Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Field of Glory: Empires is a grand strategy game in which you will have to move in an intricate and living tapestry of nations and tribes, each one with their distinctive culture.
Set in Europe and in the Mediterranean Area during the Classical Age, experience what truly means to manage an Empire.

Moderator: Pocus

ledo
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by ledo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:07 am

pnoff wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:16 am
ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 8:57 am
If you don't consider what you were saying and the way you were saying it as insulting, unhelpful and unnecessary, that's up to you. [...]
Just expressing my opinion, in case somebody out there was interested.

I'm sorry if you were offended, but I want my view to be represented.

upd. A clarification: I wasn't meaning to beat down on you just for the sake of it. In my opinion, you diplomacy/propaganda (whatever you want to call it) caused a lot of unnecessary doom and gloom and made other players to act irrational and break character. Unfortunately, I was not able to counteract it due to irl business, which is a source of my frustration. So I was not snapping on you because I wanted you to be offended, but because I wanted other people to see your strategy and overview of the game to be "overthought and overcomplicated", which is still the opinion I stand by.

I will write longer post on my diplomatic outlook later.
I appreciate that, and I respect that that was your opinion. I do think that your experience of what I was doing was largely based on my forum posts and you need to realise that that was only the public arm of the whole effort. I filled my inbox and sent box playing this one game with at least 70-80 messages sent and received. I was talking to multiple nations and there was some optimism about the effort. The Seleucids were coming, with their shock army alone containing 12 elephants and 12 horse archers (their land power was something like 900), but the Saka winning against Bactria and the second Mauryan invasion seemed to delay them indefinitely. The ptolemies were with us but couldn't risk a war that wasn't already going in our favour (i.e. before the seleucids invested the levant) The Avernii were willing to cross the sea if the Romans could hold out a few more turns. The Armenians were seen as likely to join us because of their alliance with the Seleucids. The combined resources and military power and axes of attack would put us in a favourable position.

We were all playing to win. Even nLysimachos who was willing to jump in early to cause a distraction draw troops until the alliance could be ready. We imagined that if we banded together and won the war we could divide the territory between ourselves. Unfortunately Rome (and this was in part my fault) didn't hold out as long as we hoped so the Avernii could bring an army, and the Seleucids got delayed again leaving lysimachos alone and meaning ptolemy would not join. I was hoping to drop the army in Macedonia just to distract you and sacrifice them to keep the Lysimachos in it for longer. We had built an alliance that very much could win, but it was poor timing for most of the members and the surprise attack on italy meant we had to organize everything quickly.

All of us saw an opportunity with the invasion of italy. As long as rome survived at least for a while and pulled 4 armies into the peninsula (that may very well become trapped there or be destroyed), we had an ability, all of us to knock out two of the strongest players and divide territory between allies, ensuring our survival, removing two major threats, creating strong alliances and giving everyone territories that they wanted. This was our strategy it did require complex negotiations and it had many moving parts, but it was fairly simple in essence; everyone piles on the antigonids and then splits the spoils. This is usually how I play most games, with this game i underestimated how long it would take to bring together, misjudged how quickly the seleucids would arrive and made some tactical mistakes and/or overestimated romes ability to survive. Just because i made these mistakes doesn't mean the whole theory is wrong, or that i'm hysterical necessarily, that's throwing the baby out with the bath water. Because it ignores the fact that it came very close to succeeding and the idea was far more potentially lucrative than any other course of action, and theres a risk reward calculation to be made.

The only alternative strategy would be to split you and the antigonids up, and no one seemed to particularly believe that was possible, or desirable (because no one really knew what happened with epirus so there was that trust deficit there), if it was they would have suggested it, I was not the only one with a voice in the alliance. If that was a better play for them you needed to convince them of that, if you wanted to turn on the antigonids and wanted their alliance then I don't think they knew that. From our perspective it seemed like a strong alliance that might last until most powers with the ability to resist were eliminated. The ambitious nature of the Italy invasion seemed like it was proof of that.

And for perspective, Macedonia and the Antigonids were powerful enough to deal with their enemies head on and one on one. Their borders and countries were relatively were stable and contiguous making it easier to co-ordinate. We didn't have that luxury, for the rest of us nothing short of 6 player alliance would give us the advantage. In that situation not banding together and drawing a line in the sand is just as dangerous a strategy, as to let Rome fall might indeed leave us with one less ally, which is one more ally we have to find, one more army we have to raise, and our enemies will not be distracted in a bloody invasion when we finally do.

