Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread]

[Russia (DoE)]

OK, I was hoping to make my turn now and leave France the rest of the timer, considering Turkey will find internet or get back at home, but it seems it have to play in the night again.

Bye for now guys.

As a bottom line, I can say this is maybe the best pitboss I ever played in terms of in-depth and satisfaction.

[Israel (DoE)]

One thing I should nuance a bit;
- the offer Russia made to Israel was not unreasonable
- Israel rejecting it made Israel not unreasonable either.

I think that we both are too extreme in this debate on this.
My point is that I think that Israel has been trying to make peace and was not stubborn in a zealoat war that should never end. And thus I feel like that 'unreasonable' exception in the rules does not apply to Israel. We really wanted peace.

But I have gone too far by saying that the Russians were unreasonable. They weren't either.
I do not blame the Russians and the Turks for attacking me and hurting me either. They had good reasons and I just got what I sowed.

I just think that I got too much to keep the game fun for me. And all I did, how deep my betrayal may have been, it was all in character and in an attempt for me to play a certain role.

[Israel (DoE)]

I can't play right now, it's a busy day for me. I hoped I could play now but I have to go already.

[England (DoE)]

One thing I should nuance a bit;
- the offer Russia made to Israel was not unreasonable
- Israel rejecting it made Israel not unreasonable either.

I agree. Thanks for the nuance.

While it was certainly reasonable for you to reject their offer, it is also reasonable to expect that Russia/Turks wouldn't just sit around and wait for you to get your troops in position. I know it sucks to lose your capitol, it really, really does, and I hope it'll be returned to you in any peace deal (unlike peace deals offered to me), but you can't blame Russia/Turks for continuing to march.

[Inca (DoE)]

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.

This is not an appropriate measure of lost quality of a civ. So much of a score is in tech, which doesn't disappear.

Hi dear FRIENDS/Allies/Enemies,

I am sorry but i will have to plug out from Civ IV and DOE. Being having some issues with my wife over it during the last few years lol.

I guess we guys always have to do the compromises.

Anyway I am sorry to be leaving at such an important stage for the game.

Now many of you know me very well, you know that I am a loyal ally/friend in each game i play:

I ask that either France or Germany subs for my civ, I want the vikings to continue to be part of the ACE alliance, thus i want a ACE member to continue to sub for me, use Money/Units all i own to help the ACE. If i had continued to play i would help/contribute/assist with all i can my allies.

I want all Vikings matters to be decided by my alliance. I put my civ's faith into their hands.


This game was a big part of me

Many of you will understand my actions I hope.

sorry to hear, Vikings. Good luck with RL.

[France (DoE)]

I agree. Thanks for the nuance.

While it was certainly reasonable for you to reject their offer, it is also reasonable to expect that Russia/Turks wouldn't just sit around and wait for you to get your troops in position. I know it sucks to lose your capitol, it really, really does, and I hope it'll be returned to you in any peace deal (unlike peace deals offered to me), but you can't blame Russia/Turks for continuing to march.

Earth to England! As I said above, I offered you a peace deal that returned your capitol. I did not get any response. Do I need to post the PM's here to refresh your memory? Sheesh. Someone mentioned about Israel's posting simply looking for symapthy. A couple of yours lately are in the same vein.

Why didn't you ever get back to me? I know you raised my offer with the Vikings, as he mentioned it to me. So what gives?

[Ottoman Empire (DoE)]

Sorry to see Vikings go

[Israel (DoE)]

but you can't blame Russia/Turks for continuing to march.

Yes, I can, because it's against the definitions of diplo gaming: "Nations won't be annihilated or broken in such a way that the fun is gone for a player."
Israel was not an unreasonable nation that just went zealoat and wanted war at all costs, we wanted peace above all. In fact we even had already given in to initial demands. They were not forced to take our capital. It was their choice to do it. And that's against the definition of diplo gaming. Israel was willing to compromise and to give into demands of our enemy. Just not all.

