I think you're misinterpreting me. I have not directed any insults toward you. I'm simply incredulous at your reasoning. I really, truly do not understand it. I'm not saying "I don't understand it" in the sense of "I don't approve of it." I genuinely cannot fathom the reasoning behind what makes you declare what I consider fair balance changes to the rules cheating. At the same time, you seem to have no problem with changing the game's rules to favor specific players above the rest (whether you made the comment in passing or not, you were apparently fine with the idea of it), and with accessing information that isn't normally available to players and which I consider to be privileged.
I respect Vanigo, he made a good game that I enjoy playing, but I question some of the decisions he made in balancing it. I don't think initiative should be randomized after people submit their actions, I think that that undermines the player's ability to plan turns. Obviously some kind of solution like that had to be made as to what units should be given priority, but I think that making players blind to the effects of their actions is not good game design, and that's entirely separate from units rolling random attack and defense. It's not the fact that initiative is randomized that's bad, it's the fact that you don't know whether or not you're going to be able to move before your opponents until after it's happened. I don't think changing it so that everyone can freely see the order in which they'll take the next turn unbalances the game in any way. It doesn't change how anything works. I don't understand why you would consider it cheating.
Additionally, I don't like that you can only build improvements in a very limited range around your cities. I think it encourages city clustering, which is bad strategy in this game. I don't see why vast swathes of your country should be locked off from you; ostensibly, the improvements are people going out there and building a self-sustaining village that then create these improvements, so it makes no mechanical sense either. It's a seemingly arbitrary restriction and I don't understand what balance purpose it serves, so I don't like it. I don't understand why you think that allowing everyone to circumvent it would be cheating. Cheating is when you break, circumvent, or change the rules to give yourself an advantage over other players. That doesn't benefit anyone in particular; I'm not even in the game. I can see the logic in it now that you've explained it, but I still feel that the improvement radius is much too small, especially for so large a map, and should increase at a greater rate the larger the city is. As it is, your cities can only be at most 4 tiles away from each other or you won't be able to take full advantage of the tiles you've claimed.
And that is, in my opinion, effectively what you asked for, in passing or otherwise, which is why it upset me. It felt like you were trying to cheat by asking for the rules to be changed in a way that would only benefit your ally, and in turn, you. It was especially egregious to me because you were saying that they weren't effective when they were posing a serious problem for me at that very moment. Additionally, I didn't like the way the Danes had no permanent stake in the game, played outside of its rules, and were really only there to stir up trouble, so I was looking forward to getting rid of them. What definition of cheating or metagaming do you have that it doesn't apply to that situation but it does apply to my proposed rule changes? I mean it, I'd like to hear your definition.
As for the resources thing, the difference is that troop count and location are freely available to you in the Player Interface. If Vanigo wanted people to be able to view the structures in a city, he could easily make that menu accessible the same way you can access the menus of enemy troops. Doing it through the Admin Interface feels to me like circumventing that restriction, which fits my definition of cheating. Same for Resources; if he wanted you to be able to view everyone's resources, why didn't he put the Players menu in the Player Interface instead of just the Admin Interface? Why are you only able to view your own resources in the Player Interface? Taking advantage of people's weaknesses is indeed part of the game, but circumventing restrictions to learn what your opponents' weaknesses are is, in my opinion, cheating. It's true that everyone can circumvent those restrictions, but everyone can also open other people's spoilers. It's frowned upon because that's not information you're supposed to have.
That's all just my opinion, but I'm GM in this game so I do have some say over the rules that aren't hardcoded. If the majority of the players think that you should be allowed to look at other civ's resources and buildings, then I'll allow it. Otherwise, I think it should be prohibited.
Speaking of the Danes, I'd like to make clear the way the Golden Horde will work: They will spawn with an army appropriate to the military strength of the other players in the game, and attempt to take over an existing city, and then will attempt to complete the same win condition as everyone else: Wiping out all the other players. Every 20 turns a larger part of the Horde will enter the map from the desert pass, until the entire Golden Horde is here, at which point they can be wiped out like any other civ. I think they're a fair challenge, intended to unite all the other players in destroying them, and actually start at a disadvantage since they will have no cities and have to take existing ones before they can begin playing normally. The Southerner civ was intended to be sort of like the Night Watch in guarding against their inevitable invasion, since they are refugees from a homeland that was destroyed by the Golden Horde and are placed directly north of where they'll enter the map. Other civs would probably do well to aid them in this fight. Diplomacy!
Author
Topic: Fertile Lands - A Vanigo Empire Game - Turn 54 - 2 Players Needed (Read 38362 times)