Star League Obituary

[Paradigm]

Having run into some of the Ur-Lords ship (which have some size) I can understand the treachery. if he has focused on non weapons and non computers (battle ships with MK III computers???) then it would take YEARS to catch up.

 

Those are the risks he accepted when he chose to try to get a leg up in tech by specializing and counting on trade to fill the gaps. Luck wasn't with him in the end. Not a good reason to throw in the towel IMO.

 

It shouldn't take long to get to Mk IV computers if several research centers are assigned. Those should be sufficient against opponents not using swarm tactics, especially if combined with a naval leader.

 

Worst case, fort up until caught up enough in critical tech areas. Sometimes playing a position with disadvantages can be more fun than playing a highly advantaged position. There is more glory in defeating a more powerful opponent.

[looker]

I am a quite regular Diplomacy player too, and always keep an eye on allies. That keeps alliances healthy, I suppose.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I used to play Diplomacy in years past. I quickly learned that my faith in human nature could not tolerate more than about one game every six months.

 

TErnest

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And you are a big hearted forgiving guy!

 

Being trustworthy is a lot like being pregnant. You either are (period) or you are not (period). Not a lot of room for middle ground, even though you can not always tell who is pregnant right away it eventially shows.

 

I sort of like the theory of Scotty of star trek: Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!

[Lord Uriel]

I don't really think of it as a group hug sort of thing. I realize some players might see an advantage with UL dropping for their own strategic purposes and I don't blame them.

 

However, I am of the opinion that the galaxy will long remember the empire that fought bravely to the end. We as a group will forget those who just .... give up.

 

 

As a New Spartan, we tend to look at historical examples from Old Terra.

Thermoplyea, Bastogne, and other examples of brave men fighting on for no other reason than it's right thing to do.

 

I understand some empires are played without combat in mind, but come on people, if you drop this game because the situation has changed and you're at a disadvantage, then the only game left to you is solitare.

 

Lord Uriel

[LenLorek]

If you compared what happened to ULT to real life, it is a bit when a country that is an important trading partner suddenly has a coup d'etat and the new ruler does not want to trade with you anymore. Let's say this would happen to Saudi Arabia and the US would need another supplier for oil. That would immensely hurt the US economy (and that of Saudi Arabia), but would the US just surrender? Or the president would step down? I don't think so! The US would put up a fight and at the minimum start to invest into new technology to overcome the loss of supply.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There is a real life historical analogy from World War II (one of my favourite periods in history -- ie, a period at war!) ... .

 

Italy is being beaten wherever it goes -- by Greece, and by Britain in North Africa. So its ally Germany helps out in every case, sending troops, aircraft and supplies, even fighting Italy's battles for them, losing some and winning others, but still suffering losses -- all to help its ally. Then Italy surrenders.

 

Would this be an analogous betrayal?

[MadMartinB]

You missed being beaten by the Ethiopians on horseback.....we'll until they rolled out the chemical warfare and gassed them.

[Galreth]

You know, reading through this entire string of posts is quite a study in sociology. One person posts about an affair from an entirely individual point of view...and then sit back and enjoy the social dynamics from there. Having freshly returned from another temporary duty assignment to read this thread, I do actually have a couple pertinent things to add.

 

First, I am the Tedric's offender in this case, who finds his case weaker than MMB's last attempt at penetrating Valkor space. We were in a larger alliance AND a local alliance--doubly bound it seems. It was understood we were at war with MMB, as it was no secret...even the RL Martians know about it I'm sure.

 

I have been harried for time as in addition to the normal military change of station cycle, temporary duty assignments crop up quite often. It's just a fact of life and it's what I do. I've recently relocated my family, found time to adopt a new daughter, and coped with multiple temp duty assignments away from home. I'm not complaining, but these facts are relevant to Tedric's fairy tale.

 

So, I've been barely hanging on as it was to the game, but managing to keep MMB at bay. It seems that Valkor and Rome were to be the banner empires for the alliance--the ones doing the fighting at the front despite that fact that Tedric was connected to Valkor directly. Over a period of 2 years, my two empires managed to keep multiple enemy empires at bay. Rome still controls nothing but its home system, but Valkor managed to push the front out a good distance from where it started.

