October 29th, 2012, 07:03
Posts: 6,775
Threads: 60
Joined: Apr 2004
No one has mentioned yet that a lot of people don't want to play full diplo because it's such a time sink. If you're not available 24/7 for chat, you are considered uncooperative or unresponsive, and this will have a negative impact on your game.
October 29th, 2012, 07:15
(This post was last modified: October 29th, 2012, 07:21 by Bigger.)
Posts: 6,141
Threads: 10
Joined: Mar 2012
(October 29th, 2012, 05:47)SevenSpirits Wrote: (October 29th, 2012, 05:29)Bigger Wrote: If NAP's were as advantageous as you suggest, then they wouldnt be a problem.
Please try to back this up.
Quote:2. PBEM 17. Again I only read novice/spacemann's thread here, so correct me if I'm missing something from another thread:
You may have missed where the other players had an illegal group chat (including parties who hadn't met in-game) to set up the NAP-break. You may have missed how some other players claimed "NoSpace already won, now we're playing a shadow game" to justify their actions. (As you say, they do not need to justify themselves. They also do not have the authority to unilaterally start a "shadow game".) I find it really strange that you consider the real in-game diplo victory to be illegitimate while the actual rule-breaking is ignored.
So apparently your solution to a plague of mutually beneficial, trust-enforced long-term deals is for people to choose to not use them (this time, by breaking deals they do sign). I wish that worked! The fact is though that people play more than one game here. Showing reliability in past games makes you trustworthy in future games. Having trustworthy peace agreements puts you ahead of players who don't have such agreements. Isn't this blindingly obvious?
ugh, my message got deleted.
Anyway, of course I missed that part - I told you I only read novice's thread  . Illegal chats sound like cheating to me, I didn't realize they did that  . Also sad because it probably wasn't even necessary.
And just to be clear, I wouldn't advocate rampant deal-breaking to anyone planning to play more than one game. I'm not talking about breaking a deal because the other party is getting more out of it, or because it creates inconveniences, or because I'm bored and want to attack someone. I'm more concerned about situations where NAP's create an artificial cold war, where the two parties have clearly become enemies and one side has a very real but temporary advantage but chooses to let it melt away because of some ridiculous NAP he signed a long time ago when the situation was different. You play to win the game!
(October 29th, 2012, 07:03)DaveV Wrote: No one has mentioned yet that a lot of people don't want to play full diplo because it's such a time sink. If you're not available 24/7 for chat, you are considered uncooperative or unresponsive, and this will have a negative impact on your game.
Oh, well this makes sense to me
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
October 29th, 2012, 07:16
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
Bigger, all of what you're saying makes perfect sense within the framework you prefer playing. And you express a strong desire for playing with people who see things the same way. Your viewpoint seems to have a strong following, I'd say it's the predominant ideology especially the past year (from what I've seen, I'm not a veteran). I assume you're fine with others playing differently?
DaveV, I stressed the point in my first post and again in the one I made above. That's my main reason for not liking full diplo, and I think my system adresses it. At least diplo hasn't taken much of my time in 37 compared with 25g and 29g.
October 29th, 2012, 07:32
Posts: 6,775
Threads: 60
Joined: Apr 2004
(October 29th, 2012, 07:16)Catwalk Wrote: DaveV, I stressed the point in my first post and again in the one I made above. That's my main reason for not liking full diplo, and I think my system adresses it. At least diplo hasn't taken much of my time in 37 compared with 25g and 29g.
Sorry, Catwalk. I obviously did read your comments, since I used exactly the same phrasing. Chalk it up to encroaching old age.
October 29th, 2012, 08:21
Posts: 15,387
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
Bigger - that sounds nice in theory, but there's a reason that all those who've actually played games with full diplo on are disagreeing with you.
October 29th, 2012, 09:09
Posts: 6,141
Threads: 10
Joined: Mar 2012
(October 29th, 2012, 08:21)scooter Wrote: Bigger - that sounds nice in theory, but there's a reason that all those who've actually played games with full diplo on are disagreeing with you.
Scooter, I know you don't mean it to be, so I'm not offended - but tbh, this is a tad bit condescending.
Of course you have a reason, and its not hard to understand that reason. Even if I didn't get it before, Seven and Novice are quite articulate.
The RB meta has moved away from full diplomacy because it has been judged to be restrictive and unfun. I just disagree on the cause - I think its not the game, but the players that make it so. I also enjoy diplomacy a lot more than crunching numbers, which puts me most in the minority here, I think. We disagree about which is more fun - that doesn't mean either of us is right or wrong.
As for DaveV's point about full diplomacy being a time sink - well he's got me there . There's no doubt human diplomacy requires more time than AI-diplo.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
October 29th, 2012, 09:12
Posts: 8,022
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
And I have never been accused of being a math need before, so thanks. 
As someone who is actually pretty good at diplo I'd say my main distastes are 1. The time investment and 2. Almost every diplo game becomes primarily about the diplo situation rather than the game of civ. also, there are far more instances of diplo games ending in hard feelings than not - I think AW games probably have the best record for avoiding them.
October 29th, 2012, 09:16
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
I know you're probably the least likely convert Gaspar, but I'm curious anyway. Given your affinity for diplo (or at least skill at it) and your misgivings about full diplo (time sink + too big impact), how do you think a game with the above ruleset would turn out? What would be good, and what would be bad?
Good point about avoiding bad feelings, that's what I was getting at with creative uses of truth but didn't quite know how to phrase it.
October 29th, 2012, 09:19
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
Bigger, I guess I misread you a little earlier. Maybe you're even more of a minority than me If you feel breaking NAPs is situationally okay and you're not afraid of playing a little rough, then that is indeed a relevant alternative approach to diplo. I guess the only benefit for you would be diplo being less of a time sink, and that's only one out of several advantages. If the rest are of little to no value to you, I understand your position better.
October 29th, 2012, 09:29
(This post was last modified: October 29th, 2012, 09:32 by scooter.)
Posts: 15,387
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
(October 29th, 2012, 09:09)Bigger Wrote: Scooter, I know you don't mean it to be, so I'm not offended - but tbh, this is a tad bit condescending.
Of course you have a reason, and its not hard to understand that reason. Even if I didn't get it before, Seven and Novice are quite articulate.
Ah sorry, yeah not intended to be that way. Seven, novice, and now Gaspar have all stated pretty clearly why they object, and I don't think I need to rehash what they're saying because I agree with all of it. What my accidentally condescending sentence was trying to say is - the idea of full diplo can sound nice in theory, but it never plays out in practice. We have literally dozens of games to point to as evidence that full diplo is exceedingly flawed, and you don't really have evidence that it can work well. That's my only real point here - you're talking in theory, the anti-full-diplo people are talking in evidence. Also, the reason playing experience is worthwhile here is because so many diplo-dominated games were much more fun to lurk than they actually were to play. I played in several where the game just got to be a drag and unfun, while the lurkers were eagerly waiting to see what weird diplomatic charade would happen next. Really, the only part of full diplo games that I do miss was being able to just idly chat about the game with another player. Other than that, I find the non-diplo games to be so much more fun, and I've played in several of each.
Yes the RB meta for NAPs and the like is really weird, but from seeing other site's Demogames, it's not really unique to RB. You can't just play it where deals are broken on a whim like Risk/Diplomacy because these games take 6 months and hundreds of hours to play. Civ4 was never designed to be played in a way where you had unlimited words to say - full diplo fundamentally changes the game. Yes it's more of a person problem than setting problem, but it's humans playing the game, so the human problem will always be present.
|
