Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread]

[2metraninja]

20 points are enough to me. You give 5 for something exceptional, 4 for great story and if you just want to score someone for something you tough interesting - 1 or 2 points are absolutely ok. Not everyone will get points. Thats the point of points they have to be well deserved.

Sorry to see such an interesting story line and role play end in such a disaster. If I was you Israel, I would count more on spears and axes instead of diplomacy. Good shot at recreating the world story true. The turks have shown what a savage barbarians they were, so historical truth here too...

[OzzyKP]

I don't want a measured-war vote over it, so I won't request it b/c the outcome would not be satisfying either way and I don't think that it would be good for the game.
I do believe it's unmeasured though, razing the holy city of someone literally takes away a more then reasonable part of someone's civ that early in the game.

I was focussing mostly on story/role playing, hence founding my holy city there.
I could easily have found it somewhere else and be a top player game-wise.
But I didn't for story reasons. I gave north-west africa away to the Ottomans (immediately west of the border of Memphis) and offered him to settle a city there for him already, letting the rest of all his settlers get there through my roads. So expansion was not a problem for the Ottomans.

But I guess that I was more focussed on my story/role playing and he more on getting a good game position.

I just realised that I might have succeeded in getting to Keep Jerusalem if I would have given Memphis to the Ottomans.

Well, practically speaking, the damage to you is the same whether he razes it or captures it. In fact, since he'd benefit from the holy city himself if he captured it, it'd do you more damage if he did take it. But since you were 1st in score the entire game and have 3 world wonders, the loss of that city isn't a crippling loss imho. But again, no one is arguing whether the move is against the rules or not, it still just sucks both for you and for the game.

[Israel (DoE)]

30 points sounds fair to me so that's my vote.

[Israel (DoE)]

Yea, not against the rules or anything, but kind of a dick move.

I don't want a measured-war vote over it, so I won't request it b/c the outcome would not be satisfying either way and I don't think that it would be good for the game.
I do believe it's unmeasured though, razing the holy city of someone literally takes away a more then reasonable part of someone's civ that early in the game.

I was focussing mostly on story/role playing, hence founding my holy city there.
I could easily have found it somewhere else and be a top player game-wise.
But I didn't for story reasons. I gave north-west africa away to the Ottomans (immediately west of the border of Memphis) and offered him to settle a city there for him already, letting the rest of all his settlers get there through my roads. So expansion was not a problem for the Ottomans.

But I guess that I was more focussed on my story/role playing and he more on getting a good game position.

I just realised that I might have succeeded in getting to Keep Jerusalem if I would have given Memphis to the Ottomans.

[OzzyKP]

It certainly would have added a great deal to the game to have it be captured and to be a city fought over by many powers for the rest of the game. Would be a great bit of drama.

[mzprox]

it was a rare coincidence, too bad it got razed. Maybe you could had share it..(taking it from each other by force in different ages)

[OzzyKP]

Yea, not against the rules or anything, but kind of a dick move.

[Israel (DoE)]

Wow. That is a pretty serious blow.

I was all excited too to see Judaism founded in Jerusalem which was built in the right spot...

Well, to be honest, I'm / I was a bit pissed off about it.
When I founded Jerusalem I expected a war and a chance to lose it.
But then I offered quite a lot to both Arabia and Ottomans to keep it, and we made a deal that was pretty good for everyone, I think. Apparently the Ottomans hadn't thought about the cultural thing and now decided to burn it anyway.

I wish I had lost it when it was still a normal city, then Memphis would have been my holy city.
Now I have about nothing. My entire storyline is ruined and so is my empire which was completely fixed on building Jerusalem, holy city of Judaism, on the right spot

I offered many things to the Ottomans, but they just wanted to have Jerusalem removed.

Anyway, I hate it but I'll just adapt another Israel storyline, the storyline of the razed holy city and the diaspora. I don't think that Israel will be very big in this game

I blame the Ottomans though for first accepting a serious deal about Jerusalem first, when it was 'just' a 2nd city, and then razing it anyway when it was a holy city. I'd rather have had it razed back then
But I exchanged like 20 pm's with the Ottomans before it happened, and I'm ok with him. I see his point. If he would only have realised it.... 10 turns ago

Oh, Arabia: the settler deal is of. You can complain about that in Jerusalem.

[OzzyKP]

Eek, Play Your Turn has been taken over by DoD.

I vote for keeping the 20 points.

[Robert]

Ottomans: can you please confirm?
Seeing in civstats that Israel indeed lost a city, I assume this is right....

@America: if there's no maximum we'll have the same situation.
People can be more generous or less generous.
In fact we're then back to the DoC system.

[OzzyKP]

Wow. That is a pretty serious blow.

I was all excited too to see Judaism founded in Jerusalem which was built in the right spot...

[Israel (DoE)]

I think the war is over. Jerusalem has been razed (the holy city of Judaism is gone indeed).
I offered peace to the Ottomans, so I think we can go back to 8 hour turns.

[America (DoE)]

Well, the fixed number is there to make sure that everybody hands out the same ammount of votes.
If we make it a free number, some people may vote very low at avg and others very high. If your neighbours are generous that may give you better scores then if your neighbours aren't.

Now everybody is forced to spend the same. That's the big change compared to DoC.

Maybe the #20 is too low though (it was set as an example before we knew how many people would play)
Maybe we should make it #30 or #40....

Let's vote on it!

How many points should we hand out during the voting?
A. 20 (keep it as it is)
B. 30
C. 40

Ah, I understand, but then, wouldn't it be more logical to not have a maximum, but a minimum? If you want to crank up the average rating, then that's more logical. Because now if you have generous neighbors, they will spend all the points on the people around them, and the rest will get nothing because the points are used up. Mathematically, if you want to even out the scores more, a minimum makes much more sense, right?

[Mongolia (DoE)]

Done, thank you

[Robert]

unpaused now