 

I kept asking my ally, Tedric, to send more units to the front. After all, in my mind, an allied effort means shared allied load at the front--not a situation where I spend all my resources to fight and shield my allies and they get to spend years getting their empires bright and shiny and pretty. After 2 years of time, money, and effort, I started looking at the "worthwhile" factor of keeping Valkor running. Why was it that Valkor ALONE built nearly 40m tons of warships to hold the line against what was universally described as an alliance enemy? Why did my "ally" demand that I trade him back items of equal value for every bit of "assistance" that arrived to Valkor? Why was it that my ally, in the same period where ONE of my empires churned out 40m tons for the war effort, could only provide 5m tons of shipping? Why was it that my ally, in 2 years time, could only provide ships with 10m in FP and no promise of further assistance when I had personally shipped to him weapons far exceeding figure? Yes, for those wondering, Valkor actually EXPORTED weapons to Tedric in order to gain "assistance."

 

And now to my favorite part...Tedric had the gall to actually say I was "crying wolf" and that I didn't really need any assistance (that IS a direct quote). Apparently, after 2 years of shouldering all the fighting for the alliance, I wasn't entitled to any benefit in trade or allied warships worthy of the name. So please don't feel sorry for poor Tedric, who managed to deny aid to an ally, refuse to even promise military support, demanded the export of weapons away from the front, and then managed to insult the shield that kept him free to manage his economic empire of choice. I don't apologize for expecting an ally's support when Rome's HW is still under threat and when Valkor suffers from a lack of technology compared to the enemy. If such is "crying wolf" that I am guilty as charged. But considering the fact that Rome/Valkor have destroyed more enemy tonnage than they themselves can call on, I maintain that allied support is necessary for continued viability. So "stab-in-the-back" is an interesting turn of phrase that Tedric should use. In 2 years of playing--that's 48 turns of interaction--he has provided next to nothing in comparison to either friendly or enemy forces. He has not provided direct assistance, but instead demands equal trade--not my idea of allied help.

 

So in the wake of the demands of 4 empires that I ran, the real life demands on my time and attention, and the 2 years of waiting for any meaningful allied assistance at the front, I made the call to cut down to 1 empire--the one taking the least amount of time to care for and with prospects already for an neighbor who understands the concept of "ally." Tedric can choose to look at things from only his view, but we've all spent lots of time, lots of effort, and lots of money building our empires. He views my cutting back on the empires I run as his "stab in the back". Well, next time he wants someone to stay in the game to guard his back, he might return such a concept with reciprocal commitments. Two years is long enough a period to judge a lack of commitment. And insults were just the icing on a decision long in coming. And I had the fortitude to remain with the larger alliance and actually discuss the matter--never mentioning to the group at large more than my lack of time in real life as the reason for my cutting back in SNROTE. Tedric had the "integrity" to slander away and then leave the group email list before anyone could even question his accusations. I should have known that he'd use this forum to do the same.

 

Tedric's mettle is best summed up by what happens when I no longer had the time, money, or desire to continue Valkor and war alone...he apparently did not want to serve his time on the front that he knew would be moving his direction. As to having no research lines in order to continue...Valkor never had the chance to "specialize" in the face of enemy action, yet it managed for over 2 years. Ya'll be the judge.

 

If my commitments to my family and the US military in real life are too "selfish" in nature, I guess that's just too bad, because I feel more obliged to my professional life than I do to an undeserving ally in a game. I've enjoyed the battles and the game. I would have enjoyed them much more with a local alliance structure worthy of the name. I enjoyed playing the antithesis to MMB and the PA, who despite our differences, is a worthy opponent. I hope we provided the game a little spice on the side as well. If anyone thinks I didn't hold up my end for 2 years, I can give you the list of battles. If 2 years--48 turns--is not long enough to wait for some sign of assistance, how long?

 

Imagine what might have been accomplished in the last 2 years with just a little allied commitment.

