Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread]

[Ottoman Empire (DoE)]

@ France - Ottomans might need a little extra time to finish this turn. I might be logging in and out but when I am actually done I will hit 'END TURN.' OK?

Just wanted to give a heads up out of respect and courtesy

[India (DoE)]

To answer Inca, I don't know the exact details of India's original start as I was not there, but you say it was all flat from Delhi to Guanghzhou, but that is simply false. It was practically Jungle all over, I spent centuries cutting down those jungles and I am still not finished. And my point is not just that China was able to take (with very few real challenges) the riches of south east asia, but that their 4, FOUR core cities has more resources than all of India. And as you all state, you have even less than that.

As for my choices in play, I have not started any wars against China for the fairly obvious reasons: China by far outproduces me (look at their terrain, they also had numerous forests while all I had was jungles). They have a ridiculously strong defensive position at Guangzhou. They also have the defensive trait while I have no such bonus. My civ was so far behind when I took over it was practically dead. Remember that I have brought India from the bottom 3 to the mid-section, one of the first things I had to do was settle the southern part of India which the previous player had neglected. And once again: JUNGLES! No production and little food as it was all jungle. How does a country like that throw together an army to fight a civ which has a tech and army lead??

And finally, I have done A LOT in the diplomacy section to seek to balance China, but EVERY nation I have talked to have said: Sorry, they are our friends/they are too powerful/we have nothing to gain/it is to risky, etc. Every nation. I am not going to list them, but the fact remains, your claims are false. And as you say, any skilled player should have realized that China needed containing, but neither the original Indian player, nor Japan, nor Russia saw this (or, Russia saw it and decided to capitalize on supporting them rather than the opposite).

So I have continued my peaceful development and hoped that the giant in the east stay away from me as long as I stay away from it.

[Russia (DoE)]

Also, I though of something, which may be too late to ask for, but still worth mention - it would hurt me if you use this log to upgrade units of declare war to someone else. Alas, my good heart will always make me in troubles, but how could I say "no" to such a nice request?

[Inca (DoE)]

Me too!

[Ottoman Empire (DoE)]

Im logging in too..., not doing anything, just looking around

[Russia (DoE)]

SUre, go for it.

[Vikings (DoE)]

Russia can I log into the game? I will move no military units, I welcome you to log after me to check.

[Mongolia (DoE)]

A few notes from Mongolia. My starting position lacked much in the way of food, but had good hammers. The city needed to grow and that was going to take time. Due to poor gold return from available early city sites spamming cities would have brought me to zero science or worse. In fact even with not that many cities at one stage my science rate was lowered to 10% because of very few money generating squares. Where would I have been if the advice I am reading was followed to spam more early cites, minus 50% perhaps. Other alternative to spam armies would have resulted in me needing to kill armies in an early war that would damage a neighbour or 2 severrely. This tends to be frowned upon that early in a diplo game. So I took the 3rd option of building pyramids. At the time I chose that option I had very little knowledge of the map (had very bad luck early with explorers falling victim to animals and barbs).
I began to expand as soon as possible, and would have made good progress except that China forced me into war because they stole a barbarian city that I had almost captured. That would not have been a big issue IF Russia and Japan had not both then entered the war on China's behalf, Russia capturing and razing a city, that was a massive cost to me. Trying to fight barbs from the north, Russia from the west and China/Japan from south and southeast was too much for me. Russia soon made peace, and Japan followed after I attacked and substantially weakened their stack. That left China to fight which is still ongoing.
Also my 2nd city was to go near where the large Russian city now is, but a substitute player placed the city in a diffferent location against my advice. Unfortunately before I could build a 3rd city Russia had moved in and taken the spot.
When the war with China commenced, I suggested to India that they should take advantage of the war to further their growth in the south of Chinese lands. They chose not to.

[America (DoE)]

The Great Lakes should have been our battle zone, but I got there firstest and have good early units, so I got lucky that way. Was only natural for me to do it, because to my backside were the Rockies, and they are junk. Of course, I think the Americans have modified strategy appropriately to take advantage of their heavily coastal nature.

Yeah, the rockies are crappy as well, haha. And just for the record, I am definitely not complaining about what you did, you didn't know anything about my land situation either, it's all good, we've worked out a perfect way of co-existing so far Also, though it might sound funny, I am actually really enjoying trying to get my crappy economy going, it's a cool challenge

[Inca (DoE)]

First, I'm responding to this NOT because I want to critique your play (although you've basically made it an issue now) or have any reason to be at fault, or that there is a fault (it's a diplo game after all), but over the concerns of map balance.

1 Quick question: How often in a diplogame does a group of smaller nations win against a larger one in a war? And how easy is it to get a small nation to take that huge risk and go after a bigger nation (even with allies?).

Everyone keeps claiming the Vikings were a tiny, insignificant power that took down the greatest, most awe-inspiring superpower diplogaming has ever know all by themselves, so it's not outside the bounds of reason...

