MP: Asia Twist - Wraithlord Wins!

[DonCorazon]

Indeed, I recall my lust for your Crystal Citadel led to my downfall...

[WraithLord]

@DonC, I like you new avatar

Now while I can surely sympathize with Archae's feelings I think the following facts need to be taken into considerations:
A. My military prowess far outclassed his. I have taken a look at his last turns and he had nothing even remotely close to what I had. I won't go into boring details. Anyone who wants to verify that is more than welcome as I can send both his and my turns.

B. I had, as of last turn, an 8th VP breached (one more than victory condition required) with nothing that Van or Caelum could throw at me that could prevent its falling to me.

C. Van has been keeping quiet about the huge stockpiles of gems he received. I got nothing even remotely close from my allies. He got, and this is just from the little I glimpsed in the few random turns I got, a staggering amount of 1366 gems!!! Enough to cast GoH and another global I don't recall it's name. Of course he also get items in addition. Now, as he likes to phrase it, is this not "throwing" the game?- What did I do so wrong to be hated so much(in the game) that the other nations would give all they have in order for Van to win???

I ask w/a honesty, how is that so different from what Arist. did?- He couldn't help by sending huge stockpiles of gems so he chose to burn ground and make a sacrifice for his (in-game) friend to win against, what I only now realize, what was an alliance of powerful gem rich nations.

Even with all those gems my all game long advantage was too big for Archae. to close the gap. He lost the game to a superior nation. I won the game after months of hard work and dedication and although I can relate to Archae's frustration I think he needs to just accept the fact that he lost and move over. I went through all the motions and tedious, meticulous and hard work that a player must go in order to get far in a dominions game - and I won at the end. It's extremely negative to go around disputing that after you lost.

Archae, I call upon you for all to witness. Get off that high tree you climbed. I'd invite over for a cup of beer to talk things over but alas that's not possible. We're both veterans avid fans of dominions, no reason we should be feeling so bad about each other.

[DonCorazon]

Originally Posted by PashaDawg

If anybody wants any turn files, please let me know. I have backups of all turns and a master password.

Pasha, I'd like to take a look at them - thanks.

[Calahan]

Originally Posted by WraithLord

@DonC, I like you new avatar

I haven't yet forgiven DonC for cruelly abandoning Butters the way he did

[archaeolept]

Originally Posted by WraithLord

@DonC, I like you new avatar

Now while I can surely sympathize with Archae's feelings I think the following facts need to be taken into considerations:
A. My military prowess far outclassed his. I have taken a look at his last turns and he had nothing even remotely close to what I had. I won't go into boring details. Anyone who wants to verify that is more than welcome as I can send both his and my turns.

This is not the case according to independent analysis by other vets. Also, quite irrelevant, though telling that you want to assert this. It is amusing to see you assert this counterfactual now.

B. I had, as of last turn, an 8th VP breached (one more than victory condition required) with nothing that Van or Caelum could throw at me that could prevent its falling to me.

You had already broken the walls twice and not taken it. I certainly could have stopped you. Also, you got two of your VP's from Aristander, not one.

C. Van has been keeping quiet about the huge stockpiles of gems he received. I got nothing even remotely close from my allies. He got, and this is just from the little I glimpsed in the few random turns I got, a staggering amount of 1366 gems!!! Enough to cast GoH and another global I don't recall it's name. Of course he also get items in addition. Now, as he likes to phrase it, is this not "throwing" the game?- What did I do so wrong to be hated so much(in the game) that the other nations would give all they have in order for Van to win???

my allies were sending me gems in order to help prevent your win, yes. That is common practice, as opposed to throwing your vps, which I have never seen in a vet game of Dominions. Ever. It is clearly not throwing the game as I had not won, and it would have been a hard fight. If Pangaia had vacated his two vps, and cast crumble on his castles while I teleported in w/ a couple units in a concerted action, then you could say that he was trying to throw the game.

The gems functioned to balance out my heavy losses in protecting caelum's vps and support the war.

I ask w/a honesty, how is that so different from what Arist. did?- He couldn't help by sending huge stockpiles of gems so he chose to burn ground and make a sacrifice for his (in-game) friend to win against, what I only now realize, what was an alliance of powerful gem rich nations.

Even with all those gems my all game long advantage was too big for Archae. to close the gap. He lost the game to a superior nation.

No I did not. What is the point of making these counterfactual assertions? If you had wished you could have demonstrated your power through the normal means of doing so. You clearly were adverse to taking that route, the one of actual conflict and resolution.

I won the game after months of hard work and dedication and although I can relate to Archae's frustration I think he needs to just accept the fact that he lost and move over. I went through all the motions and tedious, meticulous and hard work that a player must go in order to get far in a dominions game - and I won at the end. It's extremely negative to go around disputing that after you lost.

I can accept the fact that collaborating in having a game thrown is acceptable to you.

Now, I understand that after Balbarian's official warning, you are likely trying to get me banned through incitement. So be it. I will respond clearly to any innaccurate claims made by you, while endeavouring to remain within the official forum guidelines.

