Destiny of Empires [Diplo Game] [Organization Thread]

[2metraninja]

If someone has only 3 cities then you probably shouldnt take even 1 from them, you could still wage war though... Threat him to pillage the land if he will not pay for example.

This is what I meant - Europeans are virtually immune to wars between them or someone other attacking them. Japan too. Knowing the bloody history of Europe and how many wars are fought between the Europeans, also how many tribes attacked Europe, conquered kingdoms and stayed there forever, it just don't seems right. Also, you have to do a research if someone is mature enough for attacking. EU - brother's love fest in action

[OzzyKP]

Ah yea, colonial wars, that'll be neat.

[mzprox]

If someone has only 3 cities then you probably shouldnt take even 1 from them, you could still wage war though... Threat him to pillage the land if he will not pay for example.
I think europeans in this game should try to get as much land from other continents as possible.. it's like the handicapped top-players vs the others.
I could totaly see treaties where two europeans declare that they are at war in Africa or anywhere else, except in the old world.

[2metraninja]

First of all, I am new to all this stuff with the diplo-games role-playing and writing, although I enjoy it so far. And I am in no way trying to criticize. Just wanted to raise questions, which to me seems obvious.
To me, it's OK there to be a voting mechanism to stop wars which are obviously irrational - say in a pitboss I play, a neighbor of me attacked me when I was at war at the other side of my fairly large empire, but I had info he is going to attack me, and I was able to stop him and turn the war in my favor. I advanced to his empty cities and asked him just to give me 5 of ~30 of his cities in reparation for the efforts I made to counter his attack, but he refused. It was clear that I will slowly walk all over his empire after his main army died, but he refused peace to the end. In this case it was only obstinacy and it would have been nice to have UN to stop the war.
But with such small space to develop in Europe where those supposed top-players will extend their empires? Knowing that you are safe from complete killing is not good educative method. This way a really great conqueror will have spotted empire With a lot of small enclaves which are the former capitols and core cities of his defeated enemies.

The Priest raises a good question too - when a Diplo game ends - at 2050 or someone launching SS? Or by culture? Because if nations are not gonna be wiped out completely, conquest and domination victory conditions just are not working, although they are enabled in the game.

[The Priest]

I think you raise really important points. There is a danger that, however much we say 'war is fine, right and good', it becomes so constrained that it doesn't seem worth it. Civ depends on the tension between investing now in science against investing now in production and military. Too much of the former, and someone will invade and nick your goodies. If our rules mean that you know they won't invade, or at least you won't lose much, then you can just invest in science, and we lose the possiblities of different strategies and the only wise option is avoid all conflict and research. The point you make about interlocking culture is really important too. Of course that would encourage early war, when the built up culture isn't so overpowering.

However, in practice I am not sure it is quite so bad. The 'vote' rule has never been used, and I don't think it ever will. It is there to avoid people thinking they can just ignore the diplo spirit. There can be a lot of flexibility in what deal you actually agree with the Holy Romans to ensure you have a next step. Capturing a city and giving it back as part of the peace means the culture buildings in that city are destroyed which can help, or of course when a city is gifted as part of a deal some of the culture ( I can't quite remember the details) passes as well. There isn't a special rule about capitals (it would be too easy to exploit, and if the captial is the border city what can you do!).

But you are right to point out that the pressure on space in Europe may make this particularly difficult.

I think that there is a particluar dynanic in these diplo games compared to the SP I play. In SP I try to elimiate whole countries because it avoids culture problems and 'we want to join our homeland'. These diplo rules stop you doing that. I worry too that this basically means you can't really benefit from war. The other person can definitely lose from it, but can you benefit? I remember asking a while back if any diplo games had ended in conquest/domination victories, since I couldn't see how they would. Can't remember what the answer was.

Also, most importantly, the voting system does benefit aggressive nations. If you sit and bulid, you have very little interaction with other nations, and have little to write about. All you can do is write about how wonderful your new navel gazing device is. While if you are involved in war and conflict you end up at the centre of much writing. You might wonder which gives you better votes but the evidence of all the games is that fighting and conflict gives you votes. Indeed, I have known people start wars or phoney conflicts simply to give them stuff to write about, and it works. So maybe it does pay off, even if not in the way it does in SP civ.

I know some e.g. St Jon, avocate elimiation after a certian point as if happening in Doom of the Diplomats. The only problem there seems to be the dynamic in which if you attack someone and do them some damage, they then give up, and then the rest of their nation is very easy pickings. This can end up quite unbalanced.

Can you tell me if you are next to me before I answer the question about early war and losing one of two cities?

I'm rambling. I'll stop. But I think you ask important questions.

[2metraninja]

Ok, I read few times the rules and terms, but the one about measured war made me think a bit and I want to discuss it here. Not try to revolt or initiate changes of rules, but some things that I thought to myself.

All civs in Europe are packed tight, so 3-4 cities for every one of them. Say you are the Viking, attack the Holy Roman, take 2 near cities and the >51% votes the war to stop. Then if you are too powerful, but already boxed in from the remaining Holly Roman cities, what you should do? If you want to expand you need to cross their land and attack Spain for example and because you cant take their capitol which will remove the fun for them to play anymore, you are basically forced not to wage war with them at all, as if you take 1-2 coastal cities before the war is stopped, they will be so heavy pressed with culture, so they will starve most of the time and only drain you maintenance.

This also prevents early wars, as if someone lose 1 of his 2 cities he is crippled too much. Is building a military waste of time and production then?

[Israel (DoE)]

I am so sorry for posting my stories so late.
Please don't kill me for being late.

I read all stories now first time as well! They are wonderful!
Big LOL at France punch in the German ribs so early!!

Please don't kill me Germany, for laughing about that. I couldn't help it.
I am your slave.

Great stories people!
*Egypt sits quietly in his humble corner again*

[Robert]

Game's up now!
Both DoD and DoE are now running on the same machine.
Please let me know ASAP if things go wrong! (ie. you can't login to any of these 2 games, or games get mixed up on PYT.)

Please PM me in such a case! Then I'll get the message within 15 minutes wherever I am.

[Robert]

I hope today.... I'm right now trying to get two pitboss servers running on 1 machine. It may be up in an hour.

[Russia (DoE)]

And how to make my avatar to appear larger so more of my fascinating person to be clearly seen for all of you to awe?

[Russia (DoE)]

When it is estimated the game will be up to spare us checking every few hours?

[Robert]

The server made a sound as if it was about to lift up from the surface of the earth, so I thought I'd better shut it down. It's 1am right now so I'm going to let it rest for now and I'll look into it tomorrow.

If I can't get it working on this noisy server I'll just move the game to the other server, so there's no problem for the long term at least.

[China (DoE)]

zing!

[Japan (DoE)]

Maybe the server would rather run civ 5.

[Robert]

Argh, what's up with this server?
I'm rebooting it right now. Will look into it later why it keeps on being disconnectable.