Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Moderator: Pocus
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
I think you are focusing too much on the early game... Most of us here are for the long game and even if Arverni doesn't have the most glamorous early game start, they have the freedom to expand while other nations like Sparta may be in the middle of it but squeezed between 4 Diadochi doesn't really help their survival. Also, when I was playing them, I was sending a lot of gold to devoncop (about 800-1000) from conquests so they are not completely isolated.
So do we want another "Epirus" that will get wiped out by turn 20 or do we want a player that will make a meaningful impact throughout the game?
So do we want another "Epirus" that will get wiped out by turn 20 or do we want a player that will make a meaningful impact throughout the game?
-
- Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 4:42 am
- Location: Australia
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
My, probably somewhat biased, view is that there really is not enough room in Greece/Balkans area for another human player.
As it stands we have 4 players in the area already from Dacia down to Sparta (5 if you include Antigonos) each of these players currently have some room for expansion, throwing another person into the region and I agree with 13obo that at least one person will be out of the game early.
As for the other nations mentioned I have experience with Iberri in another multiplayer game and yes they are distant from the action in the early game and honestly the only diplomacy I have had to conduct in that game so far is to seek peaceful relations with Carthage once I finish securing the Iberian peninsular I can hopefully have a greater impact on the game but that is not likely to be achieved until turn 70+.
The Averni I expect would be able to have an impact before that with their large starting army they should be able to secure most of Gaul by turn 50 at the latest and by that time they will also likely be bordering Rome.
As it stands we have 4 players in the area already from Dacia down to Sparta (5 if you include Antigonos) each of these players currently have some room for expansion, throwing another person into the region and I agree with 13obo that at least one person will be out of the game early.
As for the other nations mentioned I have experience with Iberri in another multiplayer game and yes they are distant from the action in the early game and honestly the only diplomacy I have had to conduct in that game so far is to seek peaceful relations with Carthage once I finish securing the Iberian peninsular I can hopefully have a greater impact on the game but that is not likely to be achieved until turn 70+.
The Averni I expect would be able to have an impact before that with their large starting army they should be able to secure most of Gaul by turn 50 at the latest and by that time they will also likely be bordering Rome.
-
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
- Posts: 1203
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
- Location: Virginia, USA
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
There are plenty of other matches out there if people want to build up for 50 turns before getting to work gutting each other.
The purpose of the matches I put together is to stress test the diplomatic system with players competing in close quarters. There's - some - room for expansion, but no one, and I mean NO ONE should be automatically safe to just grow at the expense of the AI. To be "safe" you need to make agreements with other players in a universe where players beyond that will have memories and pattern recognition. All things that the AI........is not so good at.
I think there can be fun games where players have a perfect circle of expansion before conflict arises. I'm even playing in some like that. But that's not my vision for the Field of Diplomacy games.
In regards to Iberia - there's a reason they were where they were in my listing. As a potential inclusion, but not an intended one. For all the reasons mentioned. Like Maurya, Bactria, and Saka - they had limited ability to affect MORE than one of the major powers. But unlike the Arverni, they could at least affect one major power early on.
The purpose of the matches I put together is to stress test the diplomatic system with players competing in close quarters. There's - some - room for expansion, but no one, and I mean NO ONE should be automatically safe to just grow at the expense of the AI. To be "safe" you need to make agreements with other players in a universe where players beyond that will have memories and pattern recognition. All things that the AI........is not so good at.
I think there can be fun games where players have a perfect circle of expansion before conflict arises. I'm even playing in some like that. But that's not my vision for the Field of Diplomacy games.
In regards to Iberia - there's a reason they were where they were in my listing. As a potential inclusion, but not an intended one. For all the reasons mentioned. Like Maurya, Bactria, and Saka - they had limited ability to affect MORE than one of the major powers. But unlike the Arverni, they could at least affect one major power early on.
We should all Stand With Ukraine.
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Fair enough. It makes no difference to me. The Carthage and Iberii negotiations were pretty straightforward anyway. I actually like a player there, because it's a more reliable agreement. The AI is far more likely to go gungho into me than a player, and I have few ambitions beyond a few regions in Baetis anyway. Although everyone keeps talking about silver mines in Iberia, I've never really felt it was a worthwhile target for major expansion as it takes all my troops too far west and leaves me open (but hell I could be wrong about that, i guess I just have too much on my plate subduing Syracuse, Sardinia and the unruly Gaetuli or Mauretanians, all of which a war in Iberia would distract me from).Geffalrus wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:30 am There are plenty of other matches out there if people want to build up for 50 turns before getting to work gutting each other.
