I remember how long the first two session where.
Session 1………… 145 turns
Session 2………… 130 turns
This is very true, some people are not wrapping their head around the concept that the denfinition of "victory" and consequently the "needs" of a civ have changed.Originally posted by OzzyKP
That is the whole point. "Successful development of your civ" has now changed. By "successful development" you mean "the fastest path to launching the ship". Which gets you some points, but not enough to ignore other objectives. The point of this system is to encourage players to look at the game holistically instead of focusing exclusively on that one goal.
If you don't take the whole game into consideration you will lose.
Are people not treading my posts?Originally posted by OzzyKP
And yes, people need to vote every week. Every week. It would be great if CS made regular nagging posts listing off who has and hasn't voted to remind us.I suggested this some time ago. I've also suggested the Incas post the last save here.
I've also suggested that Lz or someone would do a post after each session with the number of turns done in each session. Next to the number of turns, would be a comment on who hasen't yet voted for that session.
/Example/
- Who hasn't voted yet:
Session 1 .......... 45 turns ............................. None
Session 1 ......... 110 turns ........................... Diplo France
Session 3 .......... technical difficulties
ect.
/attached last save here/
/end of example/
Also I've suggested a Cyber sends nagging emails to all the players after each session.
Also I'd like to remind Holland that Carpathia is not nesecarily a new player, and that talking like he is is a breach on anon.
Last edited by Diplo France; March 10, 2008 at 08:25.
'Impossible' n'est pas français.
I remember how long the first two session where.
Session 1………… 145 turns
Session 2………… 130 turns
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Also I've suggested a Cyber sends nagging emails to all the players after each session.
I'm not reading this thread on a daily / weekly base, and miss a lot of posts b/c of that.
I also don't have time / desire to put a lot of administration into a game in which I'm not even playing myself, thus sending out e-mails etc. and checking who did and did not vote is not something I'm going to do.
I just auto-collect all vote mails in a folder and I'll give them to you guys when you're done.
I'll make an update on the votes now and then, like I dus an hour ago.
I'm sorry that I can't cooperate to the fullest, but I'm sure that you guys understand that.
I'd love it btw if you will all put "Votes Session X" in the subject line, that makes it much easier for me to determine who has voted for which session
CS
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
He probably fully understands that. But there is a bit of snag, no one beside you knows who voted and not. So Lz can’t make nagging posts. We don’t know how many people are voting…
heck I don’t even know which session we just played on Sunday.
Last edited by Heraclitus; March 10, 2008 at 10:03.
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Yes shame on the Inca
I will be going back through the postings and catch on the voting.
Sorry I will vote for all sessions - in the back of of my mind I have already voted - just need to put it down in writing.
Diplo France I will send you the last save and you posted - i tried twice but i get some kind of an error.
Also all that about keeping track of how many turns and what session we are in you can keep if you want.
@ Holland
About the voting you could have said that before we decided to use it in this game.
Sorry but Inca has sacrificed much just in order to get objective points - while others as you say build settlers, troops and get sweet techs. Our whole game strategy has been based on focusing on objective points. SO we will stand by this voting rule 101% for this game. Yes in Hotw7 it was neglected - but it will not be in this.
I will post that score table at last so players can keep track of their scores. This will also remind all that we are using this system!
Indeed, Russia CAN trade, more like you give Russia techs. The situation could develop that the advanced civs will discover nearly all of the techs.
For the next game, I'd suggest an era limit, meaning that a few techs per era are allowed. That would mean everyone gets something to trade as the game goes along.
People won't accept change, don't ask me why they just don't. I think it was Diplo France who proposed a better system. But it got shot down by Carpathia.
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila
btw. on another note. Saturday/Sunday the 22nd/23rd I will be away. most likely I'll be unable to play.
e-mail: diplo_mongolia [at] plomp.eu
msn: diplo_mongolia [at] hotmail.com
“The greatest happiness is to vanquish your enemies, to chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth, to see those dear to them bathed in tears, to clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters.” -Genghis Khan (allegedly)
Thanks Mongolia for the advance note - i think we got enough time to get you a sub!
I guess for this upcoming session I should host again - seeing it went so smooth last week. I will host the game 15mins before reg time
I too will catch up on my voting for each session as per Inca.
It is true that we started this game with the Objectrive/Subjective points table being used to determine the diplo winner. I even promoted it.
But as I started to play I made game decisions, NOT on SS victory, NOR on objective points but on the strategic needs of Holland. This is organic to the changing tides of play. E.g. Mongolia and Holland fought a whole session of war, so Wonders got canned, Liberalism got canned, spreading religion got canned etc etc (hypothetically speaking - Holland wasn't thining of points at all).
