Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Setup Thread]

[The Priest]

The tier system was voted on...
But if more people feel like what The Priest say, then please speak up now!

Yes the tiers system was voted upon (though hardly fairly since people kept on popping up saying 'yes its your game your vote but it will only work if you vote yes'), but that isn't the point. Interestig you raise votes though - we voted on a good range of issues, because voting is the democratic way we used to operate, but then all these other things which keep emerging which we don't vote on, indeed we were not even told about or asked an opinion on.

Look back at the posts here the last two or three weeks. We just get a continual dribble of revelations about mod rules, who knows the map, anonymity not being anonmyity, changing lists of what civs are playing, people changing maps after the civs have been decided etc. Lots of different people expressing concerns on different issues. Throughout all of that not a single post from Ozzy responding to concerns, picking up suggestions etc. No - we can say what we want but its not our game is it? Ozzy has a grand vision he wants to implement and who cares what the rest of us think. Even when you pop up trying to smooth things, you don't actually seem to be able to say 'yes definitely the map will be known' etc. you say 'I think the map will be released' etc. Why's that? You sound like a press spokesman who can't actually commit to anything because the power is somewhere else.

We all know what will happen. In a few days, Ozzy will appear with a flourish saying 'its all done and its going to be great', and what choice will the rest of us have but to say, 'ok lets get on with it'.

I've tried to be pleasant and polite these last two weeks, and I do respect the work and good intentions of Ozzy in producing the map, and your work in getting things set up. But I'm surprised and saddened by the lack of honest two-way communication and lack of respect being shown to those who are going to be playing.

But that is that, I guess. People are busy I know, and trying to get maps, accounts etc. set up. I'm sure it will be a good game, and the bad taste of this start will pass quickly.

[Robert]

Who else feels like The Priest?

Let me make one thing clear, I want everybody to start with equal knowledge. That means that everybody must know the map from start on, or nobody. Well, since Ozzy is tweaking the map, this should be everybody.

When you guys spoke up about the anonymous thing, I introduced the civ-picking again.
I'm absolutely not deaf for complains and I try to improve it everytime complains are risen.
But if people don't speak up, that's impossible.

The Priest: what would you exactly like to change right now?
Somewhere in your post I read that you don't like the tier-system. Is that correct?

[The Priest]

Thanks RP.

No I am not against the tier system. I did raise some concerns a while back about whether it will actually help or hinder the 'weaker' players in terms of votes, to which Ozzy responded. Not sure I was completely convinced but happy to go with the flow on that.

This isn't about the tier system, unless by 'tier system' you mean 'Ozzy designing a mod with individualised starting places etc.'. And maybe that is the problem. That Ozzy feels that there are lots of things implied by 'the tier system', things which he thinks - and he might be right- are necessary for it to work. But none of the rest of us were aware of when we voted for tiers.

The anonymous thing is a great example. Yes when there were complains, you changed things. But we only found out that there was a complete stich up, with individuals being allocated to civs, known by you and Ozzy but not the rest of us, because you posted accidentially on here, then deleted it, and Ozzy even said you shouldn't have done. Thats the point. Things going on which the rest of us only find out about by mistake. It was exactly the same yesterday - it was only because I asked a question about the map, that Ozzy happened to drop the fact that he was goin to tweak after he knew which civ was his. If I hadn't happen to ask the question, we would have never known! That is the sort of things which creates distrust.

Right now. Well how about a clear statement on here about how the map is being created, what the mod rules are, what civs are being used, what adjustments are being made to the map by whom when and why, and the opportunity for people to actually express opinions which will be taken notice of i.e. it not being presented as a fair accomplait. We probably have dragged out all the facts now, but lets clear the air by 'the proposal for Ozzy's brilliant world map and mod' being posted. I guess there may be argument over the tweaks after civs are know it, but otherwise given a clear explanation of what is going on, what the plan is, I guess we will all say, 'sounds good', but we should have the opportunity say that.

[2metraninja]

I think when the game is supposed to be fun for everyone, despite their ingame skills, its ok someone who is experienced with map making and knows a lot about the players in the community to tweak the map and the rules so it give somewhat equal start, opportunities and challenge for everyone.

I'm a bit skeptic about the 1 tile city placement, but let see how it works and changes game dynamics.

Tomorrow, when the game starts and Sun shone upon the sleeping Earth , the night fears will fade and we all will enjoy the game, I'm sure.

[Robert]

because you posted accidentially on here

Well, I did not post it by accident.
I wanted a level playing field for everyone.

[trev]

I'm a bit skeptic about the 1 tile city placement, but let see how it works and changes game dynamics.

