miraeng Posted November 1, 2007 Report Share Posted November 1, 2007 Hello PeePee, What did you do? You mislead your pilots... while dropping mines! They dropped these on my transports ships, safely, in port... that was not nice!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was under the impression that mines could only be dropped in seazones... You better instruct your airmen better for their next mission. Norbert My Aircraft can't drop mines so they picked the next best thing. Ships. I'm glad to see Irish PM left you without recourses. That was a good act in my favour. I can't even find a factory. What'd he do? Scrap the lot? Brilliant! Portugal Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miraeng Posted November 1, 2007 Report Share Posted November 1, 2007 Hello PeePee, What did you do? You mislead your pilots... while dropping mines! They dropped these on my transports ships, safely, in port... that was not nice!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was under the impression that mines could only be dropped in seazones... You better instruct your airmen better for their next mission. Norbert My Aircraft can't drop mines so they picked the next best thing. Ships. I'm glad to see Irish PM left you without recourses. That was a good act in my favour. I can't even find a factory. What'd he do? Scrap the lot? Brilliant! Portugal Paul Canada! What is wrong with you people? I have never played against a weaker bunch of lily livered gutless wonders. You will regret taking the peace option. You lot are hopeless. US claims he took xbrest but just to cover his backside he gives it to Iceland. Then tries to break his alliance with me. At least I'll get my war back. I know where all your forces are so try to be a little braver have some guts. Guess Canada has his supplies now. Hardly a factory left in Ireland. That’s great. Canadyank's big worry Perfect Portugal Paul signing off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cd_ernst Posted November 1, 2007 Report Share Posted November 1, 2007 Canada!What is wrong with you people? I have never played against a weaker bunch of lily livered gutless wonders. You will regret taking the peace option. You lot are hopeless. US claims he took xbrest but just to cover his backside he gives it to Iceland. Then tries to break his alliance with me. At least I'll get my war back. I know where all your forces are so try to be a little braver have some guts. Guess Canada has his supplies now. Hardly a factory left in Ireland. That’s great. Canadyank's big worry Perfect Portugal Paul signing off. Hello PeePee, Guts only give you problems. It's better to have none Greetings, Don President of the usA. (Isn't it just great to read the recent world events?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miraeng Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 Canada! What is wrong with you people? I have never played against a weaker bunch of lily livered gutless wonders. You will regret taking the peace option. You lot are hopeless. US claims he took xbrest but just to cover his backside he gives it to Iceland. Then tries to break his alliance with me. At least I'll get my war back. I know where all your forces are so try to be a little braver have some guts. Guess Canada has his supplies now. Hardly a factory left in Ireland. That’s great. Canadyank's big worry Perfect Portugal Paul signing off. Hello PeePee, Guts only give you problems. It's better to have none Greetings, Don President of the usA. (Isn't it just great to read the recent world events?) NO NO NO NO!!!!!! I'm never reading the World Events again..... today. Posthumously Portugal Paul For all my subjects and the conquered peoples of the Portuguese Empire. We have peace to build without interference from the Canadyanks. Yippy!! Oh! It's not Paul that is Posthumous. Just Portugal. Posthumously speaking. Portugal Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Spongebob Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 Crackers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miraeng Posted November 3, 2007 Report Share Posted November 3, 2007 Crackers Dawl!! Crackers I don't call myself "Spongebob" Now that is Crackers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cd_ernst Posted November 3, 2007 Report Share Posted November 3, 2007 Hello IrishPM, Nice trick removing all the supplies and energy... I wonder how you did this... You probably put it all into ship and sailed these into the Irish Sea... Too bad my airplanes did not intercept them... It was nice playing against you. Fortunately, the torment for you is over!!!!!!!! xDublin is now safely in Canadian hands! You did a good job defending your country against bad odds... I had hoped you did some more offencive actions, but... this was fun while it lasted. Thanks again. Perhaps in future game, we run into eachother... Norbert When 2 airforces destroyed my navy, a gutsy air assault killed my airforce, 2 navies and 3 airforces destroyed every one of my HVY and ARM factories, and 3 airforces were eradicating my army, I decided to start the resistance movement a