Diplogames Rule Discussion Thread

[LzPrst]

and what do you base this thinking on cyber...?

link! we need to know that, A) a patch is in the works, and B) that the emergence rate will be changed for marathon speeds. if you happen to have information regarding this dont hide it. I want facts not hunches.

[Robert]

If I say more lawyers may wait for me when I come home tonight

[MMC]

Originally posted by Rasputin
i will abstain from this vote as i dont have a clue what a warlord is or does due to my lack of playing a game that one appears in.

Play the Genghis Khan Scenario on Warlord difficulty. You'll get a new warlord every 3-4 turns if you keep the pace going.

[Frank Johnson]

I think that we won't get warlords due to the tendancy to peacenik, not the time frame. My prediction is first GG is first to get facism :P

[Prussia]

There should also be some rule (in the spirit of the game) that if one civ falls behind too much technologically, they get every tech that, let's say, 7 civs have that they don't.

...While we're on the subject.

[Toni]

that if one civ falls behind too much technologically

become an vassalage then, it will be best

[LzPrst]

agree with toni. no rules\obligations for updating backwards civs, but I would of course encourage it. stronger civs should be open for vassalage, patronage or whatever else a clever diplomat can work out.

[MMC]

I agree. Tech trading restrictions should lifted (within reason) for Master/Vassal transactions.

[Robert]

I wonder if any player ever wants to be a real vassal in the game. a diplo-vassal (not using the game techniques) is a different situation of course

I think tech trading rules should count for those as well, otherwise it's too easy to exploit.

[Prussia]

So... Then you become a vassal, you still are technologically backwards. Vassalage doesn't help.

Since this is a Diplogame, and not a simple Multiplayer game, it would be so much more fun if everyone was SORT OF on the same foot, and I hope that people won't be jerks and obtain vassals as buffer states, or something cruel like that.

But vassal states =

[deity]

Now let's think about this. It seems to me we have a wide range of players here. Depending on starts and skills we are bound to have a few civs that simply can't catch up. Bring on vassalage (not the feudal one but the permanent one). For diplo games I suggest if a civ becomes a vassal it's permanent and the vassal state can receive ALL techs obtained by the master civ. If we don't do this we won't have vassals.

[deity]

dp

[Frank Johnson]

The game's conditions for breaking vassalage under a war capitulation are pretty harsh to begin with deity. It'll be hard for them to get out from under it anyway. No need to make them permanent.

To get out of forced vassalage you have to...

Lose half you land after you become a vassal....

Get more than half your master's population...

or...

Refuse to relinquish a resource that your master demands with the vassal game mechanic.

Meeting any of these conditions is exetremely difficult unless there's a major geo-political shake up, which are cool, and thus are to be encouraged.

But making a vassal excempt from any trade rule makes some degree of sense. Of course, the master will be leery from handing out the best stuff anyway.

[deity]

Originally posted by Frank Johnson
The game's conditions for breaking vassalage under a war capitulation are pretty harsh to begin with deity. It'll be hard for them to get out from under it anyway. No need to make them permanent.

To get out of forced vassalage you have to...

Lose half you land after you become a vassal....

Get more than half your master's population...

or...

Refuse to relinquish a resource that your master demands with the vassal game mechanic.

Meeting any of these conditions is exetremely difficult unless there's a major geo-political shake up, which are cool, and thus are to be encouraged.

But making a vassal excempt from any trade rule makes some degree of sense. Of course, the master will be leery from handing out the best stuff anyway.

Cool, I agree with that then.

[Robert]

I see possible exploits coming and I don't like it.