Noticing into EOWCF

[RiffArt]

That's my point about the meta. It's achievable but only through the near vacuum of noninterference.

A kingdom mate of mine experimented with soldier swaps and it's cool if you have the activity. We're both old companions and active so it was alright. My guess was we missed a tick of maximization, so if there's a next time we'll have it down.

I'm aware of a few forethought mechanisms I'm simply not going to use. Part of the disheveled ghetto is the knowledge gap in kingdom. You'll have frustrated meta players in the same kingdom with barbarians which requires leadership that works like a trucks transmission. Simply; this is a rare trait.

I never know what you're saying strat, but I love the way you say it.

[flogger]

i would really love to see an age without any CF deals/notice deals. i think it would be fairly interesting for the entire server.

No you wouldn't. Without the ability to pump science or protect GC, the top kingdoms would just bottomfeed on the rest of the server relentlessly, then the kingdoms below the top would be bottomfeeding to avoid the top kingdoms all the way down.

[Chrystal Palace]

Sounds like fun times

[TommyB]

No you wouldn't. Without the ability to pump science or protect GC, the top kingdoms would just bottomfeed on the rest of the server relentlessly, then the kingdoms below the top would be bottomfeeding to avoid the top kingdoms all the way down.

Bring it on! :)

[Aranfein]

MrCurious, that is true but i like a challange and its given many of my kingdommates a massive learning curve and hopefully we can start building on it and improve as a kingdom but also the individual skills, we have made plenty of mistakes but if we get chance to improve im sure we can iron some of these out, both individually as well as kingdom wise.

Not saying we will be a regular in the top fights but if able we will try and see if we cant learn this new invisible rulebook and make an appearence, as most of mine seem to have enjoyed it.

[Chrystal Palace]

yeah like this new rule. you dont have to tell opposing kd that you are serving notice.

[MrCurious]

yeah like this new rule. you dont have to tell opposing kd that you are serving notice.

CP i am serving a notice to you. It has been sent via pigeon post and as smoke signals. So its legit.

[RiffArt]

Rather than sitting around waiting to be hit, shouldn't a kingdom that gets noticed be able to wave before notice expires?

e.g. Kd-A hands 72hr notice to Kd-B. In this situation Kd-A will have the advantage most of the time, so why should Kd-B let Kd-A dictate when hostilities can begin? Seize the initiative and wave after 48hr, before kd-A have their war-builds and troops trained.

As soon as kd-B hits (or ops) then kd-A is allowed to hit back (duh), but I can imagine scenarios where this would benefit kd-B to get the jump on kd-A. Kingdoms noticing would have to be prepared right from the start of notice (losing gc) or risk being hit unprepared.

Kingdoms in Utopia exist in a state of conflict (either can op/hit the other) unless a CF is in place. Telling a kd that you intend to end the CF is thus telling them you intend to return to the state of conflict (whether or not this is followed by hits/hostile/war). So ending a CF is an aggressive action, and giving notice you intend to end a CF justifies a kd pre-empting this notice and getting their hits in first.

What effects would this have? I'm no expert but I'd imagine:
1. shorter notice periods (kds wouldn't want to sit pumped for a long time - and if they did their target could just wait them out);
2. less of a disadvantage for smaller kds (they can choose to start hostilities at a time that suits them - imagine a kd having notice expire at 2am for most of their provinces, that requires dedication to get everyone online ready for a wave, whereas this way they could pre-empt the attack and wave themselves at 10pm when they are more likely to be able to organise people).

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

[Zauper]

If KDs moved to that system, you would have to be more pumped than the kd you're noticing. This gives you a perverse incentive to stay relatively changed. I don't really see the top kds deciding to agree to that.

I thought about pushing for it for a while, but ultimately didn't think it'd work.

That said -- timing is often not a problem. Usually both kds are in fort at notice expiration, with few hits exchanged at that time. The real hostilities don't start until about 48h later when the kds are forced out. It's more about forcing the other kd to train up before they notice you. But that doesn't help you, since you need to have been trained higher than them to start with, and if they're training up to match you they probably have superior stocks as well -- so they train up to match you, then sit and draft as normal.

Usually top kds know who they are going to fight a week+ in advance of conflict starting. It's easy enough to plan around. The biggest advantage would go to kds that are being noticed right when they exit another conflict, but in those situations, the kingdoms prefer longer notice periods to shorter notice periods as it allows them to explore and using their pool is a huge potential advantage / disadvantage negation.

[scheffie]

Rather than sitting around waiting to be hit, shouldn't a kingdom that gets noticed be able to wave before notice expires?

e.g. Kd-A hands 72hr notice to Kd-B. In this situation Kd-A will have the advantage most of the time, so why should Kd-B let Kd-A dictate when hostilities can begin? Seize the initiative and wave after 48hr, before kd-A have their war-builds and troops trained.