bit early. We loaded up 6000 PET and all the supplies and shipped ALL of it out. The US killed most of the ships trying to exit, but it could not be helped. I snuck a few task forces by at the end by moving one sea zone per turn at night. Of course I also built rangers everywhere, scrapped a few more factories and built the IMDL level in agriculture provinces up to 6. Thanks for finally finishing me off 15 turns after Britain, I will move on now. Hello IrishPM, We knew your transports were slipping past us, unfortunately that couldn't be helped. Not that it mattered. But raising those IMDL levels was your best trick yet, there's not much anyone can do to counter that. But I do have to ask you: Why? Why ruin a country in this way when the only thing your opponent(s) did was fighting you on all fronts. What possible gain could you achieve in doing this? None of your TA's are still actively playing. You fought a good fight tenacious even, but I must say that I'm really disappointed in the way you left the country behind. But the upside of all those IMDL levels is that Ireland generates so much money that we can easily affort to build a massive fleet of transports to counter the food problems! See you in a next game, and despite the current status of Ireland I really enjoyed playing against you. Maybe next time you'll kick my ass! Regards, Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvorn Posted November 3, 2007 Report Share Posted November 3, 2007 Central Europe has definitely been interesting. Austria seems to be the next on the Icecanuckyank's list. Normandy and Brittany have fallen. Paris is besieged. Battle reports show lots of enemy air, but not nearly all of those identified in the past. Where are they? Grounded I hope. Come and save me old man winter! Note to self: Russian tech great ground forces do not make up for poor airpower Galvorn Austria77 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Vader Posted November 4, 2007 Report Share Posted November 4, 2007 I agree with you 100% Sorry to see another player giving up on Victory, as I am thinking about doing. My biggest pet peeves: (1) Large groups of veterans ganging the newbies and independents and running them out of the game early. (2) Backbiting and broken deals. I have never run across a PBM or PBEM where this is as common as in Victory. (3) Sacrificing of positions to benefit an exiting players buddies on another alliance. (4) Players starting multiple games and dropping any one where they start to fall behind. This results in the remaining players spending many turns fighting the computer. I believe it would be a big improvement if game fees were prepaid upfront (perhaps at a reduced rate per turn). This would encourage players to fight to the bitter end. I believe it would also improve the game if TA's were made permanent again. As for newbies, it would be nice to try to pair them with verteran players to help them in their first game. Perhaps even give the veteran a discount if he TA's with the newbie from the start. I know I would be willing to help new players, because new players are the only thing that will keep the game going. Anyway, enough with my rant. . . . Good luck Irish PM. I admire the slash and burn you pulled off before you left the game. I thought about doing it as well, but had too much going on in my other game and at work to justify the effort. I also want to say that Germany and France were great allies. They dealt with me straight-up and played the game very well. I would absolutely TA with either of them again. I am sorry to say that they list of players I can say that about is pretty short. Lord Vader Yes, there are some extra tax dollars for Canada and victory points for you for the easy to sink ships, so my solution was not perfect. We had a discussion on these forums when the Scandinavians were leaving, about how people "should" play the game. I think the concensus was that whoever pays the money can play how they want to. I think that is a very short-sighted answer. Game society is more than a bit like real society. There are long term consequences for selfish behavior on the individual and upon society as a whole if selfishness becomes the norm. If everybody on the street started acting 100% selfishly, the world would be a real drag to live in. Same with a game folks. Like the Scandinavians, I see a very unhealthy trend in Victory where the best players in the game all unite to form a team and blow out the beginners first, before tearing into each other. To me, that sounds boring. Take a newbie under your wings and try to win is more interesting to me than 40 turns of "cleanup" before the "real" game begins. This makes for a satisfying game to some I guess, but it will dry up the source of new players rather quickly. I see many of the same old faces in games now. You can't go stag into a game, especially as a newbie, and hope to survive the first round. That's a shame if you ask me. Meeting new folks and forming alliances was the most entertaining part of the game for me. It doesn't work like that anymore, unfortunately. Veterans have complained to