+- Eagle Time (https://eagle-time.org)
+-- Forum: Cool Shit You Can Do (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Forum Adventures (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: +iny ©at people (/showthread.php?tid=1786)
RE: +iny ©at people - SeaWyrm - 12-29-2017
Backup-copy type?
Backup-copy-of-Frog-Crimes type?
Wax's-blind-spot type?
RE: +iny ©at people - RedGreenBlue - 12-29-2017
DEAR GOD WE ARE WORSE AT BEING A COLLECTIVE THAN I THOUGHT.
What are we doing?
Why are we trying to mock the administrator?
Why are we trying, immediately, to make ANOTHER abstract TCP?
Why don't we have a real gameplan yet? And why did we just ruin the closest thing we had to one?
Why are we attempting to break rules even harder than we already have?
We are pretty much committing indirect suicide with this nonsense; our lives(life?) are(is) LITERALLY on the line, and we're pretty much trying to become a psychotic criminal hellbent on breaking rules and shoving middle-finger-shaped tongues into the faces of ACTUAL GODS.
Can we have a fourth head that just scolds the three other heads for being idiots? I vote for it being either rainbow or gray. That is if we're capable of changing our appearance. Which we probably aren't but if we are then we should. It'd definitely help with conversations.
RE: +iny ©at people - mortis - 12-29-2017
(12-29-2017, 06:50 AM)FlanDab Wrote: »I don't think gods are necessarily tangible things. I think gods (at least in our world) are made in the first place because it made people feel safe that they know someone is taking care of them or that they know what caused the events they couldn't control or predict. In all basicality, gods are abstract concepts akin to words and music. While you are very much right that they are likely to be a creature-type rather than an abstract-type, their ability would most likely be abstract in nature... Okay, god-type probably is a creature-type since it indicates an entity rather than an idea.
I'm advocating for Factory-type or Panacea-type.
god is creature type
RE: +iny ©at people - SeaWyrm - 12-29-2017
Honestly, we should probably table all notion of spawning a new TCP yet and figure out if our earlier plan is salvageable. And if not, what actual plan do we have?
The sensible thing to do is to stop wallowing in collective self-recrimination and see if we can turn this to our advantage. Yeah, it doesn't exactly help our personal brand or w/e, but getting Wax into the game breaks the whole Grind/Rein thing wide open. There's a version of this where everyone's at war with Wax and us, and it's a bloodbath... and there's a version of this where having Wax around shifts the balance of power into something we can work with.
Even for those of you who think we oughta just keep our heads down and not cause trouble... how do we do that? More importantly, how do we do that and protect the TCPs from senseless violence at the same time?
Also, who does Wax ally with if the teams are even? Would that be useful to us? Would Wax just leave, or ally with a random team, or be a solo player, or...?
RE: +iny ©at people - Vic - 12-29-2017
Let's just continue with sending the cats to Grind's so they can meet up with Prophet and we can have a wholesome cat reunion.
Tell Cats
> Leave for Grind's place
Call
> Marzu
or
> Grind
RE: +iny ©at people - g0atblush - 12-29-2017
i think we should go with a food type
something nice, like cake
RE: +iny ©at people - Dark Lord Graham - 12-29-2017
If a Law type is off the table, I will support Panacea or Cake. We need either something that can minimize damage or something that can heal.
RE: +iny ©at people - FlanDab - 12-29-2017
(12-29-2017, 07:22 AM)Vic Wrote: »Let's just continue with sending the cats to Grind's so they can meet up with Prophet and we can have a wholesome cat reunion.
Tell Cats
> Leave for Grind's place
Call
> Marzu
or
> Grind
I second.
RE: +iny ©at people - kilozombie - 12-29-2017
I'm not saying we shouldn't send cats to Grind's, but considering the situation right now... well, I just don't want us to have more cats go rogue.
(Even if that might be the best for their safety.)
