Maybe I misunderstood the rules, but I thought you had to denounce me before going into war:
Denouncement
Casus belli is required to declare war.
Unless it is the ancient era or your civilization benefits from surprise wars.
Denounced players can use their Casus belli without waiting.
You may disagree with my norwegian character, but he was doing exactly what I said he would do. He was even escorting my settler.
Hmn, did you mean the “friendly” game rules?
To be honest, I wasnt even thinking about those, so I’ll take a look to see if I’ve breached them. I was a bit high on meds and knew America does not want this Viking city on the lands between us but much CLOSER to my capital. So when the game allowed me to attack, I seized the moment!
We can discuss and revert if I have breached the non-game rules we agreed to at the start. Will check back. Don’t even know whose turn it is. Remember, also, this is my first real civ6 MP game!
That is quoted from the more formal Club Rules. But we decided to use the friendly rules (which basically boil down to don’t cheat by reloading the game multiple times, and don’t use great people to scout). Messages 17-22 or so of this chat.
I feel like the confusion is my fault, since at first I didn’t understand the difference between friendly and club rules. If that’s the source of the confusion, then my apologies!
There’s a difference between being fine with it and being unable and unwilling to do anything about it. They are friends to America and our largest trading partner. Who knows if they will watch the war from the sidelines, or choose a different path?
I have raised it before, remember? But to America, the aggressive expansion on our borders is a far more pressing matter, which we can turn our practical attention to.
Indeed, the world, in this Era at least, seems to be a plaything for Poland!
I have no problem with your Viking spirit and embrace a fellow warrior!
I also made my expectations very clear, I thought, and Harald disregarded these. So we have a clash.
I think the war as declared is perfectly legitimate, as this was the conclusion of our rules discussion, the ones we are playing under. I hope youbwerent confused and thinking it was the club rules, because we definitely chose the simpler “friendly” rules.
Here’s a paste from above…next post, wasn’t on clipboard…
Here’s the section where we agreed to Friendly rules:
I recommend the friendly rules for this game if you are considering having rules.
The friendly rules do look a lot simpler!
This may clear some things up: there are no city states and no AI.
Old habits from civ3 MP die hard.
The club rules seems okay, as well. Just there’s a bunch of options and I’m not sure I can be bothered, at least not right now, specifying which we’ll follow.
Friendly rules okay? Seems minimal but banning a couple obvious exploits.
Can you clarify what the difference is? I read through that page a couple times and couldn’t find a clear delineation between friendly vs club rules. I thought it was all one ruleset.
From what I can see, these are the only rules under Friendly (while Club has many more possibilities):
Correct. I’ll leave it with you guys.
1
OK, sounds good. Are we all on board with the friendly rules? And then if somebody bails we can discuss adopting the AI rules at that point. Like @J_Dennis said, you shouldn’t be prevented from finishing a conquest just because the other player rage-quit.
Yeah, it sounds good.
We should use our common sense and also not use exploits.
We have two options:
status quo continue as is
revert a couple turns before the war, where Harald understands America means business, and either comes to fight, or takes his settler away.
Yes, technically America started the war, but we feel well justified after the Ohio Incident and the disregard shown to our clear warnings about settling a Viking city along our mighty Susquehanna River.
My vote is for option 1, but I’m open to compromise since, with the rules confusion on @francisco.santanna 's part, I can understand how he’d feel hard done by.
What do you guys want to do?
I’m making the assumption it is possible to revert turns, I don’t actually know!
This is not my war I don’t know exactly what just transpired in the war. Unless something very decisive happened in the war because of misunderstanding of the rules, I vote for continuing as is. We settled on playing with the simpler ‘friendly rules’. I think Norway can survive this surprise war.
The American first strike has been fairly decisive. With no losses, we have destroyed the warrior escort and a nearby archer and captured the settler. Unless berserkers coming charging out of the fog, it looks like we own the battlefield right now.
@francisco.santanna sounds like you were thinking he was safe from attack. If we can revert two turns, would you rather go another way with the settler? I think that’s the only fair option if we can revert.
Because if we revert two turns and you come to fight, neither is this fair to me, because of the lost initiative.
@francisco.santanna is who we really need to hear from. Your thoughts?
Yes, I think you did misunderstand, unfortunately.
Yes, we should hear @francisco.santanna out. I won’t cast my final vote until I hear his side of the story.
I tell you what, if I was reading the rules in Portuguese, I would’ve been pretty confused too! I am assuming Portuguese is francisco’s first language…please correct if I’m wrong.
I prefer option 2 of course. I’m not sure if it’s possible though.
I also ack that I misunderstood the agreement.
The problem was not the English. I just paid more attention to the initial proposal and didn’t pay much attention in the other messages.
Okay, all good.
Given your preference, I’ll check in with Valamas or somebody and see about if/how we can revert, since I’m the host.
deleted
I think it’s possible to revert the turn but I am not sure if we should, honestly. I’m sorry for the misunderstanding but as @francisco.santanna said, he didn’t pay close attention to the discussion where we decided the rules. I wish no offence but I think it’s kinda on him.
Looks like it’s already done. It’s fine with me.
Well, you may have spoken a bit too late, @J_Dennis.
I discovered it’s actually really easy to revert the turn on the website, and have already started doing that.
I think I also went one turn too far back, so it’s Yeti’s turn to play instead of contasospam’s.
I think we can go from here then? I was thinking I might revert another round to Contaso has two turns to play. But I agree with Dennis.
I think this way is the best way forward. Sorry Yeti to make you replay that one!
Everyone all good? If not, speak. If you are, play on!
And keep your damn settlers off my borders! When I say it’s not wise to settle near me, IT IS NOT!!! 
Now we have two timelines. Kinda weird.