As soon as kd-B hits (or ops) then kd-A is allowed to hit back (duh), but I can imagine scenarios where this would benefit kd-B to get the jump on kd-A. Kingdoms noticing would have to be prepared right from the start of notice (losing gc) or risk being hit unprepared.

Kingdoms in Utopia exist in a state of conflict (either can op/hit the other) unless a CF is in place. Telling a kd that you intend to end the CF is thus telling them you intend to return to the state of conflict (whether or not this is followed by hits/hostile/war). So ending a CF is an aggressive action, and giving notice you intend to end a CF justifies a kd pre-empting this notice and getting their hits in first.

What effects would this have? I'm no expert but I'd imagine:
1. shorter notice periods (kds wouldn't want to sit pumped for a long time - and if they did their target could just wait them out);
2. less of a disadvantage for smaller kds (they can choose to start hostilities at a time that suits them - imagine a kd having notice expire at 2am for most of their provinces, that requires dedication to get everyone online ready for a wave, whereas this way they could pre-empt the attack and wave themselves at 10pm when they are more likely to be able to organise people).

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

It sounds good, but you BOTH agreed upon a notice time. You can also just CF to yr 10 without any notice time and gamble no hostilities will start. You both agreed upon a notice time once you CFt up, so you have to keep to that amount of time.

Also, why should KD B be in disadvantage? They had the same information and knew the CF was going to an end. Right?

[tetley]

I wanted to start a thread on this matter and I'm glad someone else did. I wanted to make a poll originally but it seemed too complicated. Although maybe a simple "is it wrong to notice into eowcf? y/n" would have taken care of the matter.

In my opinion, the "can't notice into war or eowcf" clause should be/is automatically integrated into an agreement of this kind. The concept of a notice intuitively, to me, demands that it can't be served into war.

[RiffArt]

It sounds good, but you BOTH agreed upon a notice time. You can also just CF to yr 10 without any notice time and gamble no hostilities will start. You both agreed upon a notice time once you CFt up, so you have to keep to that amount of time.

Also, why should KD B be in disadvantage? They had the same information and knew the CF was going to an end. Right?

The disadvantage is because kd-A determines what time of day hostilities can start. If you're in (say) an EU based kd then having people around on the 7th is a pain in the arse. Let me be clear, I'm not saying that the smaller kd gets to ignore notice period, but the kd who gets notice served to them. If you don't want a war, you can try to avoid it (hostile someone else or negotiate). If neither of those is possible, why should you have to sit around and wait for kd-A to train/build/pump if you get a (small) advantage waving early? That would be the motivation. It's how I assumed notices would work when I started playing.

I think Zauper's answer is good though - there's not much point in the change because the top kds know when war is coming before notice is served, it's not like the notice comes as a surprise.

I wanted to start a thread on this matter and I'm glad someone else did. I wanted to make a poll originally but it seemed too complicated. Although maybe a simple "is it wrong to notice into eowcf? y/n" would have taken care of the matter.

In my opinion, the "can't notice into war or eowcf" clause should be/is automatically integrated into an agreement of this kind. The concept of a notice intuitively, to me, demands that it can't be served into war.

1. Noticing into war is pointless if notice period is less than 96 hours.

Still, I'm afraid I don't see how "no notice into war" is intuitively included in concept of notice. I think topsy explains why no notice into EOWCF is standard - because you need so long at the top-end to prepare for wars where you're drafting so deep.

But I don't see that this argument would apply in the warring tier for instance where kds aren't as accomplished. If that's the case and 4 days EOWCF is long enough for such a kd to get ready, then the concept of notice doesn't intuitively exclude notice into war (or EOWCF). Of course, hitting into war/EOWCF is different, hence why it's pointless to notice during war with <4 day notice period - you're just giving the other kd free information.

[tetley]

For the purposes of discussing your response - what makes hitting into war/eowcf different than a notice? What if your notice has expired?

[StratOcastle]

We got a war in 6 ticks. We lost, but we got it.

Diplo was take it or leave it. Pretty heavy, hey dude? ;-)

[RiffArt]

For the purposes of discussing your response - what makes hitting into war/eowcf different than a notice? What if your notice has expired?

The difference is that war is intended to be one kd fighting another. Hitting into it unfairly helps one of the participants. This is true whether you have a CF with the kd or not. Similarly, the point of EOWCF is to allow kds to rebuild after war, which is extremely costly, and hitting in, despite the lower gains, defeats the purpose of having EOWCF.

Serving notice into war/EOWCF doesn't undermine the purpose of war/EOWCF (so long as you're not hitting in, even if your notice has expired).