Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aqizzar]

Where'd you get that map?  I need a clear one to scribble on myself.

I used the galaxy map editor (available on the nova website) and took a normal windows screenshot.

Oh.  Can you post a clear one then?  Every screenshot I try to take of this stupid game is just black with speckles.

Actually, nevermind.  I already control Leminkainen, Ravenna, Delphi, and Tethys.  Palazzo, I am allowing free passage through Leminkainen's space, but if you land anything, whatever happens happens.

I'm in the process of securing Pentateuch, and calling dibs on Gwynneth and Bannockburn.  I assume there's no objections, since none of those are on the way to anywhere from anywhere for the rest of you.

Mainiac, I find your readiness to abandon Shaprut interesting, since you do have a ship there.  Is it on the way to Stigmata?  Or being sent from?

[mainiac]

Oh.  Can you post a clear one then?  Every screenshot I try to take of this stupid game is just black with speckles.

....

Mainiac, I find your readiness to abandon Shaprut interesting, since you do have a ship there.  Is it on the way to Stigmata?  Or being sent from?

I edited the blank shot into my previous post.

Shaprut?  All I had there was a scout ship, IIRC.  I don't want Shaprut if we've got peace.  It's a great position to attack Il Palazzo from.  Which makes it a great planet to spark another war...

[JoshuaFH]

So, eh, this truce, or whatever you want to call it. Does it only count existing owned planets, or does it also include all future planets not listed that the players might own?

[mainiac]

It's really something we gotta play by ear.  Obvious acts of aggression will result in war.  However I think the last war made that principle quite clear.

[Aqizzar]

I completely disagree.  I think a clear demarcation of what planets, or what parts of them, belong to which House is needed, to prevent future arguments from erupting into war.  To be civil is to be restrained, and it's clear that you and Palazzo can't be trusted with the freedom of barbarism.

[mainiac]

Let me clarify my position.

The clear boundaries laid out are an integral part to peace.  After all, the last war was triggered by a border dispute.  However, honorable behavior entails more then following treaty obligations.  General acts of provocation are just as likely to start a war.  I think the Criticorum incident established this quite well, where Il Palazzo's insistence that he had the right to colonize Criticorum (a planet he has yet to set foot on ), lead to conflict rather quickly, neh?

No treaty can cover all the circumstances unless there is some degree of good faith behind it.  And good faith might be needed in the future. 

Suppose for instance that I retained control of the garrison for a third turn (which I recommend to next terms regent, as I have done a splendid job in the post!) and Il Palazzo denies flights over Shaprut.  This would lead to a rather tense situation?  Good faith would be needed in such a situation, like flyovers being permitted with disclosure of cargo.

Or suppose I am garrison commander and he decides to reclaim valuable land from the symbiots (which I still recommend he do).  If I were to tell him that locations I knew were full of dangerous symbiot hordes were easy targets, he would have a good case for war.  But if I gave him the best information I had and it's out of date, it would be a less provocative act.

Or consider Nowhere.  If he colonizes the planet, I don't mind, though I'd like a heads up.  But suppose he built a fortress right next to my prime farmland.  I haven't asked him not too, but it would certainly make me expect another war.  But suppose he offers to buy the farm, clearly my fears would be assuaged by his zealous, but defensive, efforts.

And so forth.  What I'm saying here is that the treaty establishes a peace.  But peace doesn't preserve itself.  The terms we agreed to are minimal and there is no collateral in place to disincentive war.  So for peace to be maintained is going to require that both parties act in a civilized fashion in ways that the treaty doesn't make clear.

Obeying the treaty is an essential requirement.  But good faith is no less important.

[Il Palazzo]

While we're waiting for Aqizzar to do his turn(hopefuly before I'm off to work), let me indulge in my favourite pastime, that is, arguing about the Criticorum incident. All you people who got already bored by this, look the other way.

General acts of provocation are just as likely to start a war.  I think the Criticorum incident established this quite well, where Il Palazzo's insistence that he had the right to colonize Criticorum (a planet he has yet to set foot on ), lead to conflict rather quickly, neh?

