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

[Byzantium (DoC)]

India - sorry my reply to you earlier was rather pointed. I agree with much that you say in your lastest post. Its all about balance, and there are always going to be different views of that, and as Persia says, different levels of involvement in conflicts. What is remarkable, is that we manage to keep this going so well despite our different interests and viewpoints. us all

[Robert]

Game has been paused. Ottomans still have to play and are able to play in 7-12 hours. I'm going to launch the game again in 6 hours.

Inca/Ottomans: if you're able to play earlier: please send me a PM

[Robert]

game's up!

[Korea (DoC)]

I firm;yl beleive it is the upgrading and gifiting of amry that is far more detrimentla to this dipl gmae than any internvetion of a larger civ.

In game it creates the same result the aidedciv will beat of its enemy, but the gifting civ remains anonymous therefore can jump up and down later when it is down properly with a nation taking a stand agsint wrogndoing and intervening.

Relaity is you cant hide the forgienersin yourarmy in realy life, Byantine soldiers would stick out liek a sore thumb in Egypt. But we cna do that ingame because of the mechanics of hte game.

So lets not pretend that gifitng of units or even upgrading is not as bad as interevention.

But at least with intervention it is done openly

[OzzyKP]

to latest Korean story post

[Persia (DoC)]

Some armies doesn't equal many armies.
Once again, it all depends on how you execute things.

[Korea (DoC)]

look at nmuber or english troops used in greece, how many persians were gifted to russia for their war. howe many byz to egypt

seems that reality is the nubmers of gifted would increas till you got the resutl you wanted.

so i prefer the open method of beignhonest and figihting under my banner rather than hiding it and pretendign later in game they werent my units.

i perosnal dont liek the UPGRADINg of units by antoher it is so easy to do and means you can skip tech reaserch all together.

I find that very unrelaistic...

[Persia (DoC)]

0 Persian troops were gifted to Russia.
And like I said, there's a huge space between upgrading 1 or upgrading all troops.

There are just many possibilities. Diplomacy offers a lot more then only full-scale war.

[Byzantium (DoC)]

I agree with Korea in fact. I said so a while ago in this thread that we should in future ban gifting of units, or at least require the public declaration of them (as we do for tech trades). Would need to be explored e.g. does this include settlers etc. Gifting units is unrealistic, and because its secret raises all sorts of suspicions whether founded or not. It happened all over in BtP and seemed silly - fighting units of a nation which everyone knows they can't built, and gifting units to a smaller nations who then invades someone avoiding the diplomatic outcry which would have come if you had invaded them youself. I'd be happy to see the rules changed now, but I guess its probably the sort of thing which needs discussing and deciding when there isn't a game on.

[Russia (DoC)]

Don't take away selling units. It is an integral part of power politics, in game and in history. What I do dislike is when whole armies are gifted away for practically nothing.

There has to be a balance to things. And it is a dog eat dog world. Diplomacy lessens this somewhat, but still, we should be able to make war. There has in fact been extremely little war in this game. Some civs have never seen war at all...

Persia-Russia
Greece Byzantium
5-England
Russia-Byzantium
Russia-Persia2
Persia-Natives (colonial)
Egypt-Inca
Byzantium-India
Russia-Ottoman

9 wars, if I forgotten some, let's say 10. For how many civs and how many years?
10 wars for 15 civs during 5500 years? It's a major game mechanic flaw that wars have:
1. No attrition or desertion of troops
2. No morale value for troops
3. Defence is too easy (cultural landscape is beyond any reasonability)
4. Possibility for limited skirmishes are practically non-existant (it's usually all in with every conflict).

A major problem is exactly that big nations, or just any other civs intervene too much.

I would like to see a rule in future diplogames.
1. Alliances must be publicly announced
2. Alliances last maximum 20 turns.
3. Renewing alliance after that time incurs an attitude/prestige loss.
4. Interfering in a war without an alliance should have a big prestige loss.

Loosening up interventions by making alliances short-lived (find me an example of any alliance in world history that has lasted more than 100 years) should be a definitive spur to make people both more active in diplomacy, but make diplomacy more interesting.

As for the role of small civs and big hinderances. Yeah, it really sucks to be small. Plotting and planning is one thing, and it is fun, but if you are very small you have very little leverage.

[Byzantium (DoC)]

What Russia says makes sense to me.

[Korea (DoC)]

Don't take away selling units. It is an integral part of power politics, in game and in history. What I do dislike is when whole armies are gifted away for practically nothing.

should only be lalowed to gift or sell units if the appropiate tech is also given..

There has to be a balance to things. And it is a dog eat dog world. Diplomacy lessens this somewhat, but still, we should be able to make war. There has in fact been extremely little war in this game. Some civs have never seen war at all...

Persia-Russia
Greece Byzantium
5-England
Russia-Byzantium
Russia-Persia2
Persia-Natives (colonial)
Egypt-Inca
Byzantium-India
Russia-Ottoman

9 wars, if I forgotten some, let's say 10. For how many civs and how many years?
10 wars for 15 civs during 5500 years? It's a major game mechanic flaw that wars have:
1. No attrition or desertion of troops
2. No morale value for troops
3. Defence is too easy (cultural landscape is beyond any reasonability)
4. Possibility for limited skirmishes are practically non-existant (it's usually all in with every conflict).

been other nations involved in wars but not directly, agaun gifitng of units etc... I know of some bloody galley thatnever got returned

A major problem is exactly that big nations, or just any other civs intervene too much.

I would like to see a rule in future diplogames.
1. Alliances must be publicly announced
2. Alliances last maximum 20 turns.
3. Renewing alliance after that time incurs an attitude/prestige loss.
4. Interfering in a war without an alliance should have a big prestige loss.

Loosening up interventions by making alliances short-lived (find me an example of any alliance in world history that has lasted more than 100 years) should be a definitive spur to make people both more active in diplomacy, but make diplomacy more interesting.

Real world is actualy well rperesented by long alliances. Australia allied with New Zeland since day one so well over 200 years now. Breakinng of allaicne by somme rule is silly, they should be borken by in game and diplo manipulations. Indian Korean alliance was broken due to IC stuff, English Korean allaince was formed due to this breaksdown. Maybe the allaince of the Mali/indians and Natives would have broken apart if soome could offer them someting to do so.

As for the role of small civs and big hinderances. Yeah, it really sucks to be small. Plotting and planning is one thing, and it is fun, but if you are very small you have very little leverage.

People do have to realise that civ 4 game mechanics severley limit a war till you totally out number someone else either in numbers or tech level, there is little actual strategy for miltiary use, it is all about lieing till you trick some one to not defneidng and then attack them
.. would lvoe to see a online game l;ike the old Avalon Hil lboard games...

[OzzyKP]

Real world is actualy well rperesented by long alliances. Australia allied with New Zeland since day one so well over 200 years now.

how many of those years were they real countries?

[Korea (DoC)]

that not very nice OZZY is USA a real country yet.. ????

How long has USA been allied to the same westrern powers of Grea Britian

[Robert]

I know of some bloody galley thatnever got returned

I know of an army of riflemen that got returned AS A WAR MOVE!