Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread]

[France (DoE)]

P.S. I am all OK with you moving before me,because Israel insisted to move first and as you know I support block moving, but England might want somehow the no-double-moving to be assured.

Given the current situation with England, it will likely be sometime before we can reverse the play order.

But it would make sense - bloc moves.

[France (DoE)]

Nothing is ridiculous in the situation. It is only slightly annoying that we had to wait 23 hours for Israel to take his turn. As It happened to me to be at work while this happen with 5.5 hours left on the timer and 6-7 hours more before I get home to play, I think nothing extraordinary happened when I asked for a pause.

We may be better off playing this via pbem.

I was not aware that Israel had taken that long. Sorry.

But it has been annoying to have to continually adapt my RL so that I am available for that last hour or so to play in, which btw, leaves me no time whatsoever for input from my allies, who play at radically different times than me.

[France (DoE)]

Lovely 40 hour turn timer we have

Well, the upside is that no one has any reason to miss their turn.

[Israel (DoE)]

I did not insist on moving first.
But when the Ottomans wanted to attack me, I told them that they should wait till I moved b/c otherwise it would have been a double move and thus against the rules.

The reason that I waited so long to move this turn is b/c I was waiting for an answer from Turkey/Russia since they are in front of Tel Aviv. It makes sense that Russia asks for a pause.
I do not see why Russia and Turkey need to coordinate their moves. Tel Aviv has emptied, there's nothing to coordinate.
All you guys have to decide if you take the peace offer and Bethlehem, or if you want to take Tel Aviv. (Or if you stop dancing on the head of the shrink)

[Russia (DoE)]

As our host said to me once wisely when I asked the game to be extended somehow, as I was waiting for diplomatic response from someone, sometimes the time is our friend and sometimes it is our enemy ( I dont remember the exact words, but that was the meaning).

I dont blame you for waiting, just I want to be sure this does not disadvantage our alliance and hence the pause request

[England (DoE)]

Well the solution is for Russia/Ottomans to hurry up and finish off Israel, then there won't be any timer issues.



(or for France to just surrender)

[Ottoman Empire (DoE)]

In fairness to France, this is my impression of the situation. Israel rebuilt Ekron after I told them not to. Instead of just razing it I pmed them and told them my demands and ultimatims etc. I also asked that in consideration of me giving them advance warning, they allow me to move first... IF and only if they were rejecting my ultimatims(which would mean war, which of course I knew Russians would probably join). I asked for this consideration primarily, because I knew full well that if Israel had first move, it would create the current situation where Russians wait for Israel, and France waits for Russians, pushing France further into the bottom of the turn.

To be fair to Israel, I did not and could not tell them my real reasons for requesting first move, for strategic reasons, as it would have given away Russians likely participation in the war. So it was reasonable for Israel to assume that I wanted first move so I could attack and kill the one unit they had guarding Ekron. I had no intention whatsoever of doing this, as it would have been a suicide mission with the whole Israeli army present nearby. Israel could have figured this out, as I asked them to move their unit to allow me to raze the offending city as part of an agreement... which they rejected obviously.

So since Israel was convinced that I was prepared to launch a suicide attack against Ekron they argued forcefully that they should have the first move, cited the rules about pre war movement. They even tried to log in as soon as the turn rolled, (although I beat them into the game ) to deny me the chance to move into first position. They listened to my arguments about how it was a request in consideration of me giving them advance notice etc., but ultimately, I think that they were so convinced that if only they could move first, they would be able to move their whole army into Ekron and prevent me from taking it... So that's what they did, over my objections. Of course there wad no way for them to know that I really didn't want to attack Ekron anyway, I just wanted them to give it up willingly... so they came to the conclusion that it was ALL important for them to move first, because otherwise they would lose Ekron.

So thats my impression of what happened. Israel feel free to correct me if I said anything wrong or unfair.

BTW I am currently Out of town with no ability to play AFAICT. I was hoping to play last night before I left. I waited 5 hrs past when I was supposed to leave in order to give Israel time to move but alas... here we are. So I appreciate everyone's patience as I try to find some way to play.

[Ottoman Empire (DoE)]

Aaargh, I found a person who let me use their mobile hotspot quickly, but now I just realized that I cant play anyway because of the Admin pause...

Oh well, maybe some other time

[Robert]

Game's up again.

[Israel (DoE)]

Russia took Tel Aviv, my capital.
This game is not fun for me anymore (refering to the explanation of a diplo game).
All 'measured war' rules have been broken. I wonder if Russia and Turkey even have read the terms of a diplo game.

I will not call for a measured war vote and I will just continue to play this game.
I will just continue the game and try to find some fun somewhere.
But Israel is completely cripled right now. Most of it's most important cities are gone, occupied or occupied in the past resulting in most buildings gone.

The list is:
- Jerusalem (holy city in early game: early game development hugely harmed)
- Tel Aviv (capital, most important scientific city, piramids city)
- Ekron (Razed 3 times)
- Hebron (occupied and returned)
- Sidon (occupied by Mali)
- Nain (occupied by Turks)

Israel has now 3 cities left over that were never occupied.

