It all started with the Mali invasion of Coventry, which was very illegal at that moment.
Ill give you my take on it too, just so we can compare notes, so to speak
I like the game to regulate itself, so if anybody had a problem with a certain action they could gather up support and do something about it. If that happens enough, that very reaction is the deterrent. I like to play this type of game with the same set of goals or objectives as any other CIV game. Specifically, if somebody goes out of their way to plop a wonder down on a contested border to eat away at the land I control, I reserve the right to fight that action. Just as I would in any other game. In my mind, a Diplo is no different from other types of games in this regard. It is still, at its core, CIV. The difference to me is that in a normal game I would push my advantage to the end and in a Diplo I would severely limit my conquest. And, of course, the idea that others would band against me to curtail my actions is also encouraged (all the while serving the core purpose of putting yourself or an ally ahead).
I think another good example of this was America vs Carthage last session. America ran wild and took more than he should have (that judgment is based on the popular reaction against America by others) and ended up getting around 4 powerful nations to come together against him in support of Carthage. To me that is the perfect example of self regulation.
Of course, last session we had so much banding togather and unbanding that I got totally and completely lost. But that was also the most fun I have had in any session so far and I didn’t even really do anything
Comment