Diplomacy Universalis, A new breed of MP gaming

[Owen]

Interesting question Peter.

I think the lower number of manufactories is caused by a combination of several factors.

Several players are scared by inflation, as you say.

Changing players does mean that longterm investment is reduced.

There have been several wars where the losing nation(s) have been completely beaten and manufactories have burned, even when the victors have been lenient in the following peace.

You haven't picked up on what I consider the biggest factor. Although no players are incompetent, by any means, there is still a big mixture of experience in DU. The players who have played a lot of MP and who really shouldn't be scared of inflation, are mostly warmongers who are good at diplomacy, particularly Redphoenix and Damocles. When they switch to a country, they spend much of the time in expansionist wars. The only player I'm sure is not scared of inflation and is more of an economist is Archduke. Most of his cash has been going on conversions, but he has built several manufactories in the last few turns.

 

[Hive]

Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen
A most interesting read. As I am an only casual observer, can anybody explain to me just why all nations in DU have built so few manufactories?

It's because I only recently joined this game.

In another game as Venice, at around the same year, I have 16 manus - with 1 additional under construction.

I started the construction of 3 new manus at the end of last night's session here, and I surely plan for more to come. I couldn't afford any last session, as BB had other concerns.

 

[Hive]

Originally posted by Owen
Several players are scared by inflation, as you say.

IIRC correctly from the stats, most nations has around 10% inflation though...

 

[Owen]

OK. Would anyone like to have an argument with me?

Following Portugese actions last night, I now declare roleplay in Diplomacy Universalis dead. Long live meta-game thinking, as it were.

EDIT: I'm actually referring to both the French use of military access followed by Portugal honouring the Spanish alliance and to the Portugese claims to Spanish provinces because she "needs the manpower". Joining the winner in a gangbang for fully in-game reasons is the polar opposite of roleplay.

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by Hive
IIRC correctly from the stats, most nations has around 1+% inflation though...

That's a good point. It scares them, but they've got lots from wars anyway. Hmm.

 

[Hive]

Originally posted by Owen
That's a good point. It scares them, but they've got lots from wars anyway. Hmm.

It was supposed to say 10%...o

 

[Hive]

Originally posted by Owen
OK. Would anyone like to have an argument with me?

Following Portugese actions last night, I now declare roleplay in Diplomacy Universalis dead. Long live meta-game thinking, as it were.

Well.... a Portugal who betrays Spain and allies France in order to expand in Iberia is ...unusual. But it sounds like they had some disagreements, and it wouldn't be the first time the world experiences a warmonger monarch...

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by Hive
It was supposed to say 10%...o

Don't worry Hive, I understand.

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by Hive
Well.... a Portugal who betrays Spain and allies France in order to expand in Iberia is ...unusual. But it sounds like they had some disagreements, and it wouldn't be the first time the world experiences a warmonger monarch...

Er. That was another one of my points. I heard of no disagreements in game at all.

 

[Hive]

Originally posted by Owen
Er. That was another one of my points. I heard of no disagreements in game at all.

Maybe they took it to PM? Dunno...

Anyway, what Tonio did can hardly be any worse than Red's infamous "insane" monarch...

 

[Tonioz]

Owen, i don`t admit that Portugal ruling idea is only sitting on ducats and not pretending on anything in europe. Portugal needs there iberian lands with manpower not to be afraid of any attack of England, France, Spain or OE.. If you announce that roleplay for Portugal is only making colonization and giving money to other europeans..

If you look at opposite side of this attack, Portugal couldn`t allow itself threating Spain like France did. I wouldn`t bet any ducat for it`s surviving then - just block homelands, and ports can`t use mercs and should surrender sooner or later (later means with maximum WE). That is game mechanism, and that is big weakness of portugal, that any neighbor can try to use (enough to announce claim to any CoT and start war). So here is mix of trying roleplaying and game mechanism...