[Galreth]

There is a real life historical analogy from World War II (one of my favourite periods in history -- ie, a period at war!) ... .

 

Italy is being beaten wherever it goes -- by Greece, and by Britain in North Africa.  So its ally Germany helps out in every case, sending troops, aircraft and supplies, even fighting Italy's battles for them, losing some and winning others, but still suffering losses -- all to help its ally.  Then Italy surrenders.

 

Would this be an analogous betrayal?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's only analogous, Len, if Star League had actually ever helped out at all. It is truly laughable in your example to compare SL to Germany..."helps out in every case"...not. Fighting my battles? LOL...Name a ship larger than a FF or DD that SL defeated. Suffering losses?...first SL would have to send something worthy of losing. "Help out in every case"...<just shaking head>

 

In WWII, Germany sent divisions, whole air fleets, submarines...everything they could spare. Another difference being the fact that Germany actually had to fight Britain and the USSR at the same time. Did Germany demand that Italy send equal trade in weapons and war equipment back to Germany?...not.

 

SL had NO enemy to fight--none. In 2 years time, the amount of assistance was truly negligible compared to friendly or enemy fleet power. For someone who gave little and chanced nothing, he sure feels owed. Now is his chance to pony up and fight on an allied front...oh wait, he quit rather than pull his own 2 years at the front.

[Galreth]

Actually, if I read this correctly, he stated that he was dependent on at least one (and it seems to me, more than one) other race for certain techs, having bypassed those R&D branches to concentrate R&D in other areas for the betterment of the whole group.  But, it now appears some of these players decided to drop with little or no notice.  And at least one player gave their empire over to someone else so they could leave .. and the new owner has decided to run things differently (negating old trade agreements).  And so, Ur Lord Tedric finds himself up the creek without a paddle.  He has no access to certain advanced tech / items.  My guess is he could forgo the items but that would leave his ships and military very weak.  And the time to research it all himself would be so long that .. well, out of frustration over how everyone simply acted in their own intereste and ignored the group, and with such a tech challenge in front of him, he has decided to drop.

 

Is that essentially correct?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And now imagine if you are the ally that is actually holding the front and has also specialized his research...and that your ally is not providing you with any of the resources in his end of the research chain so that you can use them. And now imagine you spend 2 years trying to get them to send help...and they send a cruiser to ride into battle beside your battleships and dreadnoughts. Oh yes, Tedric had it so bad. Pardon me while I go barf. Yes, Tedric has finally been put in a position to fend for himself...not unlike Valkor for 2 years while he watched and built (built what...no one knows) in the shadow of my protection.

[hobknob]

I have been in the situation where some of my allies have had to leave the game for one reason or another. When you rely on them for a particular line of technology it can be a bit difficult in the short term but it is not a game ending problem in most cases. All it takes is the will to assign many RC's on the given tech field that is missing. It will interrupt your normal research but it is not insurmountable. This tactic is insurmountable if your game philosophy does not allow multiple RC allocations. Then you will have a bit of a problem.

 

Problems are part of the challenge and are what make the game fun. When the fun factor is gone, then it makes little difference what your situation, you will lose interest and use the first handy excuse to leave the game.

 

The Ur Lord has lost the fun factor so these challenges are sufficient to call it quits.

 

[Galreth]

There is a real life historical analogy from World War II (one of my favourite periods in history -- ie, a period at war!) ... .

 

Italy is being beaten wherever it goes -- by Greece, and by Britain in North Africa.  So its ally Germany helps out in every case, sending troops, aircraft and supplies, even fighting Italy's battles for them, losing some and winning others, but still suffering losses -- all to help its ally.  Then Italy surrenders.

 

Would this be an analogous betrayal?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As I think about it, this situation is a lot this...

 

Imagine you are Israel and the UN "helps" you by putting 5,000 UN blue-helmets on your northern border. Those blue-helmets will do a lot of observing and a lot of talking while Hezbollah builds up to the point of being a very real threat. Now that the fighting has broken out (or for that matter before hostilities occurred), how much help are the blue-helmets to Israeli security? Exactly zero. And yet, the UN continues to talk a good game about cease fires and security measures. However, they contribute nothing to Israeli security, while demanding Israel comply with all UN demands.

