Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread]

[France (DoE)]

I state again, this war is bad for us, still someone had to do something about weakening the largest civ in the world.

Amen.

[England (DoE)]

I state again, this war is bad for us, still someone had to do something about weakening the largest civ in the world.

Then why do you remain at peace with the Neandor?

[Inca (DoE)]

At the risk of being repetitive:
OOG (Game), but this is rubbing me a bit for no particular OOC/IC reasons. When I think civ "strength", I think two things: economy/techs and military. Vikings had both pre-war, over the English. Yeah, the English had way more goods (not that it mattered apparently), but that was spread all over hell and back.

This is like calling Shaka the strongest AI because he always has the most cities...

Understand, I have a decent view of English possession due to my proximity, and trust me when I say this whole "city count" business is quite ridiculous. There's a reason his GNP is halved now after just losing two cities, but by your logic it should be like 90% of pre-war (-whipping, ofc). Name one of England's colonies, even the most long-established, that is comparable to York even. I understand that you, Vikings, haven't been able to look. Ask the French, they've been scouting around Incaco for ages. What amazing holdings does England have there? Honestly, I'm quite glad he took (most) of it. They got the marginal Incaco terrain (save one site, imo, that they'd be wise to defend properly ), places I didn't want to bother settling.

There was a real game to be had over colonial possession, a game that wouldn't have ruined either of your empires, and that could have dragged on for a long time, been quite strategic and tactical, and would have made for a ton of interesting and complex diplomacy, RP, and story-telling.

But you went for the jugular. It's hard to reconcile.

[Inca (DoE)]

Also, Mongolia and China are at war? When did that happen?

[Russia (DoE)]

Also, Mongolia and China are at war? When did that happen?

It started around 460AD and it never stopped since then, despite my repetitive attempts to bring this war to an end. The war was languish till now after some action in the beginning, but lately it is burning again with full power. Huge armies are clashing in the Far East and this conflict promises to continue.

[Israel (DoE)]

Let me remind you, dear Rabi, that Jerusalem was razed by your fellow Judaism brothers in faith
And this current war was started by the Hinduists

Not all who call themselves G'ds children are G'ds children.

[Russia (DoE)]

But your attempts to vilify the Christians continues. And you shamelessly tax all the Christians who are doing their pilgrimage at Bethleem.

[Israel (DoE)]

Oh no! no no no no!
We do not tax the pilgrims! Tax is an enemy of the economy!
We just sell them a lot of merchand.... uh... holy relics! Especially those from Russia are keen on buying the *cough* best stuff!
This week alone we sold 305kg of pieces of wood that once belonged to the *cough* true cross of Jesus, to Russian pilgrims.

So please keep coming to the holy land!
Despite that we look down upon all these christians, their mone... uh they are most welcome anyway!
But no: no taxes! There's no need to tax them anyway!

(OOC: is this still OOC, or does this (finally) count towards my votepoints )

[Russia (DoE)]

Mock on our beliefs as much as you want while you can.

[France (DoE)]

At the risk of being repetitive:
OOG (Game), but this is rubbing me a bit for no particular OOC/IC reasons. When I think civ "strength", I think two things: economy/techs and military. Vikings had both pre-war, over the English. Yeah, the English had way more goods (not that it mattered apparently), but that was spread all over hell and back.

This is like calling Shaka the strongest AI because he always has the most cities...

Understand, I have a decent view of English possession due to my proximity, and trust me when I say this whole "city count" business is quite ridiculous. There's a reason his GNP is halved now after just losing two cities, but by your logic it should be like 90% of pre-war (-whipping, ofc). Name one of England's colonies, even the most long-established, that is comparable to York even. I understand that you, Vikings, haven't been able to look. Ask the French, they've been scouting around Incaco for ages. What amazing holdings does England have there? Honestly, I'm quite glad he took (most) of it. They got the marginal Incaco terrain (save one site, imo, that they'd be wise to defend properly ), places I didn't want to bother settling.

Agreed that there are many ways of defining 'strength'. Game score is not definitive, obviously, but its not a bad yardstick.

And I agree that the English cities in the new world don't compare to those in the British Isles.

There was a real game to be had over colonial possession, a game that wouldn't have ruined either of your empires, and that could have dragged on for a long time, been quite strategic and tactical, and would have made for a ton of interesting and complex diplomacy, RP, and story-telling.

But you went for the jugular. It's hard to reconcile.

I see your point completely. I am still uneasy about this war from a diplo-gaming perspective. But here are some other thoughts....

1. The Israeli capitol was captured/razed earlier in the game.

2. If capitols were off-limits, then we would never need to put units in them (other than for happiness), or build walls. Not quite realistic.

3. The English pushed down a research path that gave them an early advantage in settling the new world, and put a considerable portion of their production effort into creating and defending those settlements. The Vikings pushed research towards rifling and put a considerable portion of their production effort, let alone their population, into building a strong military. Risk versus reward and threat versus opportunity.

4. Historically, capitols have fallen, and major cities have been over-run. Nations rebuild. European history is rife with such stuff.

5. I don't see this as eliminating the "colonial" struggle at all. It pares the English back, but there will still be fights over colonial lands.

I agree that none of those points, taken alone or together rebut the points you have made. I think we are into diplo game grey area here, and I am trying to think this through myself, and keep the dialogue going.

[Russia (DoE)]

Israeli capitol was never captured, nor razed. It was their second and Holly city Jerusalem that got razed.

[France (DoE)]

Israeli capitol was never captured, nor razed. It was their second and Holly city Jerusalem that got razed.

Thank you. Was not aware of that. Happened before I took over France and I have only heard references to it. I assumed it was their capitol city.

[Russia (DoE)]

Yes, I was sure you were unaware, never suspected bending the truth on purpose on your side.

And yes - see what propaganda and the loud Jewish complaints can make the people believe

[France (DoE)]

Including that Jesus must have been 400 feet tall for a cross that big.

[Israel (DoE)]

Israeli capitol was never captured, nor razed. It was their second and Holly city Jerusalem that got razed.

I bet that back then the razing of Jerusalem had more impact on Israel then the occupatation of London has for the English now
Look at the facts: Israel never really ressurected from the disaster again! (Thankfully Jesus did though, giving some good money to Israel anyway)

Including that Jesus must have been 400 feet tall for a cross that big.

Well, if the pilgrims want to believe, then we will surely take advantage of it.
Especially the Russian christians are eager to believe anything. Yesterday I sold them a stone that was used back then when Stephanus was stoned. Some russian patriarch paid 500 gold for it.