I tryed to make Portugal more independent and more balanced, otherwise it is rich toy in hands of europeans neighbors. If these things are not allowed, and i played much against roleplaying, i feel sorry and wouldn`t mind to quit the game, because i wouldn`t like my principles and understandings would hit DU and other players interests.

ciao
Anton

 

[TheArchduke]

Let´s see, what the new King of Portugal´s plan is. Diplomatic contact to France and Spain and England is needed.

 

[RedPhoenix]

Originally posted by Owen
OK. Would anyone like to have an argument with me?

Following Portugese actions last night, I now declare roleplay in Diplomacy Universalis dead. Long live meta-game thinking, as it were.

EDIT: I'm actually referring to both the French use of military access followed by Portugal honouring the Spanish alliance and to the Portugese claims to Spanish provinces because she "needs the manpower". Joining the winner in a gangbang for fully in-game reasons is the polar opposite of roleplay.

Well the french attack was roleplayed atleast, perhaps it could have been more excessively but it was never the less. (some of this happened in private with spain).

It would allways be nice if portugal made some roleplaying story about its attack against spain. It is not however that far fetched that a historical ruler would have a goal of expanding the power of its nation, its a quite roleplayable situation that you attack simply for more power, though yes it would be nice if you took some stepts to roleplay the action when you do it.


Saying roleplaying is dead however is pretty stupid, I allready said before and I say it again... you are not any better if you change your own actions only due to the actions of others let alone one person.

This game does not have strict roleplaying rules that can be both good and bad, but I think mostly good. Sure some people may not roleplay as well as others, some may forget to do it at times. It is lovely and nice if you remind them of this and perhaps give them good tips on how to roleplay the situation better.

 

[RedPhoenix]

Originally posted by Tonioz
Owen, i don`t admit that Portugal ruling idea is only sitting on ducats and not pretending on anything in europe. Portugal needs there iberian lands with manpower not to be afraid of any attack of England, France, Spain or OE.. If you announce that roleplay for Portugal is only making colonization and giving money to other europeans..

If you look at opposite side of this attack, Portugal couldn`t allow itself threating Spain like France did. I wouldn`t bet any ducat for it`s surviving then - just block homelands, and ports can`t use mercs and should surrender sooner or later (later means with maximum WE). That is game mechanism, and that is big weakness of portugal, that any neighbor can try to use (enough to announce claim to any CoT and start war). So here is mix of trying roleplaying and game mechanism...

I tryed to make Portugal more independent and more balanced, otherwise it is rich toy in hands of europeans neighbors. If these things are not allowed, and i played much against roleplaying, i feel sorry and wouldn`t mind to quit the game, because i wouldn`t like my principles and understandings would hit DU and other players interests.

ciao
Anton

Tonio, I think you understood wrong what owen ment, it was not the fact that you attacked spain that was bad in any way.

It's the fact that you should have made some roleplaying dialogue to precede the war and perhaps write an AAR about its causes and reasoning

Honestly though I think people are againt taking things out of proportion, sure the attack could have been roleplayed better, but sneak attacks did happen in real life too...

Anyway, I order you not to quit this game tonio And hope you won't.

 

[RedPhoenix]

Regarding manufactories and cash spending.

I do a bit detest the line owen suggested about me I allways thought I make war based on economic might, I try to build my countrys economic might strong enough to overpower my opponent. So I am an economist first then warrior second, or whichever way I build economy then use it for war.


Anyway atleast my self I play long term with every country I play, I just built 5 manufactories last session alone for france. Improved its trade tech and trade income considerably, I'm a bit annoyed france has gone all quality though but didnt go changing it as its at quality 9 and didnt want to lose that for the war.


About the start of the war tonio mentioned, yeah frances forces that attacked from portugal were beaten back, spain got a bit lucky on the defense and lost hardly no men against french superior leadership, morale and firepower at near equal numbers (albeit spain had moutain defense).