Israel is in a war with two civs that are just not accepting any reasonable terms for peace.
All they want is a terrible load of money that will criple Israel even more.
When Ekron was requested, Ekron was offered by Israel, but then it was rejected.
Then Israel offered a lot of money, which was rejected.
Now Israel offered the holy city of christianity, which produces a huge load of money. It was rejected again.
It's not as if Israel is stubborn and doesn't want to comply.
Israel has already capitulated many times, but Russia/Turkey just do not care and want to criple Israel beyond reasonable diplo limits.

This is not what diplogames are about and it's clearly defined in the rules/definitions of this game.
Many times I have raised this issue, but it was ignored all the time.

I am bringing it up to make clear that the fun for me is totally gone.
The diplo spirit is completely broken. This is not a diplogame anymore.
I will continue nonetheless.

Some phrases from the rules and definitions from the main post of this thread:

Dictionary of Terms; measured war:

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.

Dictionary of Terms; Diplomacy Game:

Another purpose of the game is to keep it interesting for everybody. Nations won't be annihilated or broken in such a way that the fun is gone for a player. On the other hand, players must be willing to compromise when losing a war and be willing to accept terms of their enemy.

For the record: I do not want anything to be undone. The game is going as it's going. OOC influences on the game suck. We will just let this war continue. But please do not do this to other civs. England has been hurt way too much as well, though England is still a world class subtop civ.

Keep in mind that these games last for months. People invest in it.
Civilization is a game where it's easy to gang up on another civ with 3 players in such a way that that civ has no chance in hell to win. We have diplogames to prevent this from happening in very long games where people invest so much into.

[Israel (DoE)]

Ottoman Empire:

Israel rebuilt Ekron after I told them not to. Instead of just razing it I pmed them and told them my demands and ultimatims etc. I also asked that in consideration of me giving them advance warning, they allow me to move first... IF and only if they were rejecting my ultimatims(which would mean war, which of course I knew Russians would probably join). I asked for this consideration primarily, because I knew full well that if Israel had first move, it would create the current situation where Russians wait for Israel, and France waits for Russians, pushing France further into the bottom of the turn.

Turkey: the reason that I moved in my army was to avoid that you would raze the city before I had a chance to negotiate with Russia. I told you in advance that I would give the city to you if my negotiation attempts would fail.

And that's what I did, when negotiations failed I offered the city to you.
But you rejected the city, declared war, took Ekron, Nain and now Tel Aviv as well.

So I don't see what the problem is. You wanted to move first b/c you feared that I would bring in my entire army. I was allowed to move first anyway, and only did so to buy negotiation time. Then I gave you the city anyway.
It's not as if I did not comply to your demands.

I'm in such a terrible situation already that I can't affort to give up my first move position.
I'm already too late to save Tel Aviv and Sidon, imagine how much I would be too late if I would even have to give up my first move.

And the double move rule is there for a reason. So that I can anticipate on your moves.
When I see your armies board your ships, I have a chance to respond to that by improving the defense of my cities.
So you requesting first move order is not fair. If you want to move first, then make sure that you move first in the turn before.
You can't just PM me saying that I should let you move first while the rules let me move first.

Anyway, you got Ekron, first b/c I offered it, then because you razed it again.

[Ottoman Empire (DoE)]

Yup.

That about sums it up. In that rule statement you cited, notice the last, most important sentence which says...

On the other hand, players must be willing to compromise when losing a war and be willing to accept terms of their enemy.

So are you at that point yet or are you still going to come back after us with"20 Cannons and 50 Muskets"... or whatever innumerable number of soldiers you claim to have? How can I make peace with an enemy who openly threatening he is amassing soldiers to attack when peace is over? How can I accept "non negotiable" peace that requires me to abandon my allies? That doesn't make sense.

It is impossible for you to simultaneously tell me "here is my non negotiable offer" and say you are accepting MY terms for peace. Sorry you are having a hard time. Felt the same when Turkey was second to last in rankings and all our cities were slaved down to POP 1 and 2 just to barely keep Damascus after your stupendous, spectacular backstabbery destroyed our army down to the last man and left us defenseless. The game wasn't fun at all for me either after that. But I did not say a word about it. I just quietly accepted defeat, focused on entertaining the other players with some nice stories and tried to rebuild as best I could to make things fun again. I am still in the bottom half of the rankings BTW.

And now that I'm having fun again you are raining on my parade complaining that its not fun for you. I did not do that to you. When you betrayed us, all I said was "well played, you got me good" and I sucked it up, kept quiet and kept playing. Why ruin the fun for others by saying its not fun anytime you are not winning? Everyone has to lose sometimes, and losing is never fun.

And BTW, when war began you had 800 pts. You have about 700 pts now. When you are down to 600 pts, only then would you have an even remotely legitimate argument that you lost 25% of your empires value.

[Israel (DoE)]

points are mostly techs. that will never go down by much.

I have tried a lot to accept reasonable peace deals.
I gave up Ekron, you then refused.
I offered a crap load of money, you refused.
I offered Bethlehem, you refused.

The terms you had for peace all the time were way over the top and very unreasonable.
But as shown above, I have tried to compromise a lot.

[Russia (DoE)]

I think it is time for some "Cold turkey time".

I will not comment the speeches of both of you too, however there are some really strong points.

[Russia (DoE)]

On the other hand, why you dont ask for a Measured War rule? If you are still not willing to accept my last offer, what choice we have except for continue the war? After all, the rules are made just for a cases like this and there is nothing wrong in using them if you feel this way.