The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread]
So far I'm doing quiet well in retelling Israels history
Remember Israel did not betrayed Germany leading to their utter defeat in Africa in the real history
And you are not the only one who withdraws from alliances thinking they are too strong. I did left China against Mongolia only few days after this started and signed lasting peace with Mongolia. I was also the one (with Neandor) who helped Mongolia when she was crippled in the beginning of the game.
Which was official indeed.
But in return the Germans got the Marshall plan reparations:
The experience of the post–World War I reparations led to the post–World War II solution, where winning powers were supposed to take reparations in machines and movable goods from the defeated nations, as opposed to money. Moreover, policies like the Marshall Plan emphasized shared economic development of the Western European states (removing much of what critics saw as the incentives giving rise to World War I) rather than punishment of the former Axis powers.
Oh, not to mention that I simply offered to capitulate and become your vassal.
That's the biggest sign that I accepted defeat and wanted to accept your reign.
Will cite myself when you dont bother to read my posts or just ignore my reasons and repeat your statements:
You speak of friendship and vassalizing to Russia. What means "vassalizing" if you are even reluctant to close borders with my enemies, not to mention to actually fight for me, as a friend and an ally would do willingly? And you are at the very same time subsidized by my enemies and they are arming you? While you offer your loyalty to me in Tel Aviv, you are receiving French and Neandor Cannons and grenadiers in Bethlehem!!! WTF? How you have the eyes to come here and ask for better treatment?
I think they were all size one cities. Nothing more than outposts. I am not going to hold on to them. That makes no sense either from a diplo perspective or a game mechanics perspective.)
This was not the case here. Israel was accepting all kinds of peace, except that very expensive one you offered. Israel even made many reasonable counter offers.
Reasonable to you, what reason there is in offering 1 city in exchange of the return of 4 other and call this final offer without possible negotiating?
And why do I have double standards?
I have applied these standards many times in earlier games to my own enemies when I was the big civ. Allies in former games can testify how I always insisted on balanced wars, stepped out of alliances b/c I believed they were too big.
Said the one, who allied with the two aggressors of England for NOTHING! Saying you think what happened to England was way over the top and then supporting the guys who did that is double standard.
The civ is supposed to compromise, accept deals, etc.
You keep missing the main point - you did nothing to convince me you want to befriend me. Only tricks, stalling and threats. Even now you speak like someone who is not ready to make peace.
Gangbanging another civ if he doesn't comply to ones wishes is easy
Everyone in the Axis knew about our DEFENSIVE agreement with England and Turkey. They did declared war to England no mater of this. So, they attack their neighbor without a good reason (the Vikings reason was they never talked to them and they had no chance of having colonies! Well, they were offered most of a whole continent, for God's sake!) And then Russia is the bad that wants to keep their word and fights against the enemies of my friends? You decided to side with France and you are still siding with them, no matter they left you alone and they did something you condemn as something over the top. Where are your reasons? Where is the Diplo-spirit?
Come on guys, this constant back and forth ain't much fun to read..
It IS a game, so get even within the game..
or write a good story..
and even the one on the loosing end can have some tricks in his sleeve..
I'm writing stories, waiting for Russia to continue my story on the invasion of the Sahnedrin council by Russian armies.
But you're right, I have said my thing. Too bad that people can't just say: "Ok, we'll keep that in mind next time" but just want to justify themselves and their actions for 100%.
But it's only a game, and that's why I'm just continueing it.
In fact I'm already enjoying it again, despire the fact that Israel is a worthless nation. The stories are only getting more and more interesting. So far I'm doing quiet well in retelling Israels history
quote:
"The victorious wartime Allied powers (principally the USA, USSR, UK, France and Canada) negotiated the details of treaties with Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Finland"
The list you quoted has nothing to do with Germany.
Not that this matters to our dispute, it just had to be straightened
Oh, not to mention that I simply offered to capitulate and become your vassal.
That's the biggest sign that I accepted defeat and wanted to accept your reign.
this attack and utter destruction of the civ is over the top, in my opinion.
Utter destruction? All I have asked Israel was to side with me and to assure me about their good intentions. They decided to take their chances. Am I to blame for this? OK, tell me - what would you have done at my place? But honestly.
Heck, they have a stack of 25 SOTL's blockading my coast now.
Really? Well, Israel have stack of 10 cannons and 30 other units. And? England lost their capitol. Israel did too.
a 5 on 3 fight
And I am under no illusions that the English attack on the British Isles and the Russo-Turkish attack on Israel are not in some way related.
said the one, who attacked England which was already overrun by the most advanced and powerful nation in the world.
And while you have gained from this war - you got your army to Number 1, you took 2 major cities and intend to keep them, I got nothing. Only huge debts.
You demanded Ekron, I gave it.
The rest is all IC details. For the OOC rule that does not matter.
