Home World Forum: The Bar » Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea

Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea

Wed, 30 August 2006 16:15

multilis

Lt. Commander

Messages: 789
Registered: October 2003
Location: Edmonton, Canada

Maybe m.a@stars wants to take it over... would be funny.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea

Wed, 30 August 2006 18:31

m.a@stars

Commander

Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left

PricklyPea wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 21:22

You've read the notes on here. Now take a chance to play the race causing all the havoc!

That's right! I'm looking for a permanent replacement since stars is getting way too time consuming for me. I didn't notice it so much with the minor skirmishing but as full war looms, I just can't spare the time for 48hour gens.

In other words: you are fleeing even before real fight has started. Shocked

Bravo!

So many Stars, so few Missiles!

In space no one can hear you scheme! Deal

Report message to a moderator

Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea

Fri, 01 September 2006 21:12

Steve

Officer Cadet 1st Year

Messages: 217
Registered: November 2002
Location: 40 deg N, 90 deg W

PricklyPea wrote on Mon, 28 August 2006 14:00

>This happened between you and Steve in 2480, in 2481 he attacked you. This is not only honest it is in fact encouraged by the rules.

Interesting. This could well be the answer, in which case it is not a backstab but in fact good play! I haven't received an email stating the new #1/#2 positions. Nor has it been updated on the game page. Perhaps the host sent to the wrong email (I've been using work email from time to time which I can't access from home)?

I am entering this discussion late because I have not been following this forum.

The rules indeed say that every 10 years the number 1 and 2 ranked players must be set to enemy and all alliences between them are null and void.

In 2470 I was in 3rd place. In 2480 I found myself in second place. I checked with the formerly 2nd place player and he said he was in 3rd place. Following the rules, I set the Veggies to enemy. The attack I committed consists of killing a few scouts at my planets and a few Veggie ships hitting mines.

In the game specs, the host is to make the announcement of the players at war. Unfortunatly the host made this announcement in 2481.

No trees were harmed in the making of this sig. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced

Report message to a moderator

Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea

Sat, 02 September 2006 16:35

Marduk

Ensign

Messages: 345
Registered: January 2003
Location: Dayton, OH

Steve wrote on Fri, 01 September 2006 21:12

Unfortunatly the host made this announcement in 2481.

This is off-topic, but I would like to see a standard definition for years - I've encountered a lot of confusion in similar situations. "We attack in 2453!" Does that mean we arrive in 2453, or give the orders in 2453? And is it 2453 when the message box says 2452, or 2453?

I've talked to people that believe the year in the message box is the current year, and people that consider it to be the previous year. I consider it to be the previous year, but don't really care as long as everyone uses the same definition.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Backstabbers Hall of Shame: Enter Pricklypea

Sat, 02 September 2006 17:16

Kotk

Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003

When you end a NAP with a exit clause (n years warning) then its good idea to explicitily tell what you mean with that. Nod

As for myself ... I say that i will set him neutral immediately, but i wont battle him during n years. Also, I tell him at what message box year he will see me initiating battles against him. I am of course open to protests if he interpreted the exit clause differently. I also dont object if he speeds things up by initiating a battle earlier ... it was me who did end agreement after all. Wink

As for case under discussion ... M.A. took replacement position in game with "only one may win" rule. He claims he did not know if there are (and how long) exit clauses on his NAPs. So technically he silently accepted possibility of 0 years warning before NAP end. Laughing

Report message to a moderator

Pages (3): [ « ‹ 1 2 3]

Previous Topic:	Replacement player wanted - Digital Domination
Next Topic:	Serial Number Problem

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Sat May 04 10:56:36 EDT 2024