I hate it when you falsify history like that and expect people to believe you.

Spoiler: Li Halan's first-turn claims (click to show/hide)

Brought before the Imperial Senate:
Let it be known that the worlds of Criticorum, Rampart and Icon ((galactic north, east and south of the Li Halan homeworld of Kish)), are considered worlds of extreme interest to the August and Noble Li Halan.  Hostile actions upon these worlds or in their surrounding space may be taken as hostile actions against the fearsome might of Li Halan.(...)

Spoiler: al-Malik's statement (click to show/hide)

Also, We regard the world of Criticorum and it's space as a vital point connecting our sector with the Imperial world of Byzantium II. We find violation of it's neutrality a direct threat to our safety. We are sure that house Decados will agree with Us on this matter and, should said neutrality be broken by some third party, will join us in an armed effort to maintain present status quo.
 It has been rumored that the noble House Li Halan plans on sending their expeditionary forces to Criticorum. We sincerely hope that those rumors are but some villanous demagoge's ridiculous ramblings, as we've allways held house Li Halan in high regard and it would pain us greatly to wage war on our brothers.

So, mainiac, as you can see, You managed to claim

that (you) had the right to colonize Criticorum (a planet (you) had yet to set foot on )

All I wanted was for it to remain neutral.

[JoshuaFH]

I hope I didn't accidentally re-inflame the argument.

[Il Palazzo]

It's not really a flammable agrument anymore, in my opinion. Me and mainiac are like two dogs separated by a fence, that never shy from giving a concerto of barking and howling at each other, just for the sake of tradition.

[mainiac]

sake of tradition.

Amen.  I don't think the game would be half as fun without.

But Criticorum:

1) First world I settled.  You never sent a single legion there.  Clearly, you had no interest in the surface of the world except to deny it to me.  You don't hear me complaining that I have as much right to Aylon as you.
2) I offered to divide the planet.
3) You flew an assault lander full of powered armored legions over that world right after refusing to promise peace.

Malignatius:

1) Directly between us.  Valuable for mining in the mid game.  Clearly, something we both had reason to want in the midgame.
2) You told me that you would attack peaceful settlements.
3) You refused to divide the planet, even when I asked for a single settlement.
4) I repeatedly stated my fears that you would use Malignatius to prepare an invasion of Kish.  You did exactly that.
5) That thing you asked me to keep secret.

The only similarity in both events is that:
1) I resorted to pre-emption in the face of aggression that was a clear danger to future Li-Halan sovereignty.
2) You rejected peace offers that would have divided the planet, extended while I had the upper hand.

[Il Palazzo]

re. criticorum:
1)You're righ there, I wanted to deny it to you, for the fear that you'd deny me a safe passage to Byzantium. Which you did right after the first turn ended.
2)your offer arrived after destroying my transport, which at the begining of the game was a big drawback. Besides, as you've stated, I didn't want that planet, I just wanted it be clear of your troops.
3)it was a freighter, it was full of <unidentified cargo> that you claim to be armoured legions, and I refused the "peace offer" that was basically a demand for concessions on a point of a gun.

re. Malignatus
I've got nothing to complain there. This was a proper war for valuable territory, which I lost and you won.
I've got to read through all the conversation we had though, to find out what was that secret thingy, cause I don't bloody remember.

(It doesn't seem that Aqizzar is going to finish his turn anytime soon, and since I'm off to work in an hour, you'll have to wait another 20-ish hours for me)

[mainiac]

3)it was a freighter, it was full of <unidentified cargo> that you claim to be armoured legions, and I refused the "peace offer" that was basically a demand for concessions on a point of a gun.

...it was full of unidentified cargo, which you refused to identify, which had just launched from a fortress full of powered armored legions and no exportable resources.  What else could it be carrying?

So, in order to protect the safe passage of your troops, you sacrificed safe passage for your troops.  Yup.

[Il Palazzo]

...and another turn is done.

[mainiac]

http://theamazingjex.googlepages.com/Turn40.sav

Well, looks like I won't be garrison commander for long.  Damn shame.

[Il Palazzo]

Don't worry, somebody able will take over.