What matters is:
1. Israel has been nearly annihilated
2. Israel was accepting in-game offers
Like I said before, the not to be annihilated civ is supposed to be reasonable. In the past we had civs that would go zealoat on it's agressors, never wanted to sign peace but just start some eternal war. Then the agressor had no chance but to continue the war.
This was not the case here. Israel was accepting all kinds of peace, except that very expensive one you offered. Israel even made many reasonable counter offers.
You reason by IC arguments.
But this definition is exactly there to protect smaller civs against big powerhouses who want to put their will on their neighbors or will annihilate them if these don't comply.
The definition isn't saying: "The smaller civ should accept everything the agressor says", but that's how you explain it.
The civ is supposed to compromise, accept deals, etc.
Giving up Ekron is definitely a way to compromise, that I wrote a story about it makes no difference for this OOC definition.
And why do I have double standards?
I have applied these standards many times in earlier games to my own enemies when I was the big civ. Allies in former games can testify how I always insisted on balanced wars, stepped out of alliances b/c I believed they were too big.
This is the first time that I blame others for not applying it to me. And even while I did I have said that we can just continue the game.
The reason that I bring it up here is b/c I think that what happens to me happens to way too many civs in this game. England, Mongolia. Gangbanging another civ if he doesn't comply to ones wishes is easy in an 18 player game. That's why we have definitions and explanations of diplogaming. It's as simple as that. Saying that Israel is unreasonable b/c it did write a propaganda story about the loss of Ekron in a diplogame is simply silly. Then you haven't dealt with those unreasonable civs in past games that forced us to write up that "losing civs must be reasonable" exception.
Instead, with the help of the Incans, England has decided to pursue a purely military response, which we have been working to deal with.
Help? I gave them 5 or 6 units to bolster their forces at a time when their army had been almost completely wiped out. I don't even think I've given them monetary assistance since then. I'm curious as to what "help" I've given them beyond that other than a bit of story posting. Certainly, we've been on very good terms for a long time, but they asked for nothing really in terms of assistance other than some emergency troops early on.
Also, at the time, I had offered my colonies and territories as bargaining chips for you and the Vikings in order to give you options for expansion in the event that English cities were returned (with, of course, compensation to myself). I don't like offering my own colonies/territories up and then having the person they would have been given to saying I've been somehow central in continuing the war. My peace brokering was not just a bunch of long-winded letters, and I did a lot more bilaterally to try to grease the wheels.
I somewhat resent all that effort ending up being depicted as "I helped them pursue a military strategy," as though I was the one that built all their SotLs or provided them with 15 grenadiers...
Quote Originally Posted by Russia (DoE) View Post
You NEVER accepted the simplest of my demands to depict the French and the Neandors as a coward and tell the world how they have deserted you.
Sad that that was a demand.
Really? What is sad in this? I did not said any of those words - they came from Rabbi, but I was afraid he is only telling me what will save him, I was afraid he is playing me and I asked him to say this aloud, not to speak only to e. He did not, which only increased my doubts about Rabbi's fairness.
What to speak of the other terms... What logic have this? To me this is not diplo-spirit - you obviously have OOC ties with those guys, or you IC are devoted to them unconditionally,
Absolutely not. Not true! So cut the BS. I was late to this game and have no idea who the Israeli player is. And neandor may know who he is (I'm not aware that he does), but there is definitely no strong 'pact' between us and the Israelis. It was all in game.
I said I cant see in-game logic in his stubborn stance and the only other possible reason for him acting as he acted was OOC reasons. Now when you are stating it is not OOC, then I believe you, but then there is no reason for Israel's acting.
And while we are on the topic, I guess I may as well weigh in and say that I believe you (Russia and Turkey) are being unreasonable in your attitude and actions towards Israel.
We have old diplomatic history with Israel - I had asked them for help once, then they used the same tactics - they wanted one, then other and when I managed to make all this happen, Israel said "I am not interested." Then I approached then once again. This time they tricked me very well - kudos for them doing so. They put dent in my plans and tricked me once again. I decide I wont fall for their honey speaches once again. When I asked them to give me guarantees they will not betray me again, they said they are sorry they dont have such thing. When I thinked of a way to guarantee their neutrality, they refused.
First of all, I don't see why building Ekron was such an issue.
It was an issue, as Turkey did feared your favorite tactic - naval attack. From Erkon to their 2 largest cities after Istanbul, it is 1 turn rowing. Of course they will be afraid with your fleet in the Med.
They had been very gracious and good sports over what went down in Africa.
There is no 2 opinions on that. They can serve as an example on how to handle manly such situation.
and again - as to the "razing" of the Turkish African cities - I think they were all size one cities. Nothing more than outposts. I am not going to hold on to them. That makes no sense either from a diplo perspective...)
REALLY? You say this with pure heart? You must say this to the real-life North-American Indians - their settlements were mere tent villages and their land were open for taking by other races, they are out of the continent, so no problem with that When talking in-game, I'll take this as a precedent and will cite you if I need excuse.
... or a game mechanics perspective.)
Speaking of game mechanics, Oil anyone???? The only oil available to your alliance?