The purpose of the matches I put together is to stress test the diplomatic system with players competing in close quarters. There's - some - room for expansion, but no one, and I mean NO ONE should be automatically safe to just grow at the expense of the AI. To be "safe" you need to make agreements with other players in a universe where players beyond that will have memories and pattern recognition. All things that the AI........is not so good at.
I think there can be fun games where players have a perfect circle of expansion before conflict arises. I'm even playing in some like that. But that's not my vision for the Field of Diplomacy games.
In regards to Iberia - there's a reason they were where they were in my listing. As a potential inclusion, but not an intended one. For all the reasons mentioned. Like Maurya, Bactria, and Saka - they had limited ability to affect MORE than one of the major powers. But unlike the Arverni, they could at least affect one major power early on.
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Is all diplomatic chat going to happen here or in game as well?
Also the Pontic Kingdom offers an alliance to the noble people of Armenia. We true heirs to the great Achaemenid Empire should stand together, those red haired and bearded devils from Macedon have been making quite a fuss these past decades...
Also the Pontic Kingdom offers an alliance to the noble people of Armenia. We true heirs to the great Achaemenid Empire should stand together, those red haired and bearded devils from Macedon have been making quite a fuss these past decades...
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Most of the diplomacy will inevitably occur in the private messages. Here is too public, and the in-game chat is not only too public but intolerably delayed.Wulfburk wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 1:07 am Is all diplomatic chat going to happen here or in game as well?
Also the Pontic Kingdom offers an alliance to the noble people of Armenia. We true heirs to the great Achaemenid Empire should stand together, those red haired and bearded devils from Macedon have been making quite a fuss these past decades...
-
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
- Posts: 1203
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
- Location: Virginia, USA
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
I highly recommend using the private message function of this forum. Of course you can conduct diplomacy however publicly you like. Some things work better that way. The in game chat, however, I find extremely clunky. Ultimately up to you, just know that other players may be using the features I mentioned.Wulfburk wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 1:07 am Is all diplomatic chat going to happen here or in game as well?
Also the Pontic Kingdom offers an alliance to the noble people of Armenia. We true heirs to the great Achaemenid Empire should stand together, those red haired and bearded devils from Macedon have been making quite a fuss these past decades...
We should all Stand With Ukraine.
-
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
- Posts: 1203
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
- Location: Virginia, USA
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
The match is up.
Password is envoy
Password is envoy
We should all Stand With Ukraine.
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
This is to confirm that romans are dead scared of water and elephants and so we sign long term Non-aggression pact with Carthage (a whoooping 10 turn warning between any hostilities).
First Consul Pnoff is working to earn nickname "the Thirsty Drinker" as opposed to "the Thirsty Conqueror" he got in his other life.
For everybody else: sorry if you were expecting Roman envoys already, but the senate needs a couple more days to gather their collective thoughts (and I would like to know full fixed list of players, so won't do much until the game starts)
First Consul Pnoff is working to earn nickname "the Thirsty Drinker" as opposed to "the Thirsty Conqueror" he got in his other life.
For everybody else: sorry if you were expecting Roman envoys already, but the senate needs a couple more days to gather their collective thoughts (and I would like to know full fixed list of players, so won't do much until the game starts)
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Lysimakos is signed in and ready to go
Fruitful discussions have been underway and it it hoped the Lysimachids and their allies will avoid an early collapse !
Fruitful discussions have been underway and it it hoped the Lysimachids and their allies will avoid an early collapse !
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
I'll join in 12h when I'm back from work. Game was hosted too late london time. Hopefully noone outside who hasn't signed up joins.
Good luck to all!
Good luck to all!
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Any update when this one is starting ?
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
I think only Morbio is left though he did warn us that he has some previously made less important commitments to his wife like having a holiday in Greece. Hence the slight delay, I guess.
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Ah.....understood.
Three line whip as it unknown in the House of Commons....say no more
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Sorry for the delay... I've now accepted the game.
By the way, my Dacian horde hates everyone outside of... Dacia!
By the way, my Dacian horde hates everyone outside of... Dacia!
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
Looking forward to the game!
-
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
- Posts: 1203
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
- Location: Virginia, USA
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
I'm gonna enjoy watching the royal rumbles from the safety of Gaul.
We should all Stand With Ukraine.
-
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
- Posts: 1203
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
- Location: Virginia, USA
Re: Field of Diplomacy: A New World Order
I fart in the general direction of Egypt! Consider that my first diplomatic overture.
We should all Stand With Ukraine.