me about the constant double-dealing. Some people enjoy that that as well, but when everyone does it, it makes it impossible to join a game and trust someone you never met before. So not only do you have to form TA alliances with veteran players, but you better have five of them. That is also what I see happening in games now. A five man alliance was rare before, now it is normal and almost necessary. People join in groups of 5 (or even more). I have played a long time, but no new starts for me. The game is not at all fun and 77 is a perfect example of why not. Too many selfish folks playing to get their own jollies and not a whisker of a care about anybody else. Thats not what I grew up with and its not what I like. Not to detract from what is going on in Central Europe this game though. That looks like a wild ride and I wish I had been there instead. The rest of the game stinks, however. I am with the Scandinavians in saying good riddance. If you have to treat people with no respect to get your jollies then you get no respect from me. That's how I play the game anyway. Since I pay the money, I can ruin the dang country if I want to. So what if that makes it not fun for you, I got my jollies right? Just trying to make a point. Actually, in all seriousness, I hope everyone left enjoys what is left of the game. Have fun, but remember there are others trying to have fun too. If you drive off all of the newbies, all of the gutsy people who join games solo, and all of the honest people, who do you have left? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meaty_Bites Posted November 4, 2007 Report Share Posted November 4, 2007 Like the Scandinavians, I see a very unhealthy trend in Victory where the best players in the game all unite to form a team and blow out the beginners first, before tearing into each other. To me, that sounds boring. Take a newbie under your wings and try to win is more interesting to me than 40 turns of "cleanup" before the "real" game begins. This makes for a satisfying game to some I guess, but it will dry up the source of new players rather quickly. I see many of the same old faces in games now. You can't go stag into a game, especially as a newbie, and hope to survive the first round. That's a shame if you ask me. Meeting new folks and forming alliances was the most entertaining part of the game for me. It doesn't work like that anymore, unfortunately. Veterans have complained to me about the constant double-dealing. Some people enjoy that that as well, but when everyone does it, it makes it impossible to join a game and trust someone you never met before. So not only do you have to form TA alliances with veteran players, but you better have five of them. That is also what I see happening in games now. A five man alliance was rare before, now it is normal and almost necessary. People join in groups of 5 (or even more). I do not agree with the above. I joined this game with a friend (who had to pull out before it started). This is my first game of Victory (although Norbert would disagree), and I joined effectively alone. My partners are both veterans (never played together previously), and they both joined stag as well. So in essence, newbies don't get quashed, however, it is dependant on player's mind sets more than anything else. Both of my mentors were very quick to start reminiscing about their first games, almost like they wished they were the nub, they also pointed out that they had been taken under the wing by a previous vet player. So its not that this doesn't happen, but perhaps it doesn't happen enough.. As for the five man alliance, we have only seen two in this game. The Bulgarian/Austrian/Czech/Greek/Poland (who are mostly RL friends) and the Scandinavians with Germany and France which was formed out of necessity to survive. As it turns out, both of these Alliances are cracking, so clearly, five man alliances are not the be all and end all. In regards to the veterans grouping together, the US/Canada team are playing the hardest countries so I think that is justified. However, there is a line when it comes to double dealing and again it comes down to the players mentality. There are ppl in EVERY game that will play to win at all costs, weather it is backstabbing a TA, or finding an exploit in an FPS game. My opinion is that you should never break a TA unless the player has dropped due to RL commitments and that you should keep your word in agreements. As I said though, this is a mentality issue. I believe it would be a big improvement if game fees were prepaid upfront (perhaps at a reduced rate per turn). This would encourage players to fight to the bitter end. I believe it would also improve the game if TA's were made permanent again. As for newbies, it would be nice to try to pair them with verteran players to help them in their first game. Perhaps even give the veteran a discount if he TA's with the newbie from the start. I know I would be willing to help new players, because new players are the only thing that will keep the game going. No one would play if fees were up front or at least, a significant number