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]
Historically the Vikings had devastated the English islands, so this can be a good RP. Willem the Conqueror go even further by conquering Britania, so possible RP again, but purely in-game this must be painful for the poor England. I am all against "divine" intervention in the game, but maybe some kind of ransom can be negotiated for peace and the return of London back to England?
My problem with this is I suspect most capitals are 25%+ of players' economies, with perhaps only a few exceptions. So, keeping them would be against the rules of limited war we all agreed to. Capturing, okay, but returning then becomes mandatory. I think if Nidaros was captured, it would easily be 40% of the Vikings' empire (at present, I'd guesstimate 65%), for example, and I would assume Neandor and Paris to be at least 25% of their respective empires as well.
If London indeed did take out ~50% of England's economy (and from the demo graph it appears to have done just that), it's clearly a 25%+ scenario by itself, not to mention York. I would suspect that even if both are returned, 25% of England's power/economy have been taken out by the war and its aftermath alone.
This is why I feel that, in the nature of a diplo game, wars should be fought over border cities, colonies, and the like, rather than as strategic assaults on the cores of the empires and their capitals (as one would do in a non-diplo styled game). If the Vikings wanted land, they could have raised an army, gone to Australia or wherever, and started taking it, but instead they went right for the jugular. In the end, I suspect both cities will be returned and both England and the Vikings will have sacrificed much for no real gain to either side, which makes about as much sense as, well, whipping half your population away on soldiers you disband a few turns later. Another reason that going after capitals makes little sense.
Basically, if going after colonies/border cities makes more sense IC than going after a core (eg, it's not Neandor v France), then that should be the course of action as it decomplicates things considerably. In this case, England had colonies and the Vikings had plenty of galleons, and it was quite doable. It doesn't ruin two players' empires for no good reason.
I will have to think about this. Generally I would agree, but we have this awkward situation where the two capitols were two tiles apart. The English blame the original French player, but if I was him/her, I would have been miffed as well as to where the English put their capitol.
So this is a bit messier, IMHO.
On RP and Stories by All Parties
I would disagree with England in that France and the Vikings didn't give proper RP for it. France's is thin currently, but they've been busy in the last couple of weeks apparently, and have been preparing a good RP story over their queen's death and domestic politics for a long time in such a way that was obviously preparing an RP causus belli. This is OOC, of course, as IC I have quite a ton of issues over the French attack.
The Vikings' haven't really contributed much to the story thread, certainly nowhere near what I'd expect for such a major war in terms of story/RP, but they've got a fairly clear RP (and OOC) reason for their actions that make that a bit moot.
Yes, my RP could have been stronger regarding the attack. I agree with that. However, we have long-standing historical disagreements, and clearly no friendship as such, with the damnanglais.
Last edited by France (DoE); March 27, 2011, 18:50.
Russia and England are now at war with Vikings and France. It will be practical we to group for the turn orders - England and Russia first, then Vikings and France.
Russia and England are now at war with Vikings and France. It will be practical we to group for the turn orders - England and Russia first, then Vikings and France.
My problem with this is I suspect most capitals are 25%+ of players' economies, with perhaps only a few exceptions. So, keeping them would be against the rules of limited war we all agreed to. Capturing, okay, but returning then becomes mandatory. I think if Nidaros was captured, it would easily be 40% of the Vikings' empire (at present, I'd guesstimate 65%), for example, and I would assume Neandor and Paris to be at least 25% of their respective empires as well.
If London indeed did take out ~50% of England's economy (and from the demo graph it appears to have done just that), it's clearly a 25%+ scenario by itself, not to mention York. I would suspect that even if both are returned, 25% of England's power/economy have been taken out by the war and its aftermath alone.
This is why I feel that, in the nature of a diplo game, wars should be fought over border cities, colonies, and the like, rather than as strategic assaults on the cores of the empires and their capitals (as one would do in a non-diplo styled game). If the Vikings wanted land, they could have raised an army, gone to Australia or wherever, and started taking it, but instead they went right for the jugular. In the end, I suspect both cities will be returned and both England and the Vikings will have sacrificed much for no real gain to either side, which makes about as much sense as, well, whipping half your population away on soldiers you disband a few turns later. Another reason that going after capitals makes little sense.
Basically, if going after colonies/border cities makes more sense IC than going after a core (eg, it's not Neandor v France), then that should be the course of action as it decomplicates things considerably. In this case, England had colonies and the Vikings had plenty of galleons, and it was quite doable. It doesn't ruin two players' empires for no good reason.
On RP and Stories by All Parties
I would disagree with England in that France and the Vikings didn't give proper RP for it. France's is thin currently, but they've been busy in the last couple of weeks apparently, and have been preparing a good RP story over their queen's death and domestic politics for a long time in such a way that was obviously preparing an RP causus belli. This is OOC, of course, as IC I have quite a ton of issues over the French attack.
The Vikings' haven't really contributed much to the story thread, certainly nowhere near what I'd expect for such a major war in terms of story/RP, but they've got a fairly clear RP (and OOC) reason for their actions that make that a bit moot.
So.... not necessarily to complain, but just to get a sense of everyone, what do people think about the fact that the Vikings and French have now dogpiled me with little or no story, justification or diplo and have now taken two of my most important cities, one of which (my capitol) was responsible for well over half of my national GNP (due to wonders)? Is this against the rules or spirit of diplo? Or not? Or have we abandoned full diplo and this has become diplo-lite?
I was worried about that. And I appreciate that I am pushing the line here from a diplo game prespective. But the last six weeks or so have been hectic for me and hence my lack of posting - and voting.
My hand was somewhat forced by other events.
Also, the game needed some excitement. Let's see where all this takes us. First world war?
I don't think it against the rules. We discussed about banning the taking of capitals but it was agreed that would be too strategically limiting.
I don't like capitals being taken, unless of course it's a Damn Anglais capital
You have my sympathy, the Vikings are an unruly lot! I'm just glad I used diplo to avert their attack on Neandor Well so I think...
It is really a diplo-lite now with so much lack of story posting but the game is strong behind the scenes. Of course the normal rules apply that the host posted and I don't think civ elimination is allowed.
And I know I haven't been posting much lately either, but this war hit me at the worst possible time, I"ve had two conferences in two different cities in the last 4 days. And a heck of a lot of work to do over the last week to prepare for both.
So.... not necessarily to complain, but just to get a sense of everyone, what do people think about the fact that the Vikings and French have now dogpiled me with little or no story, justification or diplo and have now taken two of my most important cities, one of which (my capitol) was responsible for well over half of my national GNP (due to wonders)? Is this against the rules or spirit of diplo? Or not? Or have we abandoned full diplo and this has become diplo-lite?
Leave a comment: