The Dance of Civilizations [Pitboss Diplomacy Game] [Setup Thread]

[St Jon]

Would anyone be interested in playing DoC for the first week or two?

What is DoC?

[Robert]

@Civ Annihilation: in BtP we made the mistake to abandon abandoned civs. In DoC (the Dance of Civilizations, working title for this game) we should never abandon abandoned civs but find new players.

It's not fair to divide the cities of an abandoned civ among it's neighbours. Why would those neighbours get this unfair advantage while other civs, further away, won't get freebie cities.

@Tech trading pacts: fine with me, why not?

@Diplo victory: it is possible and it has been done before in diplo games. Why not? The AP thing failed b/c of 1 civ not having the religion anymore. The UN vote does not have such a prereq.

I hope that it'll never be used to end the game without real IG reasons to vote for civX.

@Reparations: I think that war-reperations can be part of any peace deal, but nobody should be forced by ooc-reasons to pay for reparations, either b/c he won or b/c he los the war. That's an IG thing we should imho never organize by game-rules.

@Age Tech Trade suggestion; Heraclitus, releasing the techs of a certain age for free trade is maybe a better idea indeed, though I would not say that it applies to the last age, but to the age before the last age. (ancient techs can be freely traded in the middle ages). Then we say something like; "when 3 civs are in the middle ages the ancient techs are free for trade."
I would stick to a tech for a tech trade in those situations as well.

That would limit the power of top civs by binding small civs to them by sharing goodies, and it forces mall civs to trade together and get stronger alliances.
It will also avoid that situation where just all techs of the age before the last age are automaticly known by everyone. Tech for a Tech keeps tech trading interesting, also for backwards games.

Getting freebie techs after all is not satisfying at all. It's important to gain stuff in a game. If you get all units and techs from your big neighbour the game becomes boring.

[Black Knight 427]

I like the name of this game as it is maybe we should keep it.

[St Jon]

@Age Tech Trade suggestion; Heraclitus, releasing the techs of a certain age for free trade is maybe a better idea indeed, though I would not say that it applies to the last age, but to the age before the last age. (ancient techs can be freely traded in the middle ages). Then we say something like; "when 3 civs are in the middle ages the ancient techs are free for trade."
I would stick to a tech for a tech trade in those situations as well.

That would limit the power of top civs by binding small civs to them by sharing goodies, and it forces mall civs to trade together and get stronger alliances.
It will also avoid that situation where just all techs of the age before the last age are automaticly known by everyone. Tech for a Tech keeps tech trading interesting, also for backwards games.

Getting freebie techs after all is not satisfying at all. It's important to gain stuff in a game. If you get all units and techs from your big neighbour the game becomes boring.

What's the point in getting Great Library or Internet then?

[Robert]

Great Library = getting 2 extra settled scientists.
Internet = getting all techs known to at least 2 civs.

Those rewards stand tall, I think.

edit reading your post again, I think you mean: "Why get the internet if getting techs that way is not satisfying".
Well, getting the internet is very satisfying. It takes a lot of planning and gaming experience to get it first. The reward is getting all known techs.

Personally I think that The Internet is overpowered, especially in these kinda of games. It means that in the end game one of the already better players factually can stop research all together.

[Heraclitus]

Yea, I could get you started.

Great I'd really appreciate that.

[Toni]

Latest Player list:

1. Robert
2. Pinchak
3. Toni
4. Black Knight
5. St Jon
6. Jeroen
7. The Priest
8. Rempedaalops
9. Hendriks de Infiedielen Dooder
10. bamf226
11. mzprox
12. Heraclitus (First 1,2 weeks played by Ozzy)

I think that 12 players are perfect for our game, of course more are welcomed

P.S Should we try and recall WarningU2/ America? He was realiable and interesting player to have.

[Toni]

Dance of Civilizations or DoC

Love the name too!

[Robert]

I'll pm WarningU2 and invite him.
12 is ok indeed. Perhaps we only need 2 continents for 12 players.

We can start picking civs, that'll keep us busy for a couple of days, then other players woh want to join can just pick their civs after we're done.

I'll post instructions on how to pick a civ later, perhaps today, otherwise somewhere during the weekend.
Please bear a bit with me, I'm leaving for vacation today so I'm organising a lot / finishing work / traveling / installing my vacation room. When that's all done I can do the civ pick thing (or perhaps, if I'm running out of tasks I can do it before we leave to Denmark)

In the meanwhile we have to conclude on the rules.
I'll make a last concept version somewhere during the weekend, then we can vote on that. More comments can be posted in the meanwhile.

[Robert]

I've invited WarningU2 and Rasputin.
Anybody else?

No response from The Capo or 1 of those interested people who signed up long ago.

[The Priest]

Robert,

Thanks for the huge amount of work you have done and are doing on this. And also to Ozzy for the map.

I agree that 12 woudl be fine. More may hopefully join, but its not worth hanging around just to get to a particular number.

[Jeroen Schweitzer]

How does civpickin' work?

[Robert]

I'll post instructions on how to pick a civ later, perhaps today, otherwise somewhere during the weekend.

The civpicker is a cool Robert Plomp (tm) made application in the famous Lotus Domino environment where all players will receive a password and a random number.
Then the player with the number #1 can login to the marvelous system first and pick his civ, then the 2nd player can pick his civ, without being able to pick the civ player 1 picked, etc. till all players grabbed a civ.

Then we all have a civ and nobody knows who got which civ 8)

[bamf226]

I really would prefer no Tech Trades at all, still less extending it, but if it is allowed will I be allowed to use a Tech Trade Pact? These are very powerful with good planning and can catapult 2 Civ's at the beginning.

While tech trading might catapult 2 civs, not having tech trading can destroy small civs. I think we want people to stick at it until the end. If a smaller civ has a drastic tech disadvantage, they are going to quit early.

[Jeroen Schweitzer]

While tech trading might catapult 2 civs, not having tech trading can destroy small civs. I think we want people to stick at it until the end. If a smaller civ has a drastic tech disadvantage, they are going to quit early.

And, with the 'tech trading pact' option now being known, and us being with an even number of players, anyone can play that game (might turn out as "anyone should" though)