I understand there may be flaws in this opinion, but its not ridiculous and it was obviously not entirely unconvincing. I'm happy to hear your opinion, but stop implying because it didn't work in this particular game that i'm some sort of raving moron who's 'high on his own supply'. It's just rude. Let's just discuss our various opinions and leave it at that.

Morbio
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2073
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
Location: Wokingham, UK

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by Morbio » Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:50 am

I'm still interested, but I go on vacation for a week from Saturday 7th and returning late on Saturday 14th, so if the game starts before then it'll have to be without me... you won't miss me, based on my last performance!

Judea is an interesting one: I've played SP games where Judea has conquered a significant part of Egypt and all the levant, but when I've played it in MP it's hard. You start with 1 region with next to nothing, can't build any good units (although 1 unit of zealots appeared out of nowhere and these are good) and are totally dependent on the good will of Ptolemy, Seleukos and Nabataea.

pnoff
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by pnoff » Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:53 am

ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:07 am
Thanks, I see. Please notice that

"tl;dr
Stay calm and keep playing. Use diplomacy, not propaganda. Put your nation first, this is both in the spirit of the game AND in the spirit of time period. Leave altruism for IRL."
is written in present tense, so I was encouraging people to (continue) doing the thing. Diplomacy/propaganda was written with respect to me. Put you nation first was about me seeing people putting hands down or suiciding. Better to peace out and live to fight another day.

By the way, I dont get the logic of
a) Pnoff cant be trusted;
b) Pnoff is forever an ally of Antigonids.
They kind of contradict each other, right?

Also, please note that you don't have to be an ally to have productive communications. I think you are too concerned with creating grand alliance in ffa game. What happens when one of you becomes too big?

Here is an example of what could have happened. Please don't take offence, I mean in most "alt history" way:

Turn 7, from Carthage to Macedon, cc:Rome
" Hey Macedon,

You have been a bad boy. Well, we are bad boys too sometimes, let bygones be bygones. Just don't touch Lysimachos, we would not like that.

We see that Antigonos has your back. He is a bit scary, isn't he? You know what, we can have your back better. With us, you can have all Greece. You can even have all Asia Minor, if you catch our meaning.

Tell us what you think.

P.S. what are Antigonuses plans, by the way? He is not planning invasion of Italy, by any chance? That would be silly, haha"

I'm not saying I would bite, but it would get me thinking and open line of communications. And you didn't exactly promise me anything, you don't have to trust me. You would have plenty of time to DOW me "honorably" later, and territory you "promised" is mine to work for, so does not matter essentially.

ledo
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by ledo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:05 pm

I can see the option. And it's possible. Rome was trying to reach out, because frankly the conversation between us made me think you were unlikely to accept a communication like that.

Also the antigonids there is no contradiction. They didn't need your trust because they knew that it was to your benefit to stick with them and a war between you would be bad for you as well as them and you might very well lose. It was a marriage of extreme convenience, epirus was not and although we don't know what happened it seemed quite possible you betrayed them. I had no such assurances that you wouldn't use any messages I sent to away you against me, to put an antigonid Target on my back. So if that was something you were you interested in, you could have sent that message and I might have considered it. The fact that I or no one else got such a message provided, barring any other evidence, that you wanted to ride the antigonid train. And that's a perfectly logical option making it all the more convincing.

Both the strategy you suggest and the strategy we chose had merits. I put mine first because it didn't reply on me trusting you, but convincing other less suspect players to act in their own interests.

Also if you are so bold to swap an alliance with the antigonids for one with Carthage thats impressive, but not exactly logical. So you probably will have to propose it yourself next time, as that's not a course of action I would take as Macedonia personally. An alliance with Rome maybe more so as long as it holds till mid game.

pnoff
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by pnoff » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:19 pm

ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:05 pm
I'm would not be interested in this particular proposal, that's something I just quickly wrote as an example.

If I tell on you to Antigonids, even if I show exact message (although this is something I try to avoid), so what? Player X does not like big Antigonids with strong alliances and tries to turn people on him. Grass is green, sky is blue, more news at 19:00.