RE: +iny ©at people - Jacquerel - 12-29-2017
I don’t think a good type is a bad idea but i’m going to go back to advocating for a hearty chicken soup in that case.
I also think our only option is to continue our prior plan. Sure, everyone probably likes us a lot less now or at least is very confused, but also... we’ve barely met any cats in this game we didn’t create.
No matter what we do next, meeting people would be helpful, the only issue is that it’s taken a long time for us to get to this point and it will take even more time to do the tour.
But it also has a lot of advantages:
It’s the only way our half baked idea of undermining global god authority over tcps could work, as unlikely as that actually is to be a viable plan.
It lets us know what we might be in for in case of actual fighting.
It will actual let us know something tangible about who the other gods are.
Consider this: until now we have been basing all of our decisions and opinions about these gods entirely on how they or others describe their actions. Macaron is I’m pretty sure the only one whose behaviour we’ve actually seen, and even then not in much detail.
Ultimately anecdotes are useless to us because none of these people are unbiased or reliable and the only way we can actually know the character of any of these other players is by seeing how they treat their charges, isn’t that the point of a god? We’ve obviously shown everyone were incompetent, but as everyone else already knew the rules and isn’t constantly arguing with themselves, they’ve not been anywhere near as overt, and it’s vital information that we’ve just never had.
Any plan we make before doing this is going to be based on extremely incomplete and unreliable data, and doing this would hopefully help to curtail people repeatedly insisting that beings we’ve never actually seen perform any acts of any kind are pure evil based entirely on hearsay.
RE: +iny ©at people - LoverIan - 12-29-2017
>Spawn: Hydra Type
>Tell cats to wait, and tell them we made a big mistake again....
>Call Grind. Trying to find a third solution when there isn't one is a fool's errand, and we've caused everyone more grief than they deserve. We're seeing that now, and Wax gave us a wake up call about what the point of this really is. We had some inklings, but, didn't take it all seriously enough.
RE: +iny ©at people - ☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ - 12-29-2017
i'd throw support in for chicken soup type
edit: also the anti-war approach we had is still an excellent idea, that was us operating at our absolute best. "war is bad and i refuse to participate by sending others to die even if it means suicide" is literally our only admirable stance. i don't fuckin' care if there's "not" a third option, first of all, duh of course they'd say that that's the whole point of secret third options you figure out for yourself, second of all, if the situation is "kill or be killed" the morally-correct thing is to be killed
also don't call grind, wtf. why would we ally with the person who despises us the most because they say someone else is cousins with Pure Evil. somebody talking like that is what leads to real-life, mundane evil
RE: +iny ©at people - tronn - 12-29-2017
(12-29-2017, 07:03 AM)RedGreenBlue Wrote: »DEAR GOD WE ARE WORSE AT BEING A COLLECTIVE THAN I THOUGHT.
What are we doing?
Why are we trying to mock the administrator?
Why are we trying, immediately, to make ANOTHER abstract TCP?
Why don't we have a real gameplan yet? And why did we just ruin the closest thing we had to one?
Why are we attempting to break rules even harder than we already have?
We are pretty much committing indirect suicide with this nonsense; our lives(life?) are(is) LITERALLY on the line, and we're pretty much trying to become a psychotic criminal hellbent on breaking rules and shoving middle-finger-shaped tongues into the faces of ACTUAL GODS.
Can we have a fourth head that just scolds the three other heads for being idiots? I vote for it being either rainbow or gray. That is if we're capable of changing our appearance. Which we probably aren't but if we are then we should. It'd definitely help with conversations.
This. Instead of constantly apologizing to everyone we should stop doing random things in the first place, and act a little more seriously.
For example, creating wax-type TCP just to mock the admin is acting petulantly and we really should not do that.
