Absolut said:
Your non-dutch provinces were onlimits.
I am now confused, is PJL or Sid perm for Burgundy?
Sid Meier...
Anyway, this is the biggest outright crap i have ever seen since Aladar onlimited my nation on Offensive Fire when i disapeared all of a sudden (thanks to eletricity) when i was at war with him.
Look...
At start, Burgundy is so strong (or stronger!) then France. Burgundy's Philip Le bon is so good as richemont, but while Richemont dies in 1457, Philip dies in 1463. So anyway Burgundy would have some advantage.
Burgundy is also richer then anyone on the entire game at start up. Ok, France beats them by a miserable 10 MP but so what. There is also a neighbour, or more then one capable neighbour, able to help Burgundy at start up against France.
Then just because "poor FAL" did not have a human neighbour in Burgundy, we had to AI it, so that he could "kill" Burgundy with this miserable advantage. Actually i do not see how France got that big of an advantage against Burgundy tbh, apart from the 10 MP, but that is no big deal.
Honestly i do not know why John ever agreed to "onlimit" all non-dutch culture provinces. There were more then reasons enough NEVER to do this.
1º Sid did not speak with us. We did not know what hapened to him. When i was onlimited on OF, i had a power cut off and i could not turn my computer on even if i wished to. I do not know, but something serious could have had hapened with Sid making him unable to comunicate with us and even join the game.
2º In all games that you have played, many people got ghosted. I am fairly sure certain people did not like to see their potential enemies ghosted, specially if they had a kick assing leader around. Did they ask the GM to onlimit their enemies so they could use their "advantage" over them? Did the GM ever agree to such? Answer: No.
3º Being ghosted or AI would be punishment more then enough to Sid, if he ever deserved it. As it was, the AI did not even conquer a single province, and only vassalized 2 crap minors on germany. His expansion was none, close to none, or even, negative (since he lost 6 provinces iirc). I do not know what is on your little minds but for a nation to loose 6 starting provinces, do 0 expansion, and get surrounded from all sides by humans right at the first session is very bad. Specially when AIed. You were basically saying "Sid, we do not need you, goodbye".
Then comes the petty comentaries that were better if kept to whom stated them.
Ampoliros said:
Sid isnt properly very reliable
Well first, defamating a player in public when he cannot defend himself, is, very, very bad. This is even worse then Propaganda. While propaganda may have some truth on it, your words had nothing consistent on them, and were stated, most likely, with the intention of harassing and bullying Sid's reputation. For what purposes, i do not know. I play games with Sid almost or more than 2 years ago, and in that period, i only remember about 5 times where he did not warn us he could not play. And on EU2, if you have the reputation of an "unreliable player", who will want to play with you? So, i kindly ask you next time, to keep such comments to yourself, unless you know what you are speaking about.
Drake said:
Sid didnt even get the nations he asked so he will probably not even play
Honestly drake, if Sid did not state he did not want want Burgundy, why do you bother ever stating this? When i was a total noob i wasnt given the nations i asked for, and in these games, if i did not want to play that nation i was given, i would tell everyone about it, and if i wouldnt receive another one, i would perhaps leave the game, but i would state it on the forums.
If Sid did not state it, why do you start formulating things out of thin air? Do you know Sid that much? Do you have any proof i am not aware of? Do not take a step longer than your legs.
-----------------
Anyway back on the main subject...
Can anyone give me a plausible reason to why was Burgundy AIed and onlimited? If Sid missed 2, or more sessions in a row, or we could not get a new PERM should he have left - sure, it would be reasonable to do such. But Sid only missed the first session. Dane did not say a single word either - why didnt we onlimit him as well? Is Dane special?
Honestly John, if you start onlimiting nations just because the player did not state he could not play, on the first session he misses, i do not think i shall stay for long.
I mean, what the hell? If suddently i loose my internet conection, or if i do not have eletricity to power my computer, or if one member of my family suddently has to go to the hospital, all things a couple of minutes before game starts, how do you expect me to comunicate with you stating such? Telepathy?
I do not know what hapened to Sid, but so do you. And you cannot judge him basing yourself on facts that cannot be backed by any proof. As it is now, Burgundy has been totaly crippled, and any dream to become a moderate, or a good land power, is gone. If this had hapened to me, i would most probably have left the game for good, so i do not blame Sid if he does it. Nor can you, after AIing his nation and onlimiting him, without knowing anything in detail.