I like the points system as a reflective way of assessing the game but NOT as a guide to strategic moves. Do you follow my point?
I also think that to encourage new diplo players the power diplo powers have a responsibility:
* maybe discuss Wonder limits for future rules? Holland and Inca are building most in this game due to traits and/or tech advancement
* maybe discuss the limiting of religion to two?
I'm just thinking of the new players and or those that are getting behind.
And sorry about assuming Carpathia is a new player - if I'm wrong then that's good for anon!
Dirk Ginkel of Huygens, Ginkel [RIP] & Clovis
[Trading Inc. 660AD]
Hey, just to let you guys know, im still in it and all.
Although my empire is in shambles, I will post and play on.
Truth be told, I was just flat out pissed off at how badly the war went. I jumped the gun, and paid the price. I think part of it was that I was so eager for war that settler looked like a good excuse. Just wanted to shake things up a bit.
Overextended and premature were my downfalls. Believe it or not, I am actually pretty good in multiplayer (played in Rah's saturday night game for over a year before switching to HOTW12). Honestly though, the marathon setting did throw me more off target than I would have been otherwise, that was really the only Diplogame 'noob' aspect of it. I expected to be able to replenish my city defences in much less turns. I usually play on normal or quick speed in multigames.
Hats off to you Ozzy for your stomping of my defence, not that there was much of it.
As far as me not communicating, part of it was i was pissed, part was I didn't want to make any rash decisions (i think someone mentioned shock earlier?), and part of it was I was hoping another nation might decide to take advantage of Americas other fronts... but yeah, mostly just pissed off.
Last edited by Diplo Carpathia; March 11, 2008 at 00:43.
YIM is CarpathiaCiv
MSN is CarpathiaCiv
Email is diplo_carpathia at plomp dot eu
Welcome back Carpathia, great to know that you are in
Well my advice is for you guys to start negotiating a peace deal (Carpathia i strongly believe that you will get some cities back from America especially your holy city etc)
Actually it was me, prior to the anonymity, and it was shot down by Deity, Lz, and others.Originally posted by Heraclitus
People won't accept change, don't ask me why they just don't. I think it was Diplo France who proposed a better system. But it got shot down by Carpathia.
My suggestion was to base it on how long the people had the tech in question for, not number of techs. I was told that we would do it as is because my suggestion of what would be the problem, that being that the divide between the "haves" and the "have nots" becoming increasingly wide and decimating the "have nots" ability to compete in... anything.
Well, as can be evidenced by Nols' statements about what Russia seems to be going through, I think my point is proven.
So when it was said that my suggestion would be talked about if there was deemed a problem, and it's fairly evident that there's a problem when someone takes over a civ, plays for about 1/2 of a session, and says "Yeah, they're screwed, because they're already low on things to trade and it's getting worse fast," is it time to talk about it yet?
Me.
Yes, I've been a bit absent in the "out of the actual game" stuff, work went a bit nuts on me and I have a few other RL projects that have taken up a huge amount of my time.
I'm very sorry about that and promise that I will do as much as I can to catch up. (I have to go through and check all the email still for christ's sake, I'm going to do that and reply to any emails sent to me as soon as I get done with this post, don't know if I will have time to post any story stuff up right now because I'm doing this AT work while I'm working with a client, which is not conducive to continued employment if anyone notices. :| )
A few things to respond to:
1. Yes, Daylight Savings is a pisser. I have no problem, if Nols is willing, with running the session until 3am my time and having Nols take over. I'm very confident in her abilities, as I've played with her on many occasions, and consider her to honestly be better than I am in infrastructure building, easily, although I think i coudl take her in a war. . .
2. About tech: Yes. Russia is a large, technologically backwards behemoth. I was going through getting all the early infrastructure stuff, when suddenly I was set upon by the barbarian ARMADA. I managed, through some diplomatic wrangling and some strategic city placements, to acquire what is roughly 1/4 of the main continent entirely to myself. The downside of it is about 1/2 of that is almost entirely tundra areas and ice, so it hasn't been settled as of yet, which meant that (since I didn't have the scouts/warriors to dot the landscape at the time) the barbarians came in force. So I had to switch gears to beeline my way to ironworking (since I had no other strat resources yet in order to be able to fight back the hordes. At this point in time, I noticed I was steadily going bankrupt, so I had to rip through CoL to Currency, at which point I realized (while researching Monarchy) that my people had no freaking clue what Pots were.
