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

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Oh.. no.. an other civ complaining ooc in the story thread..no, wait: it's Korea again..
Persia, don't take it personally: I too got the "I'm destroying the diplo spirit" and "this game is over anyway"

Me too. In fact Korea recently threatened me with giving me low votes for the rest of the game because I didn't want to give him a voucher (hows that for in-character, out-of-character confusion).

i cant beat you up i a small nation so jsut ignore me , but it will cost you my votes for restof game...

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Persia, definitely understand the annoyance but I think Ozzy is right that the same actions can be seen in different ways, which is of course why we have votes so we don't have to argue out what people think of each other, we can just vote.

Two things to helps:

1. We keep as strictly as we can to the story=in character, org = out of character distinction. I think RP should just delete posts which don't follow this - if people want to repost they can. Or if RP doesn't want to because he is player and can get accused of bias (since we all know he is the Ethiopians) Ozzy could do it. And occ includes for exmpale reference to 'big four countries' etc. which are not in character ideas (as someone reminded us on here recently)- any post in story with taht sort of reference Ozzy should just delete.

2. The rule set in this game is great. Just one improvement needed - we play without the scores being visible in game. Will solves lots of this. Its too easy for our views of the game to be shaped by those numbers in the corner. Epionage would become much mroe important if my only way of knowing whether I have a greater production than the Romans is by EP, not by guessing because of score.

(and of course beer always helps).

[Korea (DoC)]

my posts wee all carefully contrsucted IC posts. Many real world countries are concerned about the major nations in the owlrd hav ing all the power.


so now at least i know who the Byzantine leader is i can deal with that.


but relaity is as i have said many times the FREE TRADE rule was brpught into help the less developed nations gain some free techs. To trade these free techs with the larger nations is so worng. I understnad the larger nations putting presure on you guys,m but for god sake dont do it. it is not the spirit of the rule

oh i forgot someof you dont care about the spirit of the rules only what a lawyer can use.

[mzprox]

I also thought we should have a system helping to those who are in lower position and I understand Korea's concern (though the story thread defiantely not the place to discuss it), but: what you are suggesting is not a good solution:
If small civs won't trade with big civs then the big civs will trade with each other-ultimately changes nothing
If we forbid the top 4 to trade these techs then why not the 5th? the 6th? or just the top 3?
Anyway those civs who have answered my proposal said that we shouldnt have any extra rule to help the less fortunate civs so I guess it stays as it was, maybe for next game we will consider something.

[Byzantium (DoC)]

Korea you seem to live in make-believe world of your own.

1. Spirit of the rules - you threaten changing your votes depending on whether people do what you want in-game - which is a massive rule break of the spirit as well as the letter of the rules.
2. Its not true that 'I understnad the larger nations putting presure on you guys'. I have traded two classical trades, both with smaller nations, both were completely freely offered (one by them, one by me) no pressure from anyone. I didn't accept the trade you offered involving feudalism because its not a classical tech. Mzprox is exactly right - I could have done classical trades with other large powers but chose to do it with smaller ones instead.
3. You are not small! Current scores you are exactly in the middle.

The issue about how to keep it a good game for everyone is a real one but complex. But the answer isn't make-believe ranting about the peopel who happen to be higher scoring at the moment. (Look at Russia - smaller than you bringing down the mighty Persians!).

[Korea (DoC)]

Korea you seem to live in make-believe world of your own.

1. Spirit of the rules - you threaten changing your votes depending on whether people do what you want in-game - which is a massive rule break of the spirit as well as the letter of the rules.
2. Its not true that 'I understnad the larger nations putting presure on you guys'. I have traded two classical trades, both with smaller nations, both were completely freely offered (one by them, one by me) no pressure from anyone. I didn't accept the trade you offered involving feudalism because its not a classical tech. Mzprox is exactly right - I could have done classical trades with other large powers but chose to do it with smaller ones instead.
3. You are not small! Current scores you are exactly in the middle.

The issue about how to keep it a good game for everyone is a real one but complex. But the answer isn't make-believe ranting about the peopel who happen to be higher scoring at the moment. (Look at Russia - smaller than you bringing down the mighty Persians!).

the rules quyite clearly state i give my attitude score based on how i percieve you to be playing the game. my opinion is the style of postingyou sent me detailing a lawyers response to my issue, is not good attitude so you reieve low votes.

If you or others think i suck at the attiude then give me low votes. i dont care about the attiude votes they are just sunbjective a perception of a reality not rea.

so yesi will not give you voted becasue in my opinion , you are lawyer and i hate lwayers.

Score does not mean power high... i hav eno army , i dont care who knows, come invade me if that what you do to weak civs.. being middle jsut shows i got some citys and some population starting to grow. no army no production base.

So you and everyone esle get of your high horses and stop telling my to attack someone i have about 3 offensive uints which inclludes one chariot , and two macemen.

if that is aforce worth reckomning with then wow you guys must be having no archers anywhere andof course no longbowmen.


The rules for freetech trading should be it is not allowed for the top 4 civs, if that changes overthe game great. but at point of trading no free techs allowed. that way they cant freetrade amonhst themsleves

if you want a normal civ MP game then go play one. last time i looked this was a diplo game.

go read the DIPLO FAQ it mentions it was a style made for ANY one. GOOD OR BAD palyers. I dont see that happeneing here, the better palyerts keep winning or being in the top 4. you may thinkl that ok for the best palyers, but it not what DIPLO was about. DIPLO was supposed to be more of a recreational social version of CIV not the competive best always wins. people speak of learning to get better and then i can win etc etc. DIPLO is not supposedto be about getting better, it is about (again read the FAQ made by OZZY) ANYONE playing and ANYONE being able to do well because the rules woudl be there to EVEN up the game.

