New type of diplo game

[St Jon]

I've already been eliminated, so I have no opinion here.

Eliminated?????

That throws my guesses out the window. So who are.........................??????

[Robert]

Eliminated?????

That throws my guesses out the window. So who are.........................??????

I'll tell you after the game!

[OzzyKP]

I know!

[Robert]

Ozzy..... the all seeing eye.....!

[OzzyKP]

Ozzy is everywhere and no where.

[Byzantium (DoD)]

I think this has been a successful game, but it is a shame several top players have been eliminated.

A large amount of diplomacy has occurred behind the scenes and a little bit in the thread which is good to show others how much fun is going on.

Alliances are unwieldy and unpredictable. Ultimately each player wants to win and relatively new to diplo even I can see interesting and very funny roles and deceit.

You can talk here but try not to distill it down to a formula. Make your own destiny or doom please.

[Egypt (DoD)]

Ultimately each player wants to win

I question this.. some actions would seem very illogical then. There are players who play to win.. actually I think Egypt is not one of them, nor Rome nor Byzantium.

[Byzantium (DoD)]

I question this.. some actions would seem very illogical then. There are players who play to win.. actually I think Egypt is not one of them, nor Rome nor Byzantium.

There are several layers to this:

each player wants to win in game mechanics tempered by the fact that it is a diplomacy game

super-imposed on this is 'good form' - e.g. Gondor does not wipe out Mongols

So I can see your point.

Therefore the definition of winning is very subjective and it is highly likely we'll declare an end to the game at some time with a 'notional' winner or even better, we don't!

[Egypt (DoD)]

Those who follow some obscure honor-code are handicapping themselves. Not attacking weaker civs is one way, Rome sacrifising himself to save Gondor, Gondor not allowing me to attack the top civ through his territory, America saving Russia's city...these are not the signs to be a winner, you all would be in better position if you just let me fight my war. This is if we look at the gain to each civ individualy. But in diplogames, especially in the end games it's always about alliances and then being in the already stronger alliance seems to be the best strategy for any civ...less challenging though..

Ok..now i actually don't know what is the point-if any-in the thing I just wrote . It will be a fun game, how long it will last depends how balanced the opposing sides will be.

[Russia (DoD)]

Good diplomacy can take you far! Much also depends on the people behind the Civs you deal with. I agree with Byzantium that everyone wants to win. Rome and Egypt acted at one time all powerful and free to do what they wish. Now all the sudden that it just seems harder, Egypt says they are not after winning the game. You blame Russia on its strong relation with some civs. Well unlike Egypt and others we weren't so lucky with our starting location, thus a strong relation with neighbors was essencial for our development.

I can not recall a diplo/none Diplo game with so many large and strong Civs. Any civ can change the end for all of us.

[Russia (DoD)]

I think that there is much value in what Byzantium said about not declaring a winner. What matters is that all the players who have invested now so many months keep on enjoying it. At the end that it what matters enjoying a game you love with your poly friends.

[Egypt (DoD)]

Well, by "not after winning" I meant not directly, on the "shortest"/best way, but following the unwritten code which all of us has, just not the same one.
and Egypt's starting position is baaad.. just as I told in the beginning of the game.. you can only see the rich floodplans, but 60% of my land is just worthless desert. russia did very well what He did.. too bad He was not next to me . ((When I went to china btw I prepared a fleet with soldiers and settlers and told my sub to send them to the west, to the new world and then send as many more as possible, to have some bases there for future operations.. but my sub instead founded cities for me in the south, on some tundra land ))

[Sumeria (DoD)]

I certainly agree that this game has been very successful. The Diplo going on behind the scenes has been great and very much IC. It has succeeded in being 'A (Very) Different Kind of Diplo-Game' but it has remained true to its' roots.

Even without the Post's it has been possible to Role-Play. Gondor is the ultimate 'Good Guy' whose only thoughts are honesty and the good of humanity, the out and out Bad Guy, guess that's me, the Builders, the Conquerors and every shade in between.

How we will judge a winner is very hard as those of us left are so powerful an IG victory seems unlikely. Whether it really matters is another issue - personally I don't think it does but that wont stop me trying. When to stop is easy as it must just be when we stop enjoying it.

Well done Deity.

[Babylon (DoD)]

I'm definitely playing to win 'in-game'. Unlikely I will - unless someone else decides they want Hinduism to conquer all and votes for me in those annoying votes which keep popping up, but I will keep trying to build my military for the battles to come.

For me, that makes the best game and the most true to life - each player constantly looking for the best for their civ. That can often mean being part of big alliances - because at that time that is the best way forward for your nation - but national interest is what reigns supreme. Alliances in the real world don't last long.

Lord Palmerston said:

“ Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.[20] ”

This is often paraphrased as: "Nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Only permanent interests."So playing to win is the most honourable thing to do - and keeps it all IC. After all IC why would anyone decide not to?

(And yes its been a great game, and still is, with lots of diplomacy, even if not a diplo game in the style of DoC).

[Sumeria (DoD)]

I certainly agree with Babylon and the quote is, indeed, apt. I would offer another from Lord Palmerston, a great orator, which might fit equally well in this game.

'Russia will in due time become a power almost as great as the old Roman Empire. She can become mistress of all whenever she chooses to take it; and when enlightened arrangements shall have made her revenue proportioned to her territory, and railways shall have abridged distances her command of men will become enormous, her pecuniary means gigantic, and her power of transporting armies over great distances most formidable.'

A good summation of Russian dominance.