Proposed New Diplo Game (USA Sat nights)

[Epik]

Starting this Saturday at 7PM EST is fine with me.

No early kills? I am not so sure about that... The possibility of someone marching a settler into my territory and building a city next to one of my cities, is something I normally would not allow to happen.

The 3 city capture rule is acceptable. Am I correct in assuming that it is 3 per tribe. (An alliance of 2 tribes could capture 6 cities per turn)

All of the other settings are okay with me.

Is this game going to for Alpha Centauri or World Domination? I ask this because in the one MP game I played to AC, we encountered several late game bugs. Perhaps you have some other victory condition in mind, or just want to play until someone is obviously dominating the game. I do not really care which way we play it, I just want to know in advance, so I can adjust my strategy.

[Dank]

Lets go over all of the rules before we start playing....just so there is no arguments about a rule not explained. Will there be wonders alowed? or not or just one per civ? I assume we will be doing the 3 city rule but lets just get it all in one place.

[OzzyKP]

I don't want to be a prude, but you all do realize that the group of players for this game is pretty much the same as the last "diplo" game.

Rules don't make a good diplogame, players do. You all need to be careful this doesn't leave the diplo-genre like the last one.

[Dank]

Damn......I can't play this weekend.....I'm going out of town and I forgot....sorry

[Frank Johnson]

Hey Ozzy why don't you leave us alone? I dont know what dip games you have played in, but almost all the ones I played it had some sort of war, usually big ones, and most of the posting was soso. About the only rule was no genocide, and thats the only rule that was broken in the last game when berz was virtually wiped out and was not negoiated with

[deity]

Originally posted by Epik
Starting this Saturday at 7PM EST is fine with me.

No early kills? I am not so sure about that... The possibility of someone marching a settler into my territory and building a city next to one of my cities, is something I normally would not allow to happen.

I guess what I meant was not the Capital and not 3 cities that might wipe out the entire civ. Let's say undefended non-Caps can be attacked, one per turn until 1000BC? Obviously units including settlers are fair game

The 3 city capture rule is acceptable. Am I correct in assuming that it is 3 per tribe. (An alliance of 2 tribes could capture 6 cities per turn)

That would be my understanding and intention.

All of the other settings are okay with me.

Is this game going to for Alpha Centauri or World Domination? I ask this because in the one MP game I played to AC, we encountered several late game bugs. Perhaps you have some other victory condition in mind, or just want to play until someone is obviously dominating the game. I do not really care which way we play it, I just want to know in advance, so I can adjust my strategy.

Normal civ victory conditions apply.

IF we get to SS we'll discuss in the light of your other diplo with drake - I read that thread

---

Wonders? I don't like Wonders dominating a game so I'd prefer no Wonders or ONE per civ.

How about one per civ?

I'm a bit anti about alliances too. In other games it tended to force the world into 2 or 3 blocs. And tech trading gets restricted to these blocs.

I may be in the minority but I think because of the way the civ engine works it may be best to have no "alliances" and no tech trading? But stealing and capture are OK.

To sum up my SUGGESTIONS:
ONE Wonder per civ
NO Alliances
NO Tech trading
ONLY capture one undefended city per turn pre 1000BC (per civ)
ONLY capture 3 cities per turn per civ thereafter
Ceding units OK BUT NO double moves
No City bribe
Unit bribe OK
All tricks acceptable in Rah Rules are OK - like IRB is OK, etc
All the cheats not accepted in Rah rules NOT OK - NO caraporting, etc

And ozzy, shut the frig up!
In HOTW 2 you started major global war by nearly annhilating Mali!
Rules ARE necesary in diplos and in fact all games, otherwise mavericks like you, sonny, have no rules to break LOL!!!

[Frank Johnson]

Deity if you are gonna ban tech trading, might as well close the "friendly tech stealing diplo" loophole too!

[deity]

Originally posted by Frank Johnson
Deity if you are gonna ban tech trading, might as well close the "friendly tech stealing diplo" loophole too!

I think tech stealing is OK but players should not agree to a 'friendly' deal like that. Government restrictions would apply too.

I just thought of something else that would make war much more realistic and tricky...
You can't ask another civ to go to war on someone else to avoid revolution! Let's play it properly particularly if we have no alliances. I really want to avoid solid blocs which will make the world more realistic.

[deity]

Also, if you have a strong Peace Treaty with another civ which involves unit ceding (which I'd like to keep in the game) you should post about it so that it comes to the attention of the world.