But yeah, there is certain gravity in starting positions that made things play out as they did.

13obo
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 863
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:01 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by 13obo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:20 pm

Btw, I agree with ledo that this sharing of private communique on the public forum (seen in the other MP game out there) to be terribly bad taste. Diplomacy is done on the basis of trust and when that is not possible, then there can be no diplomacy.

Could we agree not to share private messages?

For reference, this happened recently and shows the bad repercussions of such actions in real life:

BBC News - Sir Kim Darroch: UK ambassador to US resigns in Trump leaks row
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48937120
Last edited by 13obo on Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ledo
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by ledo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:28 pm

I like to see Carthage as kind of like England. It's fairly removed, has a strong navy that most enemies will have to get past and quite rich but not super strong militarily. Like England, it doesn't benefit me when any individual power or alliance gets too strong, or too close to me. It puts my nice culture/legacy generating country at risk. Invading me from Italy would be a lot easier than from greece for example. As such, it really isn't in my interests to support the strongest powers whether that be Rome or Antigonos. I would rather there was a relative balance between the eastern powers with them occasionally duking it out between themselves. This is not so much a justification of why I didn't seek an alliance with you, that is above, but why I didn't pursue an antigonid alliance either.

In general, an alliance with either of you did not seem absolutely necessary, or no more so than having to eventually convince others to turn against the antigonids or macedonia or both. It also just seemed terribly unlikely, I might as well ask Seleucids if they minded if I crossed their borders to take out Bactria in exchange for an alliance. At best they'd be like inexplicably, yeah sure why not, at worst i've just made two enemies. As far as sharing communications, it means that the Antigonids might work harder to destroy me. They might try invade me or turn my allies against me. They might think i and my allies are their main threat, and taht is not what I want, remember I prefer a war in the east, and nothing creates peace in the east than an enemy in the west (in fact this very idea should have been a red flag for us, although rome wasn't an enemy they were the antigonids targets, thus peace in the east). It's the same reason rome and I never formalised our alliance, why make ourselves seem more threatening than we needed to? (in hindsight this was a trade-off as it might have made an invasion of italy less likely, but also it might not have deterred the ambitious antigonids and just made them more prepared, so i think on balance it more likely worked in our favour).

As far as what happens when my allies get too strong, well thats a bridge we cross when we get to it. If the game really comes down to the wire, I decide whether it's worth going for the win with a backstab or whether I feel like i've had enough fun and let them have it. But that's really late game and I haven't had to test that out in a while. Frankly most times in the past if we have done something awesome, defeated some super strong enemies, had a lot of fun, I usually don't really care if I win, and let it go.

pnoff
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by pnoff » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:37 pm

ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:28 pm
I think games are more fun when all players use the same conditions as winning.

No alliance should be forever. Remember that I explicitly and publicly gave Geffalrus promise of 10 turn warning before any hostilities, implying that it will end eventually, and that was when our alliance was very important for me. Why? Because no alliance should last forever and everybody knows that.

I recommen this video, which us about Dominions 5 but also applicable here
https://youtu.be/2cUQ0_giqL4
Of course there could be an argument of how much FOGE should be like Dominions 5, but why not? This is a game with precise win conditions. This is a game about time period where one nation essentialy "won" by the end date and controlled most of territory, so it is also realistic.

ledo
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by ledo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:42 pm

pnoff wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:37 pm
ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:28 pm
I think games are more fun when all players use the same conditions as winning.

No alliance should be forever. Remember that I explicitly and publicly gave Geffalrus promise of 10 turn warning before any hostilities, implying that it will end eventually, and that was when our alliance was very important for me. Why? Because no alliance should last forever and everybody knows that.

I recommen this video, which us about Dominions 5 but also applicable here
https://youtu.be/2cUQ0_giqL4
Of course there could be an argument of how much FOGE should be like Dominions 5, but why not? This is a game with precise win conditions. This is a game about time period where one nation essentialy "won" by the end date and controlled most of territory, so it is also realistic.
No I agree, to a large extent. And I always try to put myself into a position to win, I just meant whether I follow through or not on a backstab once the game is between me and my ally seems like a moot point for me, but yeah in most cases I get a lot out of my alliances and I win far more often with strong trustworthy alliances than I would without them. So it is a strategy not just a meetup event for me. I think we all thought that agreement was to bind the Antigonids not to give yourself room later, I think it was part of our discussion about how strong alliances were and you decided to nail down discrete terms, because you felt your terms with Epirus were not formal and rock solid. So it wasn't clear to us what you were signalling there for us, we just thought you wanted to guarantee the Antigonids wouldn't betray you.