I pulled my troops out of Israel to help stabilize the situation.
Yes, but to stabilize the situation in Western France and England Come on, dont be such, we have visibility on you and we know that your armies pulled from Africa all went on the Western coast of France on the sight of the English fleet. Please, dont spoil the respect I have to you with such statements. You write beautiful stories and obviously are very good civ player, but those your statements are not adding to this. I would say your guilt for abandoning the Israelis IC influence your OOC objectivity.
You NEVER accepted the simplest of my demands to depict the French and the Neandors as a coward and tell the world how they have deserted you.
Sad that that was a demand.
What to speak of the other terms... What logic have this? To me this is not diplo-spirit - you obviously have OOC ties with those guys, or you IC are devoted to them unconditionally,
Absolutely not. Not true! So cut the BS. I was late to this game and have no idea who the Israeli player is. And neandor may know who he is (I'm not aware that he does), but there is definitely no strong 'pact' between us and the Israelis. It was all in game.
And while we are on the topic, I guess I may as well weigh in and say that I believe you (Russia and Turkey) are being unreasonable in your attitude and actions towards Israel. First of all, I don't see why building Ekron was such an issue. The Turks had razed it previously, and the city was an obvious step in Israel's reconstruction.
Neither Israel or us had any designs on attacking Turkey. The situation was clearly stalemated. There were discussions earlier about how to get back the old Israeli Holy City, but it was clearly a no go, and nor was I particularly interested in hurting Turkey anymore. They had been very gracious and good sports over what went down in Africa. (and again - as to the "razing" of the Turkish African cities - I think they were all size one cities. Nothing more than outposts. I am not going to hold on to them. That makes no sense either from a diplo perspective or a game mechanics perspective.)
I pulled my troops out of Israel to help stabilize the situation.
I appreciate that the Israeli back-stab was and is a major issue. As is the Rabbi's recalcitrance at time, and his communication style. Heck, even I get frustrated with him sometime and he is my ally. But this attack and utter destruction of the civ is over the top, in my opinion.
Now, everyone is going to jump up and say, well what about England!!??
Very different situations. England is still a very powerful nation and has large remote cities to maintain the fight. Heck, they have a stack of 25 SOTL's blockading my coast now. They just dealt me major damage in Britain.
AND concrete and "reasonable" peace overtures WERE made.
For the record, as England will not publicly acknowledge them and continues to play the sympathy card ("well at least you got an offer"), here was my attempt at peace with England.
My first message... (these are from early April when the Incans were trying to mediate a peace deal)
Queen Elizabeth,
I know you have little reason to trust France, but I write this in all sincerity. I would ask however, that the discussion remain between the two of us.
I fully appreciate what the loss of London means to England. I get no joy from ruling the city. And I do believe that any lasting peace will necessarily need to consider London, and for that matter Plymouth, to ensure that London is not isolated.
France has had little opportunity to expand beyond its borders, being late to sailing and now concentrating on war.
Perhaps there is potential here to negotiate. I have submitted my views to the Incans, acting as mediators, but I would be interested in seeing if we could reach some mutual understanding before "formal" negotiations begin.
King Phillipe
He/she responded along the lines that if Plymouth and London were on the discussion table, we could negotiate.
I then sent ...
Queen Elizabeth.
I trust it is acceptable to you to continue bilateral discussions regarding various peace options while the Incan mediation initiative progresses.
If so, then following on our last exchange, I would propose that one solution is a trade of cities. London and Plymouth for your two most northern cities in South America: New Plymouth and Georgetown I believe. Would this work for England?
King Phillipe
I never received any reply. I was very willing to pursue this, even knowing my allies would probably not think well of it. In fact, this will be the first time that Neandor sees this correspondence. I knew I would have had to do some arm-twisting with my allies to make this work, but in the end, I held the two cities and it would have been my call to make. I would have done it. England would have their capitol and their wonders back and France would have a foothold in the "New World". I thought all of that would have been good for the game.
Instead, with the help of the Incans, England has decided to pursue a purely military response, which we have been working to deal with. And I am under no illusions that the English attack on the British Isles and the Russo-Turkish attack on Israel are not in some way related.
I think England's pride has taken hold. I tried again yesterday to ask if something was up, and why this wall of silence, and why my posts in this thread were being ignored. I got no response. Hey, I know that is a diplomatic stance as well, just not much fun. (and doesn't get much in the way of votes, either...)
So, with Israel beaten into submission, that leaves this a 5 on 3 fight (Inca, England, Russia, Turkey and Arabia ... and maybe even Chinese cash... versus France, Neandor, and the Vikings. So be it.
I will continue my story telling, and will follow Turkey's lead on sportsmanship.
I tried again yesterday to ask if something was up, and why this wall of silence, and why my posts in this thread were being ignored. I got no response. Hey, I know that is a diplomatic stance as well, just not much fun. (and doesn't get much in the way of votes, either...)
Leave a comment: