Diplomacy Universalis, A new breed of MP gaming

Owen · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by RedPhoenix
thinking about the venetian issue, maybe we should edit venice information of some silk road provinces in and a couple centres of trade around that area? Maybe delhi and shanghai would suffice? (though I think ganges might be ok too. Without a sea route to india Venice can't start attacking or colonizing there anyway so this will serve purely for trade.

It's a game balance issue too, venice is now proportionally weaker since its lower income for lack of eastern trade than it historically was I think, they made a big buck from trade.

No, I think that there is a misunderstanding of the situation here, and that Venice already has knowledge of more provinces than tpc's article fully justifies. The only knowledge the article definitely justifies is of the Egypt and the Levant*. This roughly means all provinces currently owned by the OE. Spices were brought from further east by Asian merchants and were not originally bought by Venetian merchants in Shanghai or Ganges. That means there is no justification for Venice being able to place merchants in these CoTs.

Of course the simple EU2 CoT system ignores long distance trade like this, so I think the best compromise would be if Venice has knowledge of Isfahan and the Arabian Peninsula but no further east. Venetian trade did decline during the period of the game, in part due to Portugese and Dutch imports direct from the areas of production. Giving Venice knowledge of these CoTs in 1520 would completely remove that effect.

*Definition from the Wikipedia:

The Levant is an approximate geographical term referring to an area roughly bounded by the Mediterranean Sea in the west, and the Zagros Mountains in the east. It generally does not include Asia Minor, the Caucasus Mountains, or any part of the Arabian Peninsula.

unmerged(15967) · Sep 25, 2003

Seconed. Venice never directly traded with China and India (if ou exclude Marco Polo

), only indicrectly. Knowledge of the Al Kharan and Isfahan CoTs would be more than fair.

Owen · Sep 25, 2003

Hosting

I will spend some time before next week preparing to try hosting in case Red is still having problems. First off, I will tidy up my save games folder so I can actually find save games when I look for them. Sorry if anyone actually has an unexpected Zimbabwe game in their save games now.

Once I've done this, I need to check if my connection speed is staying high and if my pings are spiking. Does anyone know of a good tool to do this or should I just use a few local speedtests and the ping command?

Twoflower · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by Freiherr vStein
Seconed. Venice never directly traded with China and India (if ou exclude Marco Polo ), only indicrectly. Knowledge of the Al Kharan and Isfahan CoTs would be more than fair.

And due to some strange coincidence (read Venetian shameless blackmailing and the Sultan's sense of honour that forced him to adhere to a promise given in a situation of emergency) Venice already knows about Al Kharan and Isfahan

Owen · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by Melchior
well, what may i say?
sorry for taking 20 minutes of your life away?
but thx for waiting and trying and such. hope you had fun.

I wonder what happened Melchior. Have you been able to play MP with that computer and connection before? Hope you manage to get it sorted.

Owen · Sep 25, 2003

Oh, and please put AARs here. It appears that scoring goes here as well. Please follow the instructions at the start of this thread. I've done my scoring for this session, but it won't be posted until the end of the next one, when people swap around. Feel free to post your own though.

unmerged(18425) · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by TheArchduke
Sorry guys, I can´t dedicate myself properly to this new campaign. I seriously have to cut down my free-time again. And I just can´t make it.

Well, there's nothing I can do about it, but rant.
And that's what I'm gonna do now.

I find it totally unacceptable that a co-GM quits just moments before the start of the game. You had plenty of time to make up your decision to play and be a GM for this game.
I expected more from admins then setting bad examples.

There are a few people on this forum for which I have respect, because they put in a lot of effort and seem overall nice and reasonable persons. You were one of them.

unmerged(15967) · Sep 25, 2003

I'd prefer it if there was no ranking at all before next week. There should be one overall score and not two averaged scores. Example: England has so far fought one war with Scotland. Suppose they alone fight a war against the Spanish alliance next session and win despite all odds. If you give England a mil 7 for this session and a 9 for next and 8 overall that's not really fair. If all of that happened in one session you would most likely give 9 mil overall. Also some people might have secret treaties or something like that and they can't reveal them yet. Such things would effect the diplomatic ranking.

unmerged(18425) · Sep 25, 2003

I would like to adress some RP issues.

Some nations created an excellent RP atmosphere, but I wonder how far that goes. For example the French agression towards Genoa. Imo almost everyone agreed that it was a step too far, a border dispute does not seem to justify annexing a independent nation/city.
However, is this disagreement with France limited to shouting some remarks in the game? or will it be punished point-wise?
Or punished in-game?

