SCs other than the vq

[Gandalf Parker]

Its not that unusual for Posts to be deleted if they take the mood too far in the wrong direction. Actually what I did was delete my post which probably was basly worded. Also the post before it which started the off discussion, and the one following it which was nothing but flames.

Alot of things could be done. Editing, removing a post, removing a thread. But the thread has alot of good info in it if it can stay friendly.

[PvK]

Seems to me terribly heavy-handed for something that I would not have said warranted any such attention. I'd also hope that when a moderator is involved in a discussion that he/she thinks warrants editing other people's Posts, that he should have another, uninvolved moderator look at it and decide whether to do it.

Removing other people's Posts without obviously good and impartial reason can have a lot more negative effect than someone ranting, or even some people flaming each other.

People get quite upset about it. Even if they weren't the ones whose Posts were deleted. Also, it makes it impossible for later readers (or even previous participants looking back to see where a misunderstanding or overreaction came from) to fairly judge what happened. (e.g. People may have later written something which wasn't deleted, but the tone may have had something to do with something that was deleted.)

So what if someone mistakenly Posts about some sort of "old boy network", or there's some misunderstanding going on? It's been a lot worse on other threads.

When Posts start vanishing though, well, I'm with the group who just feels like leaving the forum alone at that point, or finding one with less moderator deletion going on.

Generally, until this one, I've had extreme respect for every post and contribution you've made, Gandalf. So, I hope you see where I'm coming from on this.

PvK

[Vynd]

I appreciate Gandalf's efforts to keep things civil. And I'm chagrined that I let my bias on the topic at hand drive me to criticize his post, while ignoring the post that prompted it. My apologies.

[LintMan]

Originally posted by PvK:
Seems to me terribly heavy-handed for something that I would not have said warranted any such attention. I'd also hope that when a moderator is involved in a discussion that he/she thinks warrants editing other people's Posts, that he should have another, uninvolved moderator look at it and decide whether to do it.

Removing other people's Posts without obviously good and impartial reason can have a lot more negative effect than someone ranting, or even some people flaming each other.

People get quite upset about it. Even if they weren't the ones whose Posts were deleted. Also, it makes it impossible for later readers (or even previous participants looking back to see where a misunderstanding or overreaction came from) to fairly judge what happened. (e.g. People may have later written something which wasn't deleted, but the tone may have had something to do with something that was deleted.)

So what if someone mistakenly Posts about some sort of "old boy network", or there's some misunderstanding going on? It's been a lot worse on other threads.

When Posts start vanishing though, well, I'm with the group who just feels like leaving the forum alone at that point, or finding one with less moderator deletion going on.

Generally, until this one, I've had extreme respect for every post and contribution you've made, Gandalf. So, I hope you see where I'm coming from on this.

I haven't been active in this thread (and don't have a strong an opinion on the topic), but I agree with PvK that deleting Posts to preserve a thread's "tone" is a very very bad precedent, even if done with the best intentions.

As I see it, it is a very slippery slope from there to deleting Posts that maybe "damage the useful tone of the forum" because, say, they "argumentatively/offensively portray the game in a bad/unfair light". It's Shrapnel's forum, so they can do that if they want, but I don't think people really trust a forum like that or feel they can speak freely.

Dom2 is a great game, and this is a pretty good community, so I think we can collectively withstand an occasional misunderstanding, troll, or even flame war.

I also think that if someone's post does need to be moderated, a much more preferable way would be for the moderator to edit down the offending part of the post, and insert an explanation of exactly why the post was moderated. In that way, at least some indication of the history of what people are reacting to is preserved.

Let me add, though, that I don't have any problems with Moderators deleting Posts that contain crud like hate speech, spam, gross obsenities, or wildly off-topic rants (ie: political cause stuff). These forums are free of that stuff, and I'm certainly glad of that and prefer to keep it that way.

Just my 2 cents.

[Pirateiam]

What astonishes me is that there are not more flame wars and arguments since we are just a bunch of Megalomaniac God Pretendars.

[Tris]

(conveniantly ignoring the post-deletion debate)

Everyone seems to have conveniantly ignored my "give us counter strategies" post. The summary of what I said:

A balanced strategy should, if anticipated have accessable and effective counters. I should not be able to tell you "I'm going to choose paper" and have a chance of winning (presumably you will choose scissors).

So can the more experienced players provide worked examples of viable counters to a) The typical VQ SC and to b) the castle/temple/VQ strategy, given that you guess someone is using that strategy from (say) turn 2.

You know exactly what is coming. You should be able to destroy your opponent for being so predictable....

Do you know how much time it would take to detail each and every strategy for each? There is one big, VQ counter thread for all the nuances of killing a VQ in and out of their domain, look there. Though you might want to discriminate the "Normal VQ" the "Equipped VQ" the "EQ with 6 Wishes pumped into it". Dominion fighting should be fairly simplistic with the suggestions that were presented. And for the castling, that is depending on the nation/use you use. If you have access to stealth troops or heavy high moving troops you don't have to worry about it as much, if you are playing Ulm on the other hand, you will have to worry about it.

Also you have to factor in "How many people playing the game" and "What map" and "If they have sea provinces" and "If they react in any given way."

[Tris]

This was meant to be "If you anticipated their use of this tactic from turn 2". So presumably when you spot it they are using a VQ, if you delay it will be an EQ, and further down the line an EQ with wishes.

I've read that thread and it seemed to mainly suggest ways to beat a VQ in battle, at least some of which seemed to me to be more expensive than the cost to your opponent of his VQ being beaten in battle.

I was after the "This strategy is balanced:if you anticipate it early you can do X" answer.

Thanks for the reply anyway, and I'll go read over that thread again, in case I've missed a valid answer to my query.

Cheers.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Tris:
I've read that thread and it seemed to mainly suggest ways to beat a VQ in battle, at least some of which seemed to me to be more expensive than the cost to your opponent of his VQ being beaten in battle.

As a general rule, it'll always be slightly more expensive on a purely explicit level to guarantee success in an offensive operation against a defending force: However, if you're using resources that are reusable, this doesn't matter: You only have to replace the resources consumed. Also, the value of taking ground and holding ground, I.E., actually making progress against your opponent, cannot be quite so easily defined. Since driving off the opposing VQ defender and actually taking a castle represents progress that is not so easily undone, particularly since your opponent will now have to use a new tactic, given that you have decisively countered his old one.

How difficult this will be depends on how well prepared he was to switch gears. Obviously, if he has a secondary strategy that he can switch to, you'll have to counter that, too: However, this will no longer be the VQ....unless he's very stupid, and will keep hamhandedly trying the same, now ineffective, strategy.

[ May 06, 2004, 14:10: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

[archaeolept]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
Its not that unusual for Posts to be deleted if they take the mood too far in the wrong direction. Actually what I did was delete my post which probably was basly worded. Also the post before it which started the off discussion, and the one following it which was nothing but flames.
Alot of things could be done. Editing, removing a post, removing a thread. But the thread has alot of good info in it if it can stay friendly.

[italics added]

hmm, I was going to stay away from this thread, but given that I was subsequently attacked...

No, it wasn't nothing but flames. Likely you found the tone disagreeable, perhaps in much the same manner as I had found your tone previously disagreeable.

but to delete the evidence and then, after the fact, slander my post w/out anyone having the ability to judge for themselves...

ehh, ok, now I'm definitely out of this thread, which is now just a heap of burning wreckage anyways.

[ May 06, 2004, 18:12: Message edited by: archaeolept ]