Senate Bill: Victory by Diplomacy

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by roadcage
Let's imagine that the vote were called right now. Needless to say it won't happen because the UN Great Wonder needs to be built first. But if it were, each civ remaining in the game would be given 3 options. The leader names of the top two civs as determined by score on the display, and abstention. Looking at the current scores the choices would be:
banana
Tokugawa
abstain

The banana might actually WIN an election!

I'm still in favor of a space race victory rather than a diplomatic one, but the banana actually winning an election is enough of poetic justice for the banana and amusing headline for the last Jungle Gazette that I'm willing to be quite contented by a diplomatic win

[Aggie]

I could support diplomatic victory if we could accomplish it "honestly". What I mean by honestly, is if play the game as we normally would in the persuit of spacerace victory. In short the decsions made must not be made just to get a diplomatic victory. Any alliances/wars MUST be what we would normally do. Otherwise it could taint the victory.
Aggie

[Arnelos]

Aggie,

So, in other words... you're suggesting that you would be willing to go toward a diplomatic victory only if we don't actually try to go toward a diplomatic victory, thus raising the distinct possibility that we will LOSE the game.

C'mon.....

[Jon Shafer]

The game is won either way... if you need a little popup box from the game to tell you that, then so be it. Whatever it says, Apolytonia dominated the game.

[roadcage]

There is nothing 'tainted' about a diplomatic victory. It is included within the Civ3 engine and therefore a proper victory.

If we go this route, the final save for the game will be just before end of turn in 1435. From that point, it is just end the turn, respond to any tween turn contacts, acknowledge all the builds, and finally a dialog asking about a UN vote.

For those who wish to seek other paths to victory, just say no and play on for 36 more turns for space race, or an indeterminant number of turns for domination.

The plan is fully consistent with a full science blitz space ship victory, and will be achievable 9 techs or 36 turns later whether we do the alliances thing or not.

The only difference is which tech we will decide to research in the 1430/1435 tween turns interim. If we go diplomatic, any Modern era tech will do. If we go space ship, Computers is indicated. Computers allows Research Lab improvements and Seti program Great Wonder for furthur beaker enhancements. To maintain the 4 turn tech rate to the end, we will need several Research Labs. Since Computers is an acceptable choice for both paths to victory, it is suggested.

And Mechanized Infantry is always nice.

[Panag]

hi ,

nah , we should go for space race or so , ....

have a nice day

[joncnunn]

I usually reserach Computers as my first Modern Era tech, but with us having a GL on hand that's commited to building the UN we should research Fission first to use him, especally if we are contining to allow Jap units to land before killing them.

[OPD]

Nay
I don't think I've ever been against anything else in the game as much as this.

Why go for the hollow victory now when there is so much left to do.

After looking at the save for the first time since term 4, I was a bit disapointed with the lack of expansion and conquest. I had hopped that, considering our earlier conquest we would now rule the entirety of our original landmass or at least abanana major.

Ok so perhaps things went a bit builder and a load of universities were built but that doesn't mean that a conquest victory is not still possible.

If it were up to me I'd declare war on most of the other civs immediately, it'd be alot more interesting than waiting to see who the zulu's vote into the UN.

I mean the Greeks haven't even been attacked yet nor have the Aztecs been punished for stealing those two US cities off us.

[joncnunn]

I think the Zulu are probably going to be abstaining on the vote; I think they've been at war with just about everybody that's left in the game at some point.

The English wipe out of the Persians increased the chances of us winning an election.

If another of the civs that we've been at war with in the past is wiped out, we would have an exclent chance of winning the election.

[Aggie]

[SIZE=1]
We approach this situation with an extremely large bag of goodies to offer prospective allies. Motorized Transport, Flight, several Luxes, and several thousand Lytons and over a thousand Lytons per turn. And I am confident that we can get all 10 of the candidate civs to ally against Japan for a mere fraction of our stash.

I said earlier that I would support Diplomatic victory only if we played as we normally would. Well as shown by this plan we would be tainting our victory. Would we normaly gift such techs to other nations. If the answer is no, we are not playing"honest" as we normally would.
It would be sad to play a game one way and at the very end change our play to get a desired result.
Aggie

[roadcage]

OPD, wake up. there is no hope of getting our peacenick administration to go for a domination victory.

So the choices are Diplomatic or Space Ship. And to demonstrate how rediculous the Space Ship Victory is I offer a link to

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1680612&highlight=OCSSC#post1680612

Yes, Our Ironworks can do the entire SS Banana faster than 4 turns per tech.

So I ask, which victory type is hollow?

[realpolitic]

Too risky we've made too many enemies. At least we know where we stand technologically.

Diplomatic victory is insanely historically inaccurate, too.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by Trip
The game is won either way... if you need a little popup box from the game to tell you that, then so be it. Whatever it says, Apolytonia dominated the game.

Agreed, not bad for some Jungle people.

[joncnunn]

Several of our historical enemies can no longer vote:

Abe, Joan of Arc, and Xerxes won't be able to vote against us.

What's potientally risky is that there can be 3 civs eligible to be Sec General instead of merely 2.

If everybody's choice is between Japan, us, and abstaining, then signing MA against Japan with as many countries as possible, starting with those we've never been at war with should result in a victory for us.

But if countries have a choice between Japan, Greece, us, and abstatining, then the vote would be risky.

In addition, calling a vote without signing the MAs against Japan would also be too risky.

Originally posted by realpolitic
Too risky we've made too many enemies. At least we know where we stand technologically.

Diplomatic victory is insanely historically inaccurate, too.

[Panag]

hi ,

, we could "downsize" the others a bit , wanna bet they shall vote for us , ......

have a nice day