Why you think Vouchers were borughtin , ruleson tech trading etc.

It wasnt to help the top 4 keep wiining ,it was an aritfial barrier put in palce to try and help the lwoer civs get techs . then we added the free techs for lower eras. again to try and help less able players to catch up.

So stop complaining and telling me to shutup, this is not a NORMAL CIV MP game it is not about the best player winning. DIPLO is about eveing up the palying field. if you dont like DIPLO then dont play. but dont come and take the name DIPLO and change it to what you want.

[Orb (DoC)]

I think there are some you worry more about others and less about themselves. Here is some helpful advice. Instead of worring about how others are higher then you or your playing ability why not focuse on other things like ways to make your civ better or using diplo to get the help you need.

In my short experience in diplo I have learned one thing. Diplo as in life is not always fair. Some start off better then you some worse . All you can do it try the very best you can and enjoy the journey while you can.

[Robert]

Ok, we've all had the chance to blow of some steam.
There's no problem doing that now and then, especially not if it happens in a civilized manner as above. (I think)

But let's now stop it again.
This is a request, not a rule. Everybody is always free to post his opinion about the game in the org thread. But maybe it's better now to cool down again before we get a real fight.

1. We keep as strictly as we can to the story=in character, org = out of character distinction. I think RP should just delete posts which don't follow this - if people want to repost they can. Or if RP doesn't want to because he is player and can get accused of bias (since we all know he is the Ethiopians) Ozzy could do it. And occ includes for exmpale reference to 'big four countries' etc. which are not in character ideas (as someone reminded us on here recently)- any post in story with taht sort of reference Ozzy should just delete.

I agree. Do others also agree?
Ozzy, would you be willing to do that?

Byzantium, your #2 idea sounds good to me but I wonder if it's able to implement this now. (and especially: will it matter now we all know how big the civs already are)

Bottomline: enjoy the game!
I at least do!
I'm back to Ethiopia now! (I doubt that there's anybody left who doesn't know my identity, but hey, I will continue to pretent!)

[Orb (DoC)]

I agree with that as long as Ozzy is the one who does it. And its ok RP I have no idea who you really are...or do I?

[The Priest]

Underneath the heat there is the issue here of how to keep the spread relatively small between the civs who in-game are more successful and those who are less. In-game there are always going to winners and losers, and its the diplo and votes which matters, yet if the gap grows too big it can be hard for the nations at the bottom of the heap to still feel actively involved.

There is lots in the rules and how we play which tries to help towards this. But can we do more?

Mzprox suggested a while back an idea about giving out more vouchers periodically - I wasn't convinced by perhaps I should have thought more about it. Maybe it is still the way to go?

I wonder if there is a simpler idea though.

The current system about classical techs being tradeable without vouchers once four are in the renaissance etc. seems to have something going for it. The trigger point of 'four in era x+2' is meaningful - at the point when the four tech leaders reached this, lots still needed classical techs, and partiuclarly for the less developed nations there were still many classical techs needed. But it doesn't appear to have disincentivised technological development - its still worth being a tech leader.

But, why do we insist they have to be on a one-for-one trade basis? I am sure there was probably a reason, but I can't think of it.

What if, we said that once four reach Renaissance, all civs automatically gain every classical tech.

What difference would that make?

Currently when the trigger happens
- civs who are missing one or two classical techs, get them.
- civs who are missing many, get some but find it hard to get them all because they need to be able to trade for them, and very quickly the trade dries up because those with the more obscure classical techs have all the otthers so can't trade one-for-one.

On the new proposal
- civs who are missing one or two classical techs, get them. No change.
- civs who are missing many, get them. A help for them.

So the new proposal would not help them stronger civs, but would provide a more effective uplift to the weaker. There would be an absolute technological floor below which no nation can fall.

Two other minor points in favour:

- It avoids the great potential for mistakes in teh current system when you offer someone a one-for-one trade but by the time they accept someone else has acceped a similar trade, and you find yourself giving away the tech not trading.
- Its a development of our system which needs no more admin - we track the first four to enter the ages anyway. It doesn't disturb vouchers, or bring in new voltans etc.

(Obviously people can ask how IG do we achieve 'ever nation gains ever classical tech' but its not hard. The turn after the trigger we all have a duty to give our classical techs to everyone who needs them. Since it doesn't matter who you receive them from (its a right, there is no diplo involved / to be gained) it would work fine.)

Changing rules during the game always seems a dangerous idea. An even the discussion can be fraught with diplo undercurrents (so this is posted under my real name, though I guess that makes no difference). But this game is still in its infancy - far more to play than we have played so far. So far we haven't expereinced a real sense of civ-redundancy - the bottom score nations have just attacked England - England certainly doesn't see them as unimportant right now! But perhaps we need to do more to avoid it coming in over the next month.

Just a suggestion. Maybe there is an obvious flaw?

[India (DoC)]

I think the 1 on 1 trade was only here to keep these trades in "diplo", but it isn't anyway. Got a trade offer from civs I hardly have contact with and sure I've accepted.
This change wouldnt have any effect except it would help those who are not too fast getting those missing techs while it is possible at all.

[OzzyKP]

I've always favored getting rid of the one tech for one tech trade rule, especially for the free trades. It seems like old techs like that are custom designed to be packaged together in a 2 or 3 for one trade. Or traded for other non-tech items.

[OzzyKP]

Hey Toni, what's going on with your country?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?t=189472

[Mali (DoC)]

I guess I shouldn't be dead last in attitude next month after all this turmoil. Not really sure why I was this month. I'll keep playing and enjoying.

[Robert]

The Game has been paused/stopped for England, to give them time to play their turn.
England, please e-mail me when you're ready to play!