French had to retreat with 25k there but it was of no consequence really as the main focus of french attack intially was to take out the lowlands and south italy which were consequently taken very quickly. After that all efforts could be directed at iberia and all spanish armies were wiped out.

And the reason France did not invade mexico, well oifcourse it woud have been strategically sound to take it for some easy victory score (although not really needed), or it would have been nice to take it completely from spain if I only thought meta game and just wanted the things that made me the most powerfull.

However France did not goto war for these things, it was not a colonial war thus I did not want to make it one. I give it that sometimes wars in reality were both continental and colonial, but sometimes they were not.

There doesn't need to be strict rules on this, just common sense...

Anyway its purely for roleplaying reasons that France only took action and land in europe, although one strategical island was taken in the caribian.

 

[Tonioz]

Originally posted by RedPhoenix
Tonio, I think you understood wrong what owen ment, it was not the fact that you attacked spain that was bad in any way.

It's the fact that you should have made some roleplaying dialogue to precede the war and perhaps write an AAR about its causes and reasoning

Well, that is quite correct. Though as i`ve told i didn`t see much opportunity to declare beforehand that Portugal would attack Spain - that would be stupid, right ? I doubt i can use diplomatic on the scene of the theatre.

Anyway, I order you not to quit this game tonio And hope you won't.

I wouldn`t like to break DU community if i do or understand things wrong. Personally i would like to continue playing for Russia (far from being my favorite one too ), but more important is Owen`s opinion.

ciao
Anton

 

[RedPhoenix]

Originally posted by Tonioz
Well, that is quite correct. Though as i`ve told i didn`t see much opportunity to declare beforehand that Portugal would attack Spain - that would be stupid, right ? I doubt i can use diplomatic on the scene of the theatre.

ciao
Anton

Well I do have to agree that for a small power like portugal betrayal can sometimes be the only means to grow at the expense of the huge neighbour.

Still you could write a nice AAR about it if you have time and it would make owen have his nights rest too Don't want to stress the old man too much

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by RedPhoenix
Tonio, I think you understood wrong what owen ment, it was not the fact that you attacked spain that was bad in any way.

It's the fact that you should have made some roleplaying dialogue to precede the war and perhaps write an AAR about its causes and reasoning

Honestly though I think people are againt taking things out of proportion, sure the attack could have been roleplayed better, but sneak attacks did happen in real life too...

Anyway, I order you not to quit this game tonio And hope you won't.

I came here for an argument.

Sure, I deliberately used melodramatic language, but I think Red has pinpointed what I meant. I didn't see much direct RP in terms of the way things were said, but I did see a gradual worsening of relations between France and Spain in the run-up to war. Our northern alliance realised war would come several years before it happened. Now, I'm not saying that Portugal should have made it anywhere near as blatant, since backstabbing attacks are perfectly legal.

However, the chain of events I would have expected are as follows:

1. Portugal makes several complaints, in public, about Spanish refusals to trade on good terms with her neighbour, such that there is an obvious deterioration in relations. It doesn't have to be obviously really serious though, no threats of leaving the alliance or anything like that.

2. Portugal agrees (by PM) to allow French troops passage and to join the French attack.

3. Portugal dishonours her alliance with Spain when Spain calls allies after the French attack.

4. Portugal takes provinces.

Everyone happy. Well, except Spain.

Tonio, I understand exactly what you were trying to do, and I have no problem with a Portugese attack on Spain itself. I don't want you to leave.

 

[RedPhoenix]

it seems to me the last few sessions too few nations have changed, maybe we should decrease the amount of years it takes for changes, thoughts on that?

Right now it is:

10-15 years 3 switch, up to 6 incase of ties

15-25 years 5 switch, up to 8 incase of ties

25-40 years 7 switch, up to 10 incase of ties

40- years 9 switch, infinate by ties.


Maybe it could be 10-14
14-20

20-30

30+?

 

[Tonioz]

Red, wouldn`t that lead to more short-terms wars and inflation and less long-term economic strategy?