It's amazing how Diplogames manage to distract you from your normal evolution of play by "Oh crap the people are screwed."
Anyway, so now Russia is very isolated and technologically backwards, because we were rightfully worried more about our own skins than the petty squabbles of the outsiders from beyond the mountains, and I've been watching the gap widen. That's going to make me very unable to trade very soon. I'm still wondering how I'm going to pay back the tech gift I got.I'm sure I'll think of something... somewhere. Good times though.
3. Russia has been fairly busy being xenophobic behind their little mountains, what with the barbarian raiders being their main contact with outsiders, so I'm going to catch up everything with one post explaining all of that, and explaining the slow shift away from that due to the Nols influence (because she's awesome), and work that in. It may not be up for a couple days. I've got a "weekend" coming up, but I can give no guarantees due to the aforementioned project I've been working on (trying to set up a business with some people so I can get out of my dead-end job. . .), and the fact that I've got another side project starting soon irl that I will have to devote some time to.
All in all I'm a busy beaver, but I'm trying really hard.Apologies again! I really did not see this coming when the diplogame was being put together!
Not really.Originally posted by Diplo Holland
Actually the more behind civs can do deals with advanced civs to get a tech down one path whilst another path is resaerched by the adv civ.
You have to remember something. On top of the "Only 10 tech trades", No Tech Brokering is also on.
This screws those of us who are behind.
I'm having trouble trying to find people to trade techs with already because the people who are willing to trade what paltry techs I have for techs they have have "fluff" techs that really do me no good available, because they recevied the techs I want from someone else, and the people who actually researched the techs I want and can trade with me are so far ahead that they either have the techs I can trade already, or are unwilling to trade away the techs I want for what I have or can reasonably have in the future (unless I completely gimp my growth for a single tech by forcing my research down a path they need, helping them at my expense) so I can't get any of the more advanced and useful techs, I can only get the Garbage techs that I can research in 5-7 turns anyway.
The divide is growing, and the system is going to need to be changed now or you're going to see people either dropping or going through the motions until someone realizes that they have tanks and the neighbors can only muster Musketmen and they just move to crush them.
It's becomming nonsensical already, and I would find it safe to say that the situation is far worse than the situation that was in HOTWXI that this method was trying to solve.
As I believe a few people predicted.
The attitude is already evident. There's three posts in this thread of people saying "I'm having a hard time justifying helping someone out because I only have 2-3 trades left."
Conquer someone and make them give you techs.... or else.
Captain of Team Apolyton - ISDG 2012
When I was younger I thought curfews were silly, but now as the daughter of a young woman, I appreciate them. - Rah
Oh, so thats what America is doing!Originally posted by OzzyKP
Conquer someone and make them give you techs.... or else.
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila
I have spearmen and axemen.Originally posted by OzzyKP
Conquer someone and make them give you techs.... or else.
The majority of you have Knights, Musketmen, and Catapults (I don't even have construction yet, this is the point I'm trying to get across I might have picked it up last session and don't remember though).
Not going to happen.
Great to hear from you.Originally posted by Diplo Carpathia
Hey, just to let you guys know, im still in it and all.
Although my empire is in shambles, I will post and play on.
Truth be told, I was just flat out pissed off at how badly the war went. I jumped the gun, and paid the price. I think part of it was that I was so eager for war that settler looked like a good excuse. Just wanted to shake things up a bit.
Overextended and premature were my downfalls. Believe it or not, I am actually pretty good in multiplayer (played in Rah's saturday night game for over a year before switching to HOTW12). Honestly though, the marathon setting did throw me more off target than I would have been otherwise, that was really the only Diplogame 'noob' aspect of it. I expected to be able to replenish my city defences in much less turns. I usually play on normal or quick speed in multigames.
Hats off to you Ozzy for your stomping of my defence, not that there was much of it.
As far as me not communicating, part of it was i was pissed, part was I didn't want to make any rash decisions (i think someone mentioned shock earlier?), and part of it was I was hoping another nation might decide to take advantage of Americas other fronts... but yeah, mostly just pissed off.
I certainly know how frustrating it can be when plans go awry and things start looking bad. But that is what is great about diplogames, most wars (nearly all) don't end in elimination. There is always time to put on the brakes, and strike a deal to save your skin. It sometimes requires some pride swallowing, but it is nearly always in your longterm best interests. Those who are shrewd negotiators can achieve far more for their civs through diplomacy than through battle.
Hopefully I'll find some time to post a bit in the story thread, and make a peace offer.