RE: +iny ©at people - Myeth - 12-29-2017
Hells yeah for chicken soup type TCP, we fucked anyway so why not have some fun w/ it B)
RE: +iny ©at people - SeaWyrm - 12-29-2017
(12-29-2017, 09:14 AM)Jacquerel Wrote: »It will actual let us know something tangible about who the other gods are.YES
Consider this: until now we have been basing all of our decisions and opinions about these gods entirely on how they or others describe their actions. Macaron is I’m pretty sure the only one whose behaviour we’ve actually seen, and even then not in much detail.
Ultimately anecdotes are useless to us because none of these people are unbiased or reliable and the only way we can actually know the character of any of these other players is by seeing how they treat their charges, isn’t that the point of a god?
THIS
☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ Wrote:edit: also the anti-war approach we had is still an excellent idea, that was us operating at our absolute best. "war is bad and i refuse to participate by sending others to die even if it means suicide" is literally our only admirable stance. i don't fuckin' care if there's "not" a third option, first of all, duh of course they'd say that that's the whole point of secret third options you figure out for yourself, second of all, if the situation is "kill or be killed" the morally-correct thing is to be killedThis too.
RE: +iny ©at people - Dark Lord Graham - 12-29-2017
(12-29-2017, 01:42 PM)☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ Wrote: »edit: also the anti-war approach we had is still an excellent idea, that was us operating at our absolute best. "war is bad and i refuse to participate by sending others to die even if it means suicide" is literally our only admirable stance. i don't fuckin' care if there's "not" a third option, first of all, duh of course they'd say that that's the whole point of secret third options you figure out for yourself, second of all, if the situation is "kill or be killed" the morally-correct thing is to be killed
Except we never needed to kill. That is an assumption you have been making about my attempts to 'wage war' and 'demand blood'.
It is possible to win using non-lethal methods to force the opponent's units to defect. We know this. This is not a question. There was a time when this would have been the best course of action. Sadly, the knife-makers threw that option out when we were just starting to actually get our act together.
Further, we should consider if winning is truly what is best for the TCPs. If we win, our cats will go with us to whatever world these people come from. Not only will they be exposed to all of this drama between people like Grind and Rein on far more real terms, they will be further subjected to our proven incompetence.
At this point the most morally correct course of action is to stay with Wax, turtle down, and wait out the fight between Grind and Rein, while letting Wax do... whatever Wax does. Ultimate objective being protect our cats from dying.
Then, when one side has won, tell all our cats to go Rogue. This will mean we lose, we die, and the cats get to go live in Cat Paradise when the game ends.
This is the most selfless choice, for those who actually care about the TCPs more than their victory.
For those that actually intend to fight injustice and make a difference, our TCPs will need to fight for it. It is simply a fact that if you want to get anything done that you will need to take action to do so, and the TCPs are our only means of taking action. Keeping up with this hippy-dippy 'be Sweden' junk will only lead to more failure, because surprise surprise, the same action provides the same result.
This is the most effective choice, for those who care about victory more than the TCPs.
RE: +iny ©at people - Jokes - 12-30-2017
(12-29-2017, 12:49 AM)☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ Wrote: »slit all three of my throats, who the hell told wax to eat our heel even!?
(12-29-2017, 12:23 AM)Jacquerel Wrote: »(12-29-2017, 12:16 AM)SeaWyrm Wrote: »No, no, bad attitude. Don't apologize to anyone, don't do the self-deprecating thing. That doesn't help anything. (@kilozombie)
>Tell Wax: "Respectfully, sir, you're wrong. We're not trying to get the other gods to make decisions for us. We've already made our decision - in fact, it's one of the few things we've been able to find relative consensus on: We do not want our TCPs getting hurt over some other god's personal grudge. We're supposed to be a god of justice, right? Making the TCPs fight over some issue that doesn't even have anything to do with them - that's injustice, right there, and we aim to stop it. All we're trying to figure out now is how."
(That's more or less true, right?)
That's totally what I'm down with. Including "self-deprecation won't get us anywhere".
If Wax doesn't like what our plan is because it's not an intended part of his game then he made a bad game. If passing the test of being a good god includes overruling the will of your subjects to make them fight proxy wars for you then the test is wrong and I wouldn't be sad to mess up his game.