I know not everyone likes to post but I tell you it's fun if we post politically manipulative stuff and so on If everyone can at least post a short para each week it would be funner...

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by deity

And ozzy, shut the frig up!
In HOTW 2 you started major global war by nearly annhilating Mali!
Rules ARE necesary in diplos and in fact all games, otherwise mavericks like you, sonny, have no rules to break LOL!!!

I was totally justified! They attacked me, and wouldn't even negotiate for peace despite my continuous attempts.

But regardless, I understand I am being a pest and I'll leave y'all alone now. Have fun!

[deity]

ozzy, you are welcome!

No, it's OK ozzy! I like you around... your guiding hand about how diplos should be played is invaluable, seriously!!

I think we should all follow as many other games as possible and contribute.

BTW Your attack on Mali was NOT justified

[OzzyKP]

Re: ozzy, you are welcome!

Originally posted by deity
No, it's OK ozzy! I like you around... your guiding hand about how diplos should be played is invaluable, seriously!!

Aww shucks, i'm getting all misty. Thanks old man. I'm glad someone appreciates my b1tching.

Originally posted by deity BTW Your attack on Mali was NOT justified

Grrr, will i never win this propaganda battle? See it would be like (or is like) Bin Laden attacking the United States. Then Bush responding by asking Afganistan to turn him over. They don't so USA invades. As US forces cut through Taliban forces like a hot knife through butter Bush keeps telling them "if you hand over Bin Laden we will stop right where we are". The response he gets is "Not until all Americans perish! Pig!" So the US has no choice but to keep going. Every step of the way offering peace, but with no response. So whatever. I did all I could.

[Makeo]

i want to see no wonders,. or only one wonder per civ,.

no tech trading is good, as is no alliance. good rules deity,

[deity]

The Summary so far:

Just went over the thread and summarised the consensus thus far...

Current line up:
Dangime (FJ)
Hydey [HOST] if he shows, may need a sub and a host
Epik
Berzerker
Dank (Flatlander Fox may sub)
Makeo
deity

Settings and Rules:

Customise World: Normal 50x80 Map, normal landmass, varied terrain, wet, cool, 4 billion yrs, Deity level, 7 civs, Roving Bands, Std Rules
1x1x
ONE Wonder per civ
NO Alliances
NO Tech trading
ONLY capture one undefended city per turn pre-1000BC (per civ)
ONLY capture 3 cities per turn per civ thereafter
Ceding units OK, BUT NO double moves
No City bribe
Unit bribe OK
All tricks acceptable in Rah Rules are OK - like IRB is OK, etc
All the cheats not accepted in Rah rules NOT OK - NO caraporting, etc
You can't ask another civ to go to war on someone else to avoid revolution

[Epik]

I am concerned that Normal Landmass and Varied Land Form could cause one or more tribe to get stuck starting on an island. When I try it, the number of islands seems to be reduced when choosing either Large Landmass or Contintents (you do not need to choose both to reduce the number of islands to an acceptable level). Also, a Large Landmass (or Continents) would give the 7 tribes more room to develop without having to go to a larger map size.

The Wet Climate seems to create more rivers, but it also creates more swamps and jungles. I would prefer the Normal Climate, but I can live with Wet, since the game seems to spread things out evenly.

If you take away alliances and tech trading, don't you also eliminate most of the diplomatic part of the game? It doesn't leave much else to negotiate. I certainly don't want to see permanent alliances develop, but I would hope that self interest would eventually cause an alliance to break up. Tech stealing agreements can be a funky because until you get spys you don't get to choose the tech. Allowing Tech Trading allows you to negotiate a price (gold or another tech). I also think that Tech Trading can keep the game going longer. At some point one player will develop a big lead and without tech trading it can get pretty hopeless for those that fall behind. When it gets hopeless for some of the players, then the game will probably collapse.

That said... I am still willing to play the game without alliances and tech trading. I would like to hear how you think the problems I mentioned can be overcome.

I like the One Wonder per Civ rule. It will be interesting to see which one people go for. Is it gonna be a problem if someone captures a Wonder City, and they already have a wonder of their own? If it is, then we should probably go with the No Wonders.

All of the other rules are acceptable to me.

It sounds like Dank and Hydey are unavailable tonight... will we start next Saturday or wait until after the Easter Holiday? I am available today, and next Saturday.

I do have a cable modem, so I could host if necessary.