Home » Old Game Forums » Bab5v2 team » Shadow alliance: communication
2460: Ptolemy's response to Steve (host) |
Fri, 30 March 2007 18:18 |
|
|
Steve got in contact with Ptolemy about shooting down Spoo vessels:
Ptolemy: | Tell Alturist that his ships simply 'happened' to end up in the same space as mine - battle is permitted under that circumstance. Two of the battles happened at 'Shadow' gates - ALL non Shadow alliance ships are automatically destroyed on arrival. The scout that was destroyed in space was very close to a Shadow colony near the HW. IF he doesn't like it, tough #### - and you can forward this message to him. IF he didn't want a war, he shouldn't have started one.
Kind Regards,
Ptolemy
Emperor of a Thousand Suns
|
Spoo answere to Steve (host) | Hi Steve.
And this year another ship had the "bad luck" to be in the same space like a ship of his... in orbit of Centauri planet Franklin. The Spoo vessel was unarmed, no armed Centauri ships were there, so we can rule out the help-ally-Stars-feature.
He is quite an annoying stubborn bastard, isn't he? Especially if he is loosing.
So he is basically turning the rules around to:
for whoever dares to shoot down one of his scouts, the rules of the games are void and he can hunt those player's ships as he likes to.
> He also complained that the rules are unfair because he can't retaliate against your attack on him or an ally.
Poor guy. He thinks having 30 years development ahead, time to scan the whole galaxy and free level-10-tech is... unfair as soon as one of his scouts gets shot down? Calling it even a war as soon as he looses a 2nd scout?
I thought it was part of the scenario
* that the Elders have to move cautiously in phase II
* carefully expanding while being VULNERABLE
Only relatively vulnerable, of course, since their superiour tech easily enables them to protect their expansion. Thus it was obvious that they SHOULD have used the settings:
# everybody on neutral
# allies however they like to
# other elder on enemy
And battleorders targetting only enemies.
With the exception when being in orbit of their own planets where they can shoot at whomever they want to. And when getting attacked, Stars overrules every setting anyway.
Perhaps I should had suggested the above right from the beginning instead of asking pointed questions to clarify the rules of engagement but I didn't want to interfere in your scenario-setting.
> The game is close to phase 3 and the lose of a scout or 2 should not have a huge impact on the game.
True.
Giving high-stealth LFs and sfx to the Centauri was worse... and enabled them to set up huge colonies without anybody having the chance to notice other than by chance. Quite a handy thing in a large universe with galaxy clumping.
I am just angry how he bends the rules and the scenario. If he don't like it and deems it unfair, he shouldn't be playing this game and especially not as one of the Elders.
So, what have I got to expect for the last years of phase II? Whereever the Shadows see Spoo-ships, Shadow ships happen to occupy the same space?
I've ceased my attacks on the Centauri anyway and there are only 2 more years of phase II left. From Ptolemy's response it's obvious that it is in vain trying to talk to him.
So, just forget about it. And if Ptolemy hopefully keeps targetting ONLY scouts, I'll keep quite from now on, I don't want to spoil the game and the athmospere. If the Vorlons won't make a big mistake, they'll win anyway. At least if the Shadows don't manage to win against the odds by surprising the Vorlons with a high-stealth-fleet at their HW.
2 suggestions for bab5v3 (if there ever will be a v3):
1) Obviously it is of advantage to clearly define the rules of engagement.
2) Elders may pass tech only after the 15th year of phase II (2445). Balancing things a bit out to make it look not as worse for the Interstellar Alliance. Getting tech right from the beginning like eg the Vorlon allies, those become nearly untouchable. As an interesting side effect, alliance alignment becomes less obvious and raises the paranoia level *grin
Regards,
Patrick (SPOOmun Complat)
|
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Shadow alliance: communication
By: Altruist on Thu, 22 March 2007 01:56
|
|
|
2451: Gaim to Independent Mars
By: Altruist on Thu, 22 March 2007 01:57
|
|
|
2439-53: Shadow - Spoo communication
By: Altruist on Thu, 22 March 2007 02:15
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
By: Altruist on Mon, 26 March 2007 14:07
|
|
|
2456: from SPOOmun Complat to Shadows
By: Altruist on Mon, 26 March 2007 15:54
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
|
|
|
2457 from Centauri to SPOOmun Complat
By: Altruist on Tue, 27 March 2007 09:54
|
|
|
Re: 2457 from Centauri to SPOOmun Complat
By: Skaffen on Tue, 27 March 2007 15:14
|
|
|
Re: 2457 from Centauri to SPOOmun Complat
By: Altruist on Tue, 27 March 2007 16:03
|
|
|
Re: 2457 from Centauri to SPOOmun Complat
By: Micha on Tue, 27 March 2007 16:08
|
|
|
Re: 2457 from Centauri to SPOOmun Complat
|
|
|
Re: 2457 from Centauri to SPOOmun Complat
By: Micha on Tue, 27 March 2007 16:14
|
|
|
Re: 2457 from Shadows to Llort
By: Altruist on Tue, 27 March 2007 16:47
|
|
|
Re: 2457 Reply from Llort to Shadows
|
|
|
Re: 2457 Reply from Llort to Shadows
By: Altruist on Tue, 27 March 2007 17:45
|
|
|
Re: 2457 Reply from Llort to Shadows
By: Micha on Tue, 27 March 2007 17:49
|
|
|
Re: 2457 from Centauri to SPOOmun Complat
By: Skaffen on Thu, 29 March 2007 14:23
|
|
|
2458: from Shadows to SPOOmun Complat
By: Altruist on Wed, 28 March 2007 18:35
|
|
|
Re: 2458: from Shadows to SPOOmun Complat
By: Micha on Wed, 28 March 2007 18:57
|
|
|
2460: Ptolemy's response to Steve (host)
By: Altruist on Fri, 30 March 2007 18:18
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
By: Altruist on Fri, 30 March 2007 18:25
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
|
|
|
2461: Shadows to SPOOmun Complat
By: Altruist on Mon, 02 April 2007 20:34
|
|
|
Re: 2461/2: Shadows/Llort
|
|
|
Shadows Techs
|
|
|
Re: Shadows Techs
By: Skaffen on Tue, 10 April 2007 13:23
|
|
|
Re: Shadows Techs
By: Altruist on Tue, 10 April 2007 14:38
|
|
|
Re: Shadows Techs
By: Micha on Tue, 10 April 2007 14:48
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
By: Altruist on Thu, 26 April 2007 11:45
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
|
|
|
2470: from Shadows to Spoo
By: Altruist on Sat, 28 April 2007 06:55
|
|
|
Re: 2470: from Shadows to Spoo
By: Micha on Sat, 28 April 2007 08:35
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
By: Skaffen on Sun, 29 April 2007 03:01
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
|
|
|
Re: Shadow alliance: communication
By: Altruist on Mon, 30 April 2007 07:59
|
|
|
Shadow communication 2499
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 04 02:48:05 EDT 2024
|