of ppl wouldn't. Perhaps ppl would be more willing to fight to the end if there was an option to "surrender". When the surrender command is issued (needs to be done once per turn for 2 - 3 turns to avoid accidentally typing it in) that country has 10 free turns to do as they please (basically to go out with a bang). Your idea about pairing is good but tbh, it shouldn't be needed. Everyone should be willing to help the n00bs, you were all one at one stage, even Russ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Leader Posted November 4, 2007 Report Share Posted November 4, 2007 Breaking a TA should be allowed. In 74 one of my TAs took a beating. With his score averaged in there is NO way we can win. There is little chance anyway. I have gone into each of my 4 games with TA's. 2 in 71, 74 and 77. 4 in game 69. In 77 I provided quite a bit of advice to The Mole. Unfortunately RL forced him and his dad out. The TA's I ended 71 with were not the ones I started with, nor anyone I knew. Good jod Irish PM. Your right to play the game as you wish. In a real war would a country concede and aid their enemy after losing a majority of it's forces? Some have, most haven't. How about a discount for prepaying for 30 turns? Not a "surrender" order, but maybe a "guerrilla tactics" order. Your capital must have fallen and you aren't allowed to build air, ground or naval. 5 turns free to do all the damage you can. Random rants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_dark_monk Posted November 4, 2007 Report Share Posted November 4, 2007 Hi! I think an up front payment would be a good idea. Maybe a higher start fee would be the best solution including the last 5-10 turns you will play. You will tell Russ that you leave the game and then play the last turns for "free" (not really because you pay a higher start fee). I sure a lot of players would stay in the game until the last bullet is shot. Within these last 7-10 turns, when the player is playing for "free" he may not use some orders like: CL EA DFDU DGU BPA (only TAs) This could be easily implanted by using an external order checker (You need not to change the program Russ). Maybe Russ can setup a test game with such a rule. I am sure the game would be more interesting and I am also sure we will find enough people who like to test it. The TA rule is an old problem. Making the TA relationship unbreakable will cause other problems. For example the risk to play with an unknown newbie is higher. But maybe we can put the first chance to -10% this means you need at least three rounds to have the first really chance to break the TA. The newbie problem: I think pairing in every game is not the solution. But maybe Russ can setup a newbie game. With a veteran : newbie ratio of 2 : 1 or better 1:1, pairing newbies and veterans in the same ration. I am sure he will find enough veterans to play such a game. I would have no problem with such a game, I have try to play with the Sponge it could not be worse. A second solution is to install a newbie program such as that Russ asks veteran players to take care for them. Last but not least some people should really think more about the future turns. Some time you kill your self by killing your neighbors. Sometime it is wiser to end a war between two players before a third player killed the remaining victorious player. The Monk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cd_ernst Posted November 4, 2007 Report Share Posted November 4, 2007 As for the five man alliance, we have only seen two in this game. The Bulgarian/Austrian/Czech/Greek/Poland (who are mostly RL friends) and the Scandinavians with Germany and France which was formed out of necessity to survive. As it turns out, both of these Alliances are cracking, so clearly, five man alliances are not the be all and end all. In regards to the veterans grouping together, the US/Canada team are playing the hardest countries so I think that is justified. However, there is a line when it comes to double dealing and again it comes down to the players mentality. There are ppl in EVERY game that will play to win at all costs, weather it is backstabbing a TA, or finding an exploit in an FPS game. My opinion is that you should never break a TA unless the player has dropped due to RL commitments and that you should keep your word in agreements. As I said though, this is a mentality issue. I read a lot about backstabbing. I've been around some and I have to ask myself the question: What is backstabbing? Is it backstabbing to agree to a course of play and then not doing it? Is it backstabbing to go back to your first TA who did do what he promised to do, doing so at the expense of those TA's who failed to do as promised? We (USA?Canada) started as a TA team. We did so deliberately from the beginning; we wanted to experience a full, long range amphibious assault. We had no intentions to become TA with anyone else. Iceland and N.Russia are newbies we introduced to the game. They ran into problems, like every newbee, and we tried to help them with some advise. When that wasn't enough we became TA with both of them. We actively