I have not checked what civs and leaders are in this game, but this will give a hell of a boost to a creative leader, he can plant a city near to an opponents city and very soon his opponents city is swamped by culture, this is very dangerous in the hands of the creative player who keeps himself well armed with units.
Even for that matter a person with stonehenge or with a religion next to a player without those things will cause issues.

[DNK]

My 2c:

1c: Whoever is holding up T4 needs to get on with it

2c: A sea bridge between Alaska and Russia would be nice so T4 isn't completely isolated from everything until Optics. I doubt either tier needs to worry about an inter-tier invasion over that given how far it is, how marginal the space between is, and how much space T3 has to work with. T4 has less and weaker land, but the other issue should be strong enough to prevent it in earnest. It would make the roleplaying side of the game more interesting while helping out us "weak" players by expanding our trading partners beyond 3 while everyone else has 13 trading partners to deal with.

To weigh in on the current issues: I don't mind the tier system, although I get the feeling I'm going to dislike what I end up with. I also don't mind Ozzy editing the map a bit to make things fairer and more spread out, etc.

[deity]

I would say that ozzy needs to tweak the civ starting positions based on what we all pick (which is still underway). This is what he meant I'm sure.

Because I come from the culture that's played with ozzy for about 10 years I totally trust ozzy to be scrupulously fair about all matters related to the map including sensible judgements about civ placements, player balance, resources, modding etc etc. If anything he would disadvantage himself more than anything else.

ozzy and Cyber are total legends, thanks guys !

[deity]

I understand where you are coming from Priest but I assure you, just... trust

[Robert]

Pinchak, I can see that you may have troubles with this.
Does it help you that the map is released to everybody on before hand? That way it's easy to see if any civ gets an unfair advantage.

Regarding the 1 city placement. I see your point trev.
Perhaps it's an interesting addition for the space-battle in Europe. Or maybe the civs in europe can agree to not pick a cultural civ. (I think that's France / Louix XIV, right?)

[deity]

.. otherwise we argue forever... I've seen it before and it effects the spirit of the game to some extent. A proper full debate with all 18 players active would be impossible to resolve. Sometimes I just like inspirational leadership.

[deity]

Pinchak, I can see that you may have troubles with this.
Does it help you that the map is released to everybody on before hand? That way it's easy to see if any civ gets an unfair advantage.

Don't you mean Priest?

Or are they the same person

just joking!

[Robert]

Pinchak also raised his finger about this issue.
So I wondered about his opinion after these explanations.

But in the end both sides are right.
I think in diplogames both the players must have some trust in the map maker and the the organizer and map maker must not make it too difficult to the participants to give this trust. Transparency is important therefore.

I'm sorry if we weren't transparent enough. It's not on purpose, we most probably just didn't see it that we weren't. Always raise your finger when needed!

[St Jon]

Regarding the 1 city placement. I see your point trev.
Perhaps it's an interesting addition for the space-battle in Europe. Or maybe the civs in europe can agree to not pick a cultural civ. (I think that's France / Louix XIV, right?)

I obviously missed this little adjustment but think it a very very bad idea. If you have Europe then as far as I can see you must have a map which is large enough to accommodate it as the only solution. 1 Tile cities fundamentally alter the game mechanics, and not for the better. This will be just as big an issue in Asia as it will be in Europe only the impact will be delayed.

[The Priest]

I understand where you are coming from Priest but I assure you, just... trust .. otherwise we argue forever... I've seen it before and it effects the spirit of the game to some extent. A proper full debate with all 18 players active would be impossible to resolve. Sometimes I just like inspirational leadership.

I appreciate the sentiment. I've said my piece, and I am away for 24 hours now anyway; its up to others how they respond.

But, trust isn't quite the point. Obviously if I didn't trust Ozzy to be fair etc. it woudl be a problem, but I do. The issue is that, as we all know, these games produce arguments which can damage it, so to lesssen this we want to start without surprises, confusions or suspicions. Also not all games work - I was really keen on the european switching game a few months ago - but it didn't work or at least people dropped out. Ozzy probably is brilliant enough to design the perfect mod, but its often better to share wisdom on these things like, e.g., the one city placement, speed of ships, cutting jungles etc.

I agree that we don't want endless converstation between 18 players, but I'm not quite sure why that applies to somethings, but not other things which we did discuss and vote on. But in the end RP is right to put his finger on transparency - what has got to me is that things keep dribbling out which is disturbing when i am committing 9 months of life to this.

But I will now go away and write 'i must be more trusting' a hundred times