Maybe he'll think it's stupid and immature (in fact, probably he'll think it's stupid or he wouldn't have made the game this way) but if he wants us to learn to make hard choices I think the one that will probably lead to us failing to survive the end of the game because it's the right thing to do and give our creations their own autonomy is a hard choice we're choosing to take.
I wouldn't actually tell him the things I wrote in his post though. He'd just kickban us faster.
i agree with this whole post except the part where we don't say any of this to wax. i mean it's literally a wargame, and you know what they say in wargames? "the only winning move is not to play." i mean there's essentially 0% chance of "winning" in the classical sense here to my estimation anyway.
i also would like to cast a, likely pissing in the rain, vote against spawning a tcp right this instant. (i'm pretty sure there was no Spawn A Cat prompt anyway!)
most importantly, i feel it is time we throw away the pretense of being a god of justice and shift our domain to crimes, which is more in line with our actions and name
i'm going to second the notion of telling wax about our convictions. tcps shall not shed tcp blood.
as to our domain, freedom seems more appropriate.
we could probably spin the deal with the knives to be a moral statement on our part that it'd be more moral for us to remove ourselves from the equation than to force our tcps to fight on our behalf and just let the other players know that we didn't intend to trigger the autobalance. they should never have received knives at all.
graham: what is victory worth to you
RE: +iny ©at people - ☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ - 12-30-2017
i'll amen freedom
also: y'all realize that if we ally with anyone that means we're allying AGAINST wax by default?
RE: +iny ©at people - Dark Lord Graham - 12-30-2017
(12-30-2017, 04:46 AM)Jokes Wrote: »graham: what is victory worth to you
Personally, I'd advocate sabotaging Rein in some way and then turtling down at home base. Same end goal as the self-sacrifice plan, but with a small say in who wins. At the cost of some extra risk.
Good method might be to bring a bomb or charge with us. Something controlled - enough to punch open a door or a wall, but not enough to trigger an autobalance. Set it up to blow a hole in Rein's defenses, tip Grind off about the incoming opening. So long as things don't go back into create mode, Rein would be unable to immediately repair the vulnerability.
Rein could come after us in retaliation, but that would leave them open for Grind to capitalize on the distraction. Weaken their position further.
RE: +iny ©at people - MagicHats - 12-30-2017
I would second maybe hunkering down for a while. It probably won't be long before the other players catch wind of our actions and the effects of that on the overall session (each player having a player-killing knife and then the max tcp limit now being thirty).
This in of itself could have accidentally given us enemies of the inexperienced players in the game (not sure if either grind or rein would be angry with these developments given that both have other things on their minds right now).
RE: +iny ©at people - kilozombie - 12-30-2017
I'm happy with chicken soup TCP, but considering our mountain of problems, panacea-type might be more helpful, at least in the short term.
RE: +iny ©at people - g0atblush - 12-30-2017
(12-30-2017, 07:40 AM)bigro Wrote: »*takes long draw of e-cigarette*
Chicken soup is panacea
seconded
RE: +iny ©at people - Dark Lord Graham - 12-30-2017
Supporting chicken soup since it's got a good number behind it. Some sort of Food type, at least.
RE: +iny ©at people - BananaPanda - 12-30-2017
(12-30-2017, 07:40 AM)bigro Wrote: »*takes long draw of e-cigarette*
Chicken soup is panacea
That is true, but so is the fact that a square is a two dimensional shape. Chicken soup is a food, but Panacea is a vague overarching way to describe stuff that is a cure all, sorta abstract if you ask me. If we do chicken soup there is a 100 percent chance of it being a food type, but with panacea we get that slight chance that it is an abstract tcp who specializes in pure healing power, which honestly sounds way cooler to me.
RE: +iny ©at people - Jokes - 12-30-2017
chicken soup sounds good. we don't need more reasons to for wax to be annoyed.