[Russia (DoE)]

In fact we even had already given in to initial demands.

Initial demands? No, you did not given to the initial demands of Turkey - they wanted Erkon removed as a treat to them, and you rejected their ultimatum, reinforcing the city and switching to nationalism and you did not kept the confidential clause.

it's against the definitions of diplo gaming: "Nations won't be annihilated or broken in such a way that the fun is gone for a player."

This becomes too subjective here. Why is this double standard?

I must say our demands are absolutely reasonable IC. Your refusal is OOC. And now you just try to gather sympathy OOC to use for IG advantage. If you do desire peace above all IC, you will just take our terms and be spared, live and let live. If you OOC think that the current situation is over the top, just initiate Measured War Rule. I will vote YES for it, as it is OOC. I can OOC understand how you feel being defeated (in what was I can say fairly even war), but I cant understand how IC a leader of a nation will see that a disaster comes at his people and still bargaining and refusing peace, being it over what he thinks is fair price. Maybe you though you can win in the war? But then why you are weeping if you are losing the war if you choose to wage war, thinking you will win it?

You cant swear and threaten to raze our cities merciless and then weep when we capture yours, right?

You say you wanted peace. You did not. If you wanted peace, you would have taken ANY deal and try to show your good will about me. And just then you would have seen for yourself what a friend Russia is and how generous and forgiving I can be once I see someone is honest with me. 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?

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. 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, which automatically excludes the possibility I just to believe your promises for friendship and leave you to gather your army and when I leave with my armies you to strike at my ally Turkey. I told you - to me, Diplo-gaming must also have logic. The Diplo-spirit does not means to be feigning. Excuse me for winning the war IG and not simulating blindness about your double-play and true intentions IC.

Peace clauses will be dispatched right after Israel capitulates.

[Ottoman Empire (DoE)]

I have to agree with Russia on this. My offer to you was simple and clear (1)give up Ekron (2) Dont talk to anyone about it and (3) I give you a settler as compensation...You rejected the deal by invoving Russia and then the world community. So it is pure deception to keep saying "I accepted the terms but then Turkey rejected for OOC reasons"

You keep complaining that the game is not fun for you because you are losing, but you are still the highest score of all African nations. Can Mali and Zulu complain that they are not having fun because they are so low on the list? If everyone thought like that, ie "the game is not fun unless I am in the top-ten" then we wouldnt have a game.

And If you want peace, then why not offer your unconditional surrender and accept terms or ask for measured war? Zulu were going to be smashed by Mali and they accepted Mali's demand for Zulus largest and best city by far. But now the Zulu are better off because they ended the war by just accepting Mali's terms. Mongolia accepted peace with China... Why can't you do the same?

The only possible reason, is because you still want to fight and you still think you can win and retake your cities. That's why you dont want to accept terms or take measured war, because then you wont be able to keep fighting. I will try to resist making anymore of my substantive arguments OOC because I think that is what is truly against the spirit of the diplogame, as Native Americans said, turning the organization thread into the real place where the diplomacy happens instead of the Story thread as it should be.

So since you obviously want to keep fighting, why not use the Story thread and make your petitions to the world community IC. It is a little contradictory to complain that "This is a diplogame" and "Turkey refused my offer for OOC reasons" while you try to use all these OOC statements and arguments to influence IG situations and IC world opinion. For example Inca has instituted an "investigation" into the war because of all your OOC complaining. You can't have it both ways... You cant manipulate the situation with all this OOC talk and complaints while simultaneously complaining that others are not respecting the "spirit of the diplogame." If you want others to respect the spirit of the diplogame, you should first respect it yourself... make your arguments IC in the story thread

[France (DoE)]

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.

[Russia (DoE)]

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.

[Russia (DoE)]

I just read the second half of your message and it was the far better part.

I will comment them later as I have what to say about them too, but I do see you reasonable again

I will continue my story telling, and will follow Turkey's lead on sportsmanship.

Cheers about this

[Inca (DoE)]

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...

[Israel (DoE)]

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.