Same goes for in-game talking at all. When the Austrian emperor tells the Sultan that 'you can do with Poland what you want' it seems to me that RP-ing ended here. Should that be justified in the AAR or not?
(note: Austria was during the game for me a prime example of a good RP player).
I would just like to know if creating an atmosphere does count or not

unmerged(18425) · Sep 25, 2003

And regarding to ranking: I prefer one final ranking after two sessions. A final score is better then averaging two scores, because there can be long term plans involved who can not be revealed yet.

Twoflower · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by Freiherr vStein
I'd prefer it if there was no ranking at all before next week. There should be one overall score and not two averaged scores. Example: England has so far fought one war with Scotland. Suppose they alone fight a war against the Spanish alliance next session and win despite all odds. If you give England a mil 7 for this session and a 9 for next and 8 overall that's not really fair. If all of that happened in one session you would most likely give 9 mil overall. Also some people might have secret treaties or something like that and they can't reveal them yet. Such things would effect the diplomatic ranking.

Absolutely agree. Also consider e.g. the OE's war against Persia - how shall anybody decide now whether it was smart or idiotic?

Owen · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by Freiherr vStein
If you give England a mil 7 for this session and a 9 for next and 8 overall that's not really fair. If all of that happened in one session you would most likely give 9 mil overall...

That would be tricky, given that scoring is on a scale from 0 to 8.

unmerged(18425) · Sep 25, 2003

I always find it hard to score in ranges other then 1-10

unmerged(15967) · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by Owen
That would be tricky, given that scoring is on a scale from 0 to 8.

Hmm, I was pretty sure it was 1-9 like the morach values...
Well, just subtract 1

Peter Ebbesen · Sep 25, 2003

If you guys come up with an adjusted knowledge list for Venice at the start of 1520, please post the added province id's in the PAoE discussion thread.

Owen · Sep 25, 2003

Could you all make sure I'm on your ICQ contact list? My number is 197213645. Thanks.

I have a list of most players' numbers, along with those who've subbed so far or have said that they intend to. I can post this if everyone's happy with it.

RedPhoenix · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by FAL
I would like to adress some RP issues.

Some nations created an excellent RP atmosphere, but I wonder how far that goes. For example the French agression towards Genoa. Imo almost everyone agreed that it was a step too far, a border dispute does not seem to justify annexing a independent nation/city.
However, is this disagreement with France limited to shouting some remarks in the game? or will it be punished point-wise?
Or punished in-game?

Same goes for in-game talking at all. When the Austrian emperor tells the Sultan that 'you can do with Poland what you want' it seems to me that RP-ing ended here. Should that be justified in the AAR or not?
(note: Austria was during the game for me a prime example of a good RP player).
I would just like to know if creating an atmosphere does count or not

Creating a believable roleplaying athmosphere counts, I was for a while thingking of having that scored by only the designated scorers, we could have it scored by everyone too though. It effects the total score, which is the average of the 3 basic scores and then points added or substracted acording to the general scoring guidelines.

Also if I may ask, put your scoring in the same post with your AAR, to save space in the AAR thread avoid it being crodded. Just edit it to the bottom of the AAR separated.

on the issue of scoring scale, I was thinking more of leaders who can at best be 7, with the +1 bonus, though maybe a 1-9 scale would make more sense, hmm

I'll change it to 1-9 I think thats better.

For those who don't understand the scoring here's how it goes.

9 is for a godly performance'
8 being outstanding
7 good, 6 above average
5 average
4 below average, 3 rather bad, 2 poor and 1 hey I'm a total loser.

give 9 for only the truly unbelievable performance, 5 if you do ok, not worse than most but not better than most, 5 should be the most common score maybe.

give 1 if someone manages to destroy basically everything, play as bad as possible

ForzaA · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by FAL

(note: Austria was during the game for me a prime example of a good RP player).

hmm.. lets just say that oppinions vary

unmerged(10915) · Sep 25, 2003

I would be mighty happy to loose my hate-nation France in favour of someone elses, so if its possible to change now, i could take anything

.

RedPhoenix · Sep 25, 2003

Originally posted by Mulliman
I would be mighty happy to loose my hate-nation France in favour of someone elses, so if its possible to change now, i could take anything .

if anyone changes, it will be random who that is

hmm honestly I think a session should count for the player changes as we agreed to begin with, though maybe a shorter session means less player changes? I could work a system along that , hmm its coming together in my head!

10-20 years 2-4 people changes
20-30 years 4-6 people change
30+ years 6-8 people change'

or something along those lines

10 being the minumun with no change.

the changers would be the ones with the highest total score rolled.

Diplomacy Universalis, A new breed of MP gaming

Field Marshal

Lt. General

Field Marshal

Vile treacherous Judas

Field Marshal

Field Marshal

Cyborg

Lt. General

Cyborg

Cyborg

Vile treacherous Judas

Field Marshal

Cyborg

Lt. General

the Conqueror

Field Marshal

Lt. General

Thalassic QA

Im The Young Cow Man

Lt. General