A. Yes, human, not pre-programmed. Aggression is a risk, and many humans will avoid risky behaviour if there is an alternative.

Sometimes the alternative is riskier than the risk. What good is an alternative if it guarantees you'll be dominated for the rest of the game?

Your presupposition is that all three neighbours would be aggressive risk-takers, and none of them peaceful builders. You say that Mongolia should have acted like Mongolia, but what about India? Should I have acted like... Mongolia? What about sea-faring isolationist Japan? Should they have acted like Mongolia?

I don't recall saying these things, you are confusing me with the Ottomans a bit. Only one of you/Japan needed to be decently aggressive. As I said before, Mongolia was a mid game check on China, I think.

Also... India and China ARE in a tiff over a few border areas, and India has a fairly large, modern army given its economic situation, plus nukes. Japan conquered SE Asia, parts of China (Nanjing?) and Korea/Manchuria during its various wars, so there.

If ONE of them decided to be friends with China it would be 1 very rich civ + 1 not so rich vs 2 not so rich. Your assumed responses of the 3 roundlaying nations is flawed....

To repeat, China did not have a huge lead over you or Japan in land until fairly late in the early game, I think. You all have amazing territory for your first 4 cities, no doubt (perhaps the jungles compromised this, I forget how it looked). The differences aren't that huge. I wasn't there, but that's how I remember it and how it looks from afar.

I'm not sure what you want the map-maker to do then to assure balance. Expect that in any scenario, one of the three or four competing civs will be significantly superior to the others in gameplay, but then not know which of the 3-4 starts it will be, so... ??? What? Just make solid core territories and make everything else all but useless to settle? Give everyone 6 solid city sites and then make the rest deserts? That makes for a horridly boring map when there's nothing to fight over. You didn't want a "fun map", though, okay, don't complain about balance then.

D. Beijing has 8 resources, Delhi has 5 or six. I can't seem to connect to the game so I can't check. But you are absolutely right, the original Indian player should have immediately taken the Guangzhou area. But a mid-level player obviously did not realize the huge strategic significance it had.

I counted before. Delhi has more resources than Beijing, and more ancient resources than Beijing. It also has way more grasslands. You divided the resources up into other cities, but that doesn't change the start Delhi had.

As for my inactivity against China it should be obvious as to why, there is NO way I could ever challenge them even WITH the Mongolians fighting them in the north. Partly because of the ease they had in seizing Guanzhou which makes any attack practically impossible.

You've set up your empire to not be able to attack China, that's why! (and it's okay, but understand that you then forfeit the ability to contest land with an expansive neighbor.) I have way weaker starting terrain than almost anyone, Mongols included. My capital had 3 resources and a whole lotta coast/desert/mountains (I couldn't even work one of the 3 resources until much later as I couldn't keep it secure from barbs, being on the opposite side of the Andes). My second city had just 2 land tiles to work and some coast. My third had 4 resources and all jungles with a lot of coast/mountains. My fourth had 1 resource and 21 jungle tiles...

Also, you say that diagonal tiles are "further in distance" than regular ones? Allow me to ask you this in practical terms: Does it take longer to move a settler 10 diagonal squares to a given square than it does to move 10 squares from left to right? If the answer is no, then for practical effects and purposes the distances are the same. If it takes China 5 turns to move to Guanzhou and India 5 turns to move to Guangzhou (from their respective capitals), how can you say that one is further? Your point is moot.

It does matter if they aren't supplying units from just one city, especially as their coastal cities would be farther from Guangzhou than your eastern coastal cities (because it's a diagonal going the opposite direction). Also, maintenance costs, which in the early game can be quite significant with a 10-tile distance. Also, a lot of the intervening land is hills, which take longer to cross and road, while yours is all flat. Effectively, it's a lot closer to your center than China's.

[Native America (DoE)]

Ok wow!

I didn't see all this, I am going out now and will respond in the morning.

Until then peace and love and remember we all love this GAME.

PS I have never been in a "power" position so please don't make me feel bad for playing well, this is my 2nd ever diplo game!

*I* think you're doing wonderfully well. It's up to the tier twos around you to man up and beat you back.

[Germany (DoE)]

EDIt - just saw Russia's post in the story thread about a Mongol peace process...

[China (DoE)]

Ok wow!

I didn't see all this, I am going out now and will respond in the morning.

Until then peace and love and remember we all love this GAME.

PS I have never been in a "power" position so please don't make me feel bad for playing well, this is my 2nd ever diplo game!

[France (DoE)]

To be clear - our diplo game rules clearly prohibit the transfer of cities whilst at war. The Vikings and the French considered such a move, but it was/is prohibited. And rifles would have clearly altered the recent battle in North Africa ......

[OzzyKP]

As far as the current situation vis-a-vis these two nations goes, why is India complaining that China is beating up on Mongolia and no one is doing anything? I would think India would be the PRIME civ to take down the Chinese in that case. Probably in concert with the Japanese. Make it happen.