helped Iceland to see this game to an end. With N.Russia we bought him some time with CL orders towards us. My point here is that I see several Veteran players helping/siding with newbees to make the game as fun as possible for them as for themselves. As for reasons for breaking a TA: RL issues are always a good reason. But, as in RL, sometimes you make deals with people who can't deliver what they say, for whatever reason. If I had to play for 2,5 years with such a person or persons I would drop before the end is near and start a new game. When I saw that Norway, Sweden and Finland were working together I already knew that they would either end up high in the scores or disappear halfway the game. Scandinavia looks easy to play because it's isolated, but your biggest enemy there is the lack of resources. You must make a warproduction plan and stick to it, if you don't you will end up having serious problems. You must either capture the resources of your neighbours or work the countries as if they were 1 country. We knew we had the same problems with USA/Canada, so we worked out a production plan for the next 50(!) turns looking at N.America as 1 country. I think that newbees don't see those problems when they enter the game together. The TA option is an option that should not be taken lightly. Perhaps that's the only thing that should be made clear before anyone starts with the game. That ánd the fact that the Propaganda Ministry is not well known for it's truthfull intent... Don Usa77 (Going strong) Trans-Jordan72 (RIP) Ireland70 (Survived... barely) France69 (RIP) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus Posted November 4, 2007 Report Share Posted November 4, 2007 I was GB in this game and played as long as it was feasable to put up a defence. The Icelandic double cross was a hard pill to swallow and when I left my good friend the IrishPM decided that his task was impossible and decided then that a scorched earth policy was the best defense. Pay your dues and play how you like. The huge alliances are a problem but its the nature of the game. I have to say 77 has been the most bitter game I have seen and to be honest I dont know the reason. Games before and since have not had the same amount of back bitting but it has resulted in them having huge alliances and as could be detrimental to the end game, who knows we will just ahve to see. My suggestion would be to not allow people who have previously joined as a team in the previous 3 games to join as a team in a new game and as such the country they get is a random one. If once joined they then choose to TA then so be it but it would mean the nations around him would need to have diplomatic ovatures made. If Victory Mk II comes around I would like the game starts to be more like the real world in 1939 or the nations are diplomatically linked as in 1939 and also include the whole world. I will be playing with IrishPM and Portugal Paul again, they played with honour and that counts a lot in my book. As for the Iceycanadyank alliance, I hope I never have to face them in a game again as they will be enemies from day one. A grudge? yes but I wont get double crossed again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cd_ernst Posted November 4, 2007 Report Share Posted November 4, 2007 I was GB in this game and played as long as it was feasable to put up a defence. The Icelandic double cross was a hard pill to swallow and when I left my good friend the IrishPM decided that his task was impossible and decided then that a scorched earth policy was the best defense. Pay your dues and play how you like. The huge alliances are a problem but its the nature of the game. I have to say 77 has been the most bitter game I have seen and to be honest I dont know the reason. Games before and since have not had the same amount of back bitting but it has resulted in them having huge alliances and as could be detrimental to the end game, who knows we will just ahve to see. My suggestion would be to not allow people who have previously joined as a team in the previous 3 games to join as a team in a new game and as such the country they get is a random one. If once joined they then choose to TA then so be it but it would mean the nations around him would need to have diplomatic ovatures made. If Victory Mk II comes around I would like the game starts to be more like the real world in 1939 or the nations are diplomatically linked as in 1939 and also include the whole world. I will be playing with IrishPM and Portugal Paul again, they played with honour and that counts a lot in my book. As for the Iceycanadyank alliance, I hope I never have to face them in a game again as they will be enemies from day one. A grudge? yes but I wont get double crossed again. I've been playing this game for over 10 years now and never did I encounter these type of threads on the forum. The bitterness in this game comes from you and the Scandinavians. Whether you're just sore losers or poor analysts I can't say. But I do pity the person(s) who will play with you in future games. Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.