[WraithLord]

Your claims are untrue, they are subject to your perspective but I'm oh so tired of this. You just go on and on and on. I admit defeat in the posting arena. I can't compete with your pace. I won the game fair against all that you and your allies could throw at me. Yes, it's really a fair competition when you're getting 1.5K gems of help and what not.

Now, this is not the first time I extend my hand to you in good will and ask you the accept your loss like a man and get over it. I'm not alone in this as quite a number of players have expressed similar sentiments upon witnessing all the fuss you are making.
This is however the last time you reject my invitation to get over it. I'm done talking to you. I don't want to play with you anymore. ever. I don't want to ever talk to you as well. Have a nice life and please keep out of mine.
I also ask you one last time to stop throwing slander at me wherever you can. This is not befitting of civil conduct and certainly not an accepted practice on these friendly forums.

[archaeolept]

Slander is a very serious accusation; it depends upon the facts being asserted being untrue, and on the accuser knowing them to be untrue. Could you specifically state what statements by me you consider slander? As, I cannot recall making any untrue assertions. This is the second time you have accused me of slander, also without any specifics. Which claims of mine specifically are you asserting to be slanderous?

In fact, asserting slander when you are aware that the accusations are basically correct is itself slander.

As to the opinions of a few forum denizens who have little knowledge of the situation, I don't see how that's especially relevant.

And as to the gems, I remain somewhat perplexed - on the one hand, you assert that you had such military preponderance that the outcome was moot anyways; on the other, you assert that my having received gems to support my fight against you was ... what? the game being thrown? Sending gems and items is pretty common practice, and certainly not one you refused either.

I said I was willing to try for a rematch in that new game of yours. It was you that rejected the offer.

like a man

Lol

___________________________
If Pangaia had vacated his two vps, and cast crumble on his own castles while I teleported in w/ a couple units in a concerted action, then you could say that he was trying to throw the game

[zlefin]

wriathlord, from what i have seen and heard, i have serious reservations about the manner of your win. To my feeling, the issue of proximateness is relevant, helping someone in general is one thing. Literally giving the win condition (from your own supply rather than helping them take it from enemies) is another.
However i haven't heard your case in as much detail and length as I would like.

I propose this solution to this dispute: you both agree on a selection of 3 veteran players to be a tribunal and decide this matter. Agreeing to binding arbitration would allow this to be settled, as sedttling between yourselves is obviously not working.
Zlefin

[Squirrelloid]

You know, i'd refrained from commenting on the forums because I wasn't involved in the game, but based on discussion on IRC...

1500 gems? Seriously? Certain examples about Kingmaking in Settlers of Catan (which were derided as unfair) pale in comparison to the size of the Kingmaking attempt that represents. Trading 100 wheat for 1 sheep seems *reasonable* in that context.

It is not a difference of kind to pass VPs than it is to pass resources without fair compensation. Archae, your allies were trying to give you the game just as much as WL's were trying to give him the game. To pretend otherwise is a farce, and makes laughable your entire claim. If you needed 1500 gems in aid to just come even (or some reasonable fascimile thereof) then on your own merits the game was already lost.

Any attempt to prevent one person from winning the game is necessarily an attempt to cause another person to win the game, because ultimately *only one person can win*. If your allies had been successful in their attempt to play kingmaker and caused you to win, they would have 'thrown' the game just as much as Aristander did. I use 'thrown' instead of thrown because you can only throw a game you can win. Clearly the other nations had already determined who the two powers that had any hope of winning were, and made a choice of which nation they favored for victor.

That Aristander's aid to WL was a better kingmaking play strikes me as superior strategy because it was more direct. Whereas your allies sent you material that would hopefully turn into VP, Aristander handed VP over directly. In both cases its an attempt to give one player more VP, one of them is just far more effective.

Either giving away anything in the game is unfair, or anything can be given freely. Since trading is allowed, and its hard to know what a fair market price for any particular good is, the boundary between 'giving' and 'trading' is rather nebulous. At which point, the only rational stance is that giving things away is fair game. So i won't fault your allies for giving you 1.5k gems, but i won't fault Aristander for giving away VP either.

[DonCorazon]

@Cal: Butters just wasn't intimidating enough...

@anyone talking about gem gifts: Personally, I rarely gift anyone anything in a game. But when I do, it has never been to the player I thought would win the game. As I said above, any donations I make are to, in the words of Led Zeppelin, "bring the balance back"

These gifts are not designed to ensure one player's victory - just the opposite. Strategically the goal is to make sure the #1 and #2 players wipe themselves out, leaving #3 the sole contender. Here, admittedly there was little chance for a revival of Pan to its former greatness, but nevertheless, I made it clear who I thought would win this game on these boards (Jot), and made a couple donations to Van try to even the scales, hoping to see an epic clash between two great players on even footing.

Please do not compare gifting, which can serve a strategic purpose, with surrendering VPs, which accomplishes nothing but a nation's oblivion and I would argue is below staling in terms of the impact it has on messing up a game. At least staling keeps the troops in the fort.

Again, while not impacted by the actions in this game, I only want to play with people who will Fight to Survive. Perhaps its necessary to make that explicit, or if you feel otherwise, let people know up front that it is acceptable to essentially win what amounts to an allied victory.

Anyway, its too bad things ended this way.