Captain of Team Apolyton - ISDG 2012
When I was younger I thought curfews were silly, but now as the daughter of a young woman, I appreciate them. - Rah
America is/was fighting a technologically superior foe. But we out maneuvered them, out produced them, and out diploed them. It can be done.Originally posted by Diplo Russia
I have spearmen and axemen.
The majority of you have Knights, Musketmen, and Catapults (I don't even have construction yet, this is the point I'm trying to get across I might have picked it up last session and don't remember though).
Not going to happen.
Wait for the big powers to fight. Then pick a side. Make a surprise attack at a softly defended underbelly of a big power while their attention is turned elsewhere. Leverage your battle successes into tech during peace negotiations.
Success in diplogames depends on being able to leverage limited resources. What are your strengths, what are your weaknesses? What is your geo-political position? What is the state of world politics? Where can you insert yourself into the equation for maximum effect?
Or, alternately, bypass such conventional notions about diplogames, civ, and winning and try to win the game through other means. Being big and powerful doesn't help people write excellent stories or craft a cunning web of diplomacy around them. Impress everyone and win subjective votes. Even small powers can do this. Participation in the story thread and diplomacy isn't just eye candy, it can WIN you the game. Yes, even small powers.
Captain of Team Apolyton - ISDG 2012
When I was younger I thought curfews were silly, but now as the daughter of a young woman, I appreciate them. - Rah
The rules say nothing of great people, gold, or consentual tech stealing. You could even probably make a deal to echange workers, workboats, spies, missionaries and settlers for more advanced military units. Or even make a deal in which you give them your military unit and gold and they upgrade it for you.Originally posted by Diplo Russia
I have spearmen and axemen.
The majority of you have Knights, Musketmen, and Catapults (I don't even have construction yet, this is the point I'm trying to get across I might have picked it up last session and don't remember though).
Not going to happen.
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila
I would assume that consensual tech stealing is against the rule.
The other ideas are good though.
Captain of Team Apolyton - ISDG 2012
When I was younger I thought curfews were silly, but now as the daughter of a young woman, I appreciate them. - Rah
Originally posted by OzzyKP
I would assume that consensual tech stealing is against the rule.
The other ideas are good though.
I disagree, the player who intends to steal tech needs to spend EP and pay the price the foreign country demands. He also risks being deceived, since the power with whom he trades can cry foul and use it as a pretext for war or to tarnish his reputation.
Further more if the power which is “giving” the tech makes this easy by not spending EP on the power trying to get tech, they leave themselves exposed for a significant amount of time.
And lastly it would be impossible to enforce a ban on it without banning tech stealing, since people could always make clandestine deals amongst themselves.
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Nations that are behind should suck up to a bigger nation for protection. Big nations always love satelite nations. That's usefull in diplomacy, and oftenly as a buffer.
Not all nations can be equal.
Smaller nations that are protected by a big nation can oftenly plot secretly while nobody is watching them.
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Very true.Originally posted by CyberShy
Nations that are behind should suck up to a bigger nation for protection. Big nations always love satelite nations. That's usefull in diplomacy, and oftenly as a buffer.
Not all nations can be equal.
Smaller nations that are protected by a big nation can oftenly plot secretly while nobody is watching them.
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez Dávila
I think you're all missing my point, but it will become evident as time goes on even more clearly than it is to other people already.
So, oh well, enjoy your time, I guess. I'm going to enjoy mine to the utmost even though the divide is just going to get worse, and there's really not a whole lot I can do about it. Not to say I'm not trying or going to try, but let's be entirely honest, when people only have 2 trades to go and they want to hold onto them for something important, they're not going to give them to something who has almost nothing to offer.
I don't understand how you can't see that when it's already been stated four or five times by people in this very thread that they're not going to do it because they're low on tech trades, but hey. You're way ahead. Why would you? :|
Me.
Regarding techs...
I made one trade last session (something for feudalism). This leaves me with 4 tech trades.
Also, Russia, contact me next session. I will tech trade with you, even if it is a lopsided deal for me. I would encourage others to do the same, expecially those with many trades left, or those with a technological lead.
Also, regarding the 10 trade issue. For the record, it was my idea, and in retrospect I see some problems with it. Orginally I thought it would have been better to limit tech trades per civilization (you can only trade with each civ X number of times).
10 trades was simpler i guess, and that is what we went with. Flawed, yes. However, it is interesting to note that there have been no long term alliances formed to date. I guess this method achived it's purpose, at the cost of other things.
YIM is CarpathiaCiv
MSN is CarpathiaCiv
Email is diplo_carpathia at plomp dot eu
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks