The Dance of Civilizations [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread Pt1]

[Robert]

End of debate (for now). Persia and Russia appear to have a great war together, let's see if they can find a solution together.

Russia should indeed know that there are limits on what Persia can do to it. The measured war rules can be found in the opening post of this thread. I'll post them below again.

All enjoy a merry christmas!
Don't forget to read the Gospel of the birth of Jesus Christ tonight

[Robert]

- Measured war
A Civ Diplo Game has to balance two factors in war.
1. This is Civ - Warmongering, conquest and domination is a perfectly acceptable and honourable way to play. There is no intention that Diplo games need to be 'builder orientated' (though that is just as acceptable a strategy too).

2. This is Diplo - No civilisation should be crippled with the result that the game stops being fun for the player involved. This means that there is a balance to be struck. War is costly for the aggressor, building up forces while other nations race ahead, so the victor should be able to make real gains from the war. But if they gain too much, the loser may be crippled. Its impossible to make a hard and fast rule out of this, because that can just be exploited (e.g. a loser refusing to make a reasonable peace because 'the rule' will then kick in and save them). But as a guide, a 25% loss is an appropriate threshhold (loss being an overall measure, not just a city count - losing 3 tiny fringe cities may be much less of a loss than 1 major city). More than this may well be crippling the loser. But a loss/gain up to this probably is appropriate benefit for the victor. Again this can't be a rule - taking a small bite out of a neighbour every ten turns will cripple them, but having won a war against a neighour a millenium ago doesn't mean you can't fight with them again.

This concept of measured war is enforced in rule 7.

7. No permanent vassalage (capitulation). The vassal must obey the terms made in a vassalage deal unless it's been freed (by a 3rd nation or by the master, or if the master doesn't live up to the terms). This rule is in place to find a way to get vassalages lasting longer then 10 turns without being forced to remain a vassal by game mechanics.

8. When 51% of the players for ooc-reasons think that a war should end then it must end. This to avoid that civs will be cripled too much by a war. The terms of the end of war are in such a case: immediate peace for 50 turns. It is advised for both parties to agree on the best possible terms for peace before this happens.
Such an end of war must be organized in the org thread. (ie. players must announce their opinion regarding the end of a war in the org thread).

Reasons for such an end-of-war vote are only OOC! Not IG (like: my allie is losing this important city)
(check dictionary of terms for the meaning of 'measured war')

[Native America (DoC)]

Just for information, The Native American's are within one turn of settling on a new land to the east of the Indian sub-continent. We don't know if this is on the same continent as this new Russia, but it could well be.

There may be ample space for whoever colonises this new land, to prosper and I hope that is the case. The point is that this new land is still up for grabs and may not totally be at Persia's disposal.

Btw, I too, enjoy the Persia - Russia stories.

Oh and Happy Winter festival everyone

[India (DoC)]

[Persia (DoC)]

We're living in the year 1000 but we talk with each other as if it's a 2058 AD United Nations meeting, when some try to 'divide' new worlds

[Persia (DoC)]

Nice one, India

[Persia (DoC)]

[OzzyKP]

[St Jon]

Merry Christmas!

[St Jon]

This concept of measured war is very noble. It serves the tiny Egyptians or Ottomans in no way even though they have been to war with none. Of the defeated Romans, Inca, Greeks and Arabians, what hope? You already have a gap twixt big and small so large that Greece might as well not be here for all the impact that they will ever have for the rest of the game.

I propose that in all future - NOTICE I SAY FUTURE - Diplogames Civ obliteration must be allowed or you just get a under-class of bored people with no reason to play a turn.

[Russia (DoC)]

I've seen a lot of discussion concerning Russia here and I'm glad that people are looking out for my interests. However I am fully aware of the measured war rules and if I felt it was violated I would appeal to it. However, the fact is, I started a war against a superior enemy and lost. What would the consequences for this be? Well, I could lose a city, reducing my number to 4 (+3 undeveloped colonies in tundra) and accepting vassalage, or I could look at other options. Persia has given me other options, and I am considering them. The opportunity to settle in the new world is highly intriguing. However there are some major problems involved regarding land access, resource access and defense.

Depending on the size and geography of the new world, I may well end up with fewer, poorer cities than what I already have. As such, I am not sure if the deal is in fact a good or a bad one. I am a capable player so I might be able to make it work, but I have my doubts that I'll ever have the chance to do anything but develop to catch up with other civs who have had considerably more time to develop. Does the game mechanics allow a civ to catch up in a 1000 years with those who have already developed for 5000? The question I believe is easily answered, as we have seen in the big vs small wars fought throughout this game. The advantages of early development are simply unchallengeable.

The issue is of course that while I am competing with my colonies against other nations colonies, those nations will also have their strong homelands to support them.


blah blah blah.
In summary. I honestly don't know if it is game mechanically possible to build a viable empire in the new world at this stage. As such the deal may or may not be a good one. It is impossible to tell, but it would be interesting to try. Of course, failing might ruin the game for me. The only way it could work was if I could keep some old world cities during a transitionary phase, then maybe, just maybe, I could pull it off.

[Egypt (DoC)]

This concept of measured war is very noble. It serves the tiny Egyptians or Ottomans in no way even though they have been to war with none. Of the defeated Romans, Inca, Greeks and Arabians, what hope? You already have a gap twixt big and small so large that Greece might as well not be here for all the impact that they will ever have for the rest of the game.

I propose that in all future - NOTICE I SAY FUTURE - Diplogames Civ obliteration must be allowed or you just get a under-class of bored people with no reason to play a turn.

I am not bored at all Plus I now have 7 cities, and growing. Who you calling tiny

But, even though points-wise and military-wise I am not a very big player because other players are really good or had good starting positions, I don't mind being small because of the diplo part of the game. I really enjoy reading all the conversations and contributing and managing an empire that is struggling because of being locked in land-wise early on in the game. Precisely that makes it a lot of fun to manage this civ; I learn the ins and outs about running a not so successful civ, I get the chance to use that disadvantage for fun storylines, I have fun cooperating and scheming in PM's, it's great, I couldn't care less about my score or whether I stand a chance of winning. Who cares about size or score, I think it's fun whatever position you're in. Look at the history we created together, the laughs, the insane plans and battles! So much fun. The success of my civ in points and size has absolutely nothing to do with that. I just wish I had more time to contribute more to the story line, but I hope that will come in the new year.

And Russia, you're definitely getting max attitude and story points from me, great stuff. Same goes for Persia, you guys have been writing such entertaining posts.

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Egypt - and I agree about the Persian and Russia posts - leaves the rest of us standing.

[Korea (DoC)]

just one question i read that persia is offering russia Vouchers as part of this deal, how does that work..

i didnt think we could ctually trade vouchers , only use them when trading for a tech.

can a third party nation pay the cost of the tech trade ? is that witihn the rules

[Persia (DoC)]

I offer Russia to request 2(?) techs from me and I will pay the voucher.