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:28 am**

wieder wrote:What's stupid in making a victory post when there is still a slight chance of winning?

Why didn't you make this topic a week ago? You could have much more time for everything to win.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:48 am**

akfaew wrote:Why did this thread get so crapped up? Either you surrender, oppose, or don't reply.

Sure, but I have time to end of a game to replay if I surrender or not. Once topic was written 14 turns to end everybody need to surrender or not not less then 7 turns to end and you could be much more time to kill maybe one or two rebels (not everyone could be rebels) to be sure of winning.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:13 am**

What difference would it have made if it was posted 7 or 14 turns before the end? T113 was the last turn to post it so it makes sense to post it at that time. Actually T113 was also the optimal turn for the post to be made since T112 might have been too early.

"After a person/team declares victory on appropriate forum by listing the current turn and winning player(s), the remaining players have 7 turns to oppose this claim. RIP players cannot oppose. If you post accepting your defeat you are survivor, if you do not reply, you will be considered a RIP player."

This was the advice we got for timing the victory post.

"In LW1a AND LW1c there was T83, so victory post need to be written before end of T113. If anybody need to ask what to do because he doesnt know what is all mean please ask."

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:21 am**

wieder wrote: "In LW1a AND LW1c there was T83, so victory post need to be written before end of T113. If anybody need to ask what to do because he doesnt know what is all mean please ask."

before mean not in T114 and after, Beofre T113 means time between T83 and T113, it is up to you what is your strategy and when you writing your posts, for me writing it in T113 in this case is stupid, but i will not try to explain it. Our brains are not working on similar waves and you usualy do not understand my point of view.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 11:36 am**

Posting it in T112 might have resulted with someone else posting another winning topic at T113. This might have resulted with some interesting interpretations regarding which one of the winning posts would be valid and if someone was accepting the other but ignoring the other one. Now we know that there is just one valid post. Of course this might have happened in T113 after this topic was posted, but the risk was a smaller one.

Also as you know, time is running out and any of you remaining & not agreeing will probably disagree anyway. At least we have to assume that happening unless you want to make sure you are not going to be fighting with lw1 winnings in lw2.

Anyway, if the winning post was made 14 turns before the end the remaining players could have made a new winning post every turn for the next 7 turns and then what would have happened?

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:34 pm**

End Turn will start counting downturn in rest of games same wave, from this time future win allies have to:

end their games before End Turn + 37 turns:

they have 30 turns for post claiming victory post and have a faith there will be no rebels,

if there are some rebels they have 37 turns (End Turn +37) to kill all rebels and complete victory post,

any alliance can make a victory post sooner and wait 7 days for rebels and survivors, not to let be in hurry last turns.

If some of this restrictions will fail (no winning topic, no all rebels RIP, winning topic doesn't adhere to deadlines) - all non RIP/Idler players will get a tie point to their major points and game will be treated as a draw.

I wonder how can you interpret this rules in such radiculus way. There is no chance any winning topic is more important or writing in anytime else, if you can invent that in this rules two alliancess can win or can be any discussion who will win please quote me this sentence wich is not clear.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:42 pm**

wieder wrote:Anyway, if the winning post was made 14 turns before the end the remaining players could have made a new winning post every turn for the next 7 turns and then what would have happened?

Maybe we can treat this guy as a spammer and block him to use forum for some time. Of course first winning topic will count, after 7 days and no luck, a player can post another one.

Posted: **Mon Jun 23, 2014 5:24 pm**

akfaew wrote:Why did this thread get so crapped up? Either you surrender, oppose, or don't reply.

Another thing is that even if a player defeat nobody says that he will get a point because of rule:

Code: Select all

All non RIP players need to have a city at end of a game, players with settler/worker/explorer/partisan only will be treated as RIP and cannot get any major points.

So it may be a situation some players surrender but died before 7 days of winning topic creation date

Longturn Forum

LW1a - winning topic

LW1a - winning topic