 

Tedric plays an excellent blue-helmet/UN role.

[Galreth]

Problems are part of the challenge and are what make the game fun.  When the fun factor is gone, then it makes little difference what your situation, you will lose interest and use the first handy excuse to leave the game. 

 

The Ur Lord has lost the fun factor so these challenges are sufficient to call it quits.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would agree with you Hobknob. When my time got tight and I no longer had the time for 4 empires, especially the 3 at war, I had to make a fun assessment for the time I had available. The empty promises and insults from an ally, made the fun factor for my 3 empires evaporate. So in a pinch, which one did I elect to keep...the empire that was the most fun at that point, and coincidentally not connected to a former ally. <shrug>

[Flagritz]

As I think about it, this situation is a lot this...

 

Imagine you are Israel and the UN "helps" you by putting 5,000 UN blue-helmets on your northern border. Those blue-helmets will do a lot of observing and a lot of talking while Hezbollah builds up to the point of being a very real threat. Now that the fighting has broken out (or for that matter before hostilities occurred), how much help are the blue-helmets to Israeli security? Exactly zero. And yet, the UN continues to talk a good game about cease fires and security measures. However, they contribute nothing to Israeli security, while demanding Israel comply with all UN demands.

 

Tedric plays an excellent blue-helmet/UN role.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Close but I think you meant...

 

Imagine your Lebanon and the UN "helps" you by putting 5,000 UN blue-helmets on your southern border. Those Blue helmets do alot of observing but they don't prevent Israeli commandos crossing the border at will kidnaping and assasinating people, force Israel to comply with UN resolutions to return land, give back prisoners held for many years. Now that fighting has broken out, how much help are the blue helmets to Lebanon? Exactly zero, they don't stop Israel killing civilians and bombing civilian structures, And yet the UN continues to talk a good game about cease fires and security measures. They contribute nothing to the stability of the region, They sympathise with the bully and demand Lebanon stop hostilities while they are the victim.

 

Tedric plays an excellent blue-helmet/UN role.

 

I think thats a bit more accurate :]

 

Miltiades

[Locklyn]

I think everyone has their view of the chain events depending on where they stand, just as Flagritz example shown there are not always clear truths, evil doesn't come in the clear form of a ringwraith and you only need to destroy the one ring for it to go away...

 

I am an close ally to and would dare call me friend to these both gentlemen and understand both their viewpoints from where they are in life and in the game and that it has led to as lawyers say "irreconceable differences" with these two gentlemen. I think it is a pity that ULT drops but I understand him well, of late I have been closer and closer to dropping as the game takes more and more time to administrate as ones empires grow and they only tools available to make it easier are those you build yourself or players like cestvel marvelously offers up to the players, a pity that RTG can't be of more help in that area.

 

Likewise I understand Galreths choice in concentrating that precious free time he has to his family when resistance is taking all his time under the Eyre/Gouald/Rubber Tentacle onslaught and the fun factor diminishes when ones allies are not of the same spirit as one self, fortunately, caretakers will ensure that that onslaught is kept at the border and pushed back with every turn. Roma Victor!

 

Cheers

/Lars

[Phoenix Arisen]

So in the wake of the demands of 4 empires that I ran, the real life demands on my time and attention, and the 2 years of waiting for any meaningful allied assistance at the front, I made the call to cut down to 1 empire--the one taking the least amount of time to care for

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Most excellent. Tedric gone and now 3 of Galreth's. Soon more to follow, no doubt.

 

End result. We win. Our primary goal from the beginning.

 

This result is inevitable because we have what no other alliance has. Complete and total trust between us resulting in phenomenal intelligence and economic power.

 

We look forward to more drops from players who cannot make it work out.

[Locklyn]

The PA will never win because of the simple truth that should you run out of enemies you will fall on each other.

 

But then no PA empire has been able to take on the GGT yet either

 

/Locklyn