Languish Here I Stand (9?) Thread

[Berkut]

I am rather astounded that the Protestants would just give the Ottomans a VP though.

I'm kind of screwed until you (or, more importantly, Delirium) realize that the Ottomans are a bigger threat than the Protestants.

So...Go Sultan!

Oh shush, you have the French dancing to your tune, and in turn you are dancing to Habs tune. It isn't exactly surprising, but you know how it will end.

[ulmont]

It isn't exactly surprising, but you know how it will end.

what's going to happen is that the League is going to go down, Del is going to start raping me, and then Habbaku is going to take Suleiman to Vienna and victory.

Yeah.

[Berkut]

I am always amazed in HiS that people so consistently play the game so poorly because they react emotionally to diplomacy, rather than realizing that the calculus of the game is relatively straightforward.

I saw a Hapsburg player burn an entire turns worth of cards taking Antwerp back because the English player refused to give it back without a formal peace and a VP or card. He literally spent probably 25 or more CPs taking back a city he could have gotten for a 3CP card.

Habs won that damn game as the Ottomans as well.

[ulmont]

I am always amazed in HiS that people so consistently play the game so poorly because they react emotionally to diplomacy, rather than realizing that the calculus of the game is relatively straightforward.

Well, if not for the emotional diplomacy option, wouldn't the game just come down to dice rolls?

[Berkut]

I am always amazed in HiS that people so consistently play the game so poorly because they react emotionally to diplomacy, rather than realizing that the calculus of the game is relatively straightforward.

Well, if not for the emotional diplomacy option, wouldn't the game just come down to dice rolls?

Not at all. Emotional diplomacy is not the only kind of diplomacy.

[ulmont]

Not at all. Emotional diplomacy is not the only kind of diplomacy.

Right.  But if everyone is employing rational diplomacy, you end up with a continued coalition against the then-leader until (wait for it) dice rolls and cards determine the winner.

[Berkut]

Not at all. Emotional diplomacy is not the only kind of diplomacy.

Right.  But if everyone is employing rational diplomacy, you end up with a continued coalition against the then-leader until (wait for it) dice rolls and cards determine the winner.

That would be the case if everyone engage in perfect unemotional diplomacy.

But there is enough give and take even within rational diplomacy for plenty of variability, especially when you through in the randomness of dice rolls and cards that change the fundamental direction of the game.

And honestly, people should be playing "stomp the leader". That is the beauty of HiS - I've never played any game that is so focused on keeping other from winning, rather than just trying to win yourself (depending on who you are playing of course).

You know what it is called when people rationally play to keep the person in the lead from winning?

A long, fun, close game.

Besides, then you get the fun of the diplomacy becoming everyone trying to convince everyone else that someone other than themselves are winning.

[ulmont]

everyone trying to convince everyone else that someone other than themselves are winning.

Giving a VP to the Ottomans seems like the easiest way to be convincing on that score.   

[Tamas]

Berk, all you had to do is leaving me alone to preserve your military power and CPs to deal with Protestants and Ottoman piracy. Yet, despite all those odds against you, you kept being stubborn and wanting me to pay tribute.
I am not going to help a rival stay strong without me gaining anything.

It was you practicing emotional diplomacy, not me.

[Berkut]

Tamas, so far, in order to avoid giving up a card, you've spent a card and used your spring deployment - and you still have the exact same problem that you started with. Before it is over, you will have spent much more than 1 card to get out of the war you start the game in.

This is exactly what I mean - you cannot see how you are "not gaining anything", but of course you are gaining something - you are getting out of the war and not having to burn even more cards sending your entire army to Milan and ending the risk of excommunication. You have already spent more than I asked for!

All you are doing now is giving the Protestants cards instead of me. You are making the classic gaming mistake of reacting to a perfectly reasonable and rational offer with your ego instead of your brain. "What? Me give you a card? NEVER!!!"

[Delirium]

I rarely comment on other players' behaviour, but I have to say that just handing the Ottomans a gratuitous vp just because you want them to appear in the lead is pretty weird.

[Tamas]

Berk the point you are missing is of course, that onec I defeat you thanks to this extra investment, we won't only make a white peace, so I will not close the deal with a loss.

[Habbaku]

I rarely comment on other players' behaviour, but I have to say that just handing the Ottomans a gratuitous vp just because you want them to appear in the lead is pretty weird.

Is there a reason you haven't taken your turn yet?

[Habbaku]

we won't only make a white peace, so I will not close the deal with a loss.

If you can beat him.  I wouldn't bet the farm on that.

Enjoy your excommunication!

[Delirium]

File sent. Moved three armies. England is up.