I'll make sure to watch the video.

Geffalrus
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 698
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by Geffalrus » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:44 pm

I'm going to set up a new thread for the next game. It will have no set start date yet, so as best to accommodate those of us who are traveling in the near future (without internet). All discussion of the next game should happen there, and this thread can be left with just discussion of the current game and it's pseudo-aftermath.

Initial parameters of the new game will be:

- Only major powers and selected secondary powers that start near the majors (no Arverni or Celtiberi or Bactria).

- Difficulty Standard

- Faction pick priority and inclusion to players of the previous Diplomacy Game

- Start date probably mid September

- Turn time slightly increased since I'd rather things go fast due to eager involved players, not an artificial timer. 36hrs instead of 24 probably.

ledo
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by ledo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:46 pm

Geffalrus wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:44 pm
I'm going to set up a new thread for the next game. It will have no set start date yet, so as best to accommodate those of us who are traveling in the near future (without internet). All discussion of the next game should happen there, and this thread can be left with just discussion of the current game and it's pseudo-aftermath.

Initial parameters of the new game will be:

- Only major powers and selected secondary powers that start near the majors (no Arverni or Celtiberi or Bactria).

- Difficulty Standard

- Faction pick priority and inclusion to players of the previous Diplomacy Game

- Start date probably mid September

- Turn time slightly increased since I'd rather things go fast due to eager involved players, not an artificial timer. 36hrs instead of 24 probably.
Whoo, all this discussion is making me pretty keen for another go around. I definitely can't go back to playing the AI or completely silent multiplayer. I still would love random country choice (from an approved list), so that I can't just pick Carthage again, but maybe Ill just roll a dice by myself and see what i get.

pnoff
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by pnoff » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:54 pm

ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:42 pm
As I was saying, I am fine with how game played out. What I was complaining here is what metagame turned to in several last days.
Was just saying that if people are unhappy (from their ingame standpoint) how I did or think that I acted irrational as a player they should have done something about it. (No offence, again, I am not saying my decisions were ideal or that I myself communicated as much as I should, but if you want to change something it's on you to work to change that.)

ledo
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by ledo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:58 pm

pnoff wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:54 pm
ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:42 pm
As I was saying, I am fine with how game played out. What I was complaining here is what metagame turned to in several last days.
Was just saying that if people are unhappy (from their ingame standpoint) how I did or think that I acted irrational as a player they should have done something about it. (No offence, again, I am not saying my decisions were ideal or that I myself communicated as much as I should, but if you want to change something it's on you to work to change that.)
I'm sorry if you got that impression, I personally don't think you made the wrong call at all. I'd absolutely ride the Antigonid train, hope to get more out of it than they do, then turn on them with the seleucids when I had the chance.

Note for future antigonids players when I am macedon: I love you, I would never hurt you.

pnoff
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by pnoff » Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:20 pm

ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:58 pm
I'm sorry if you got that impression, I personally don't think you made the wrong call at all. I'd absolutely ride the Antigonid train, hope to get more out of it than they do, then turn on them with the seleucids when I had the chance.

Note for future antigonids players when I am macedon: I love you, I would never hurt you.
I think it was Rome who was saying that explicitly, but from you I got that

a) Antigonid-Macedon alliance won the game.
b) Antigonids are too strong to be stopped.

So either the alliance won the game, which is not the case according to rules, or a)+b) implies that I cant possible maneuver myself out of current situation, so I would necessary lose and Antigonids will win.

Not trying to argue, just explaining where I got the things that I'm saying.

upd. I understand that some of those things were probably said in character, but I lost track a bit by this point, tbh.
Last edited by pnoff on Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Geffalrus
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 698
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by Geffalrus » Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:22 pm

ledo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:58 pm
Note for future antigonids players when I am macedon: I love you, I would never hurt you.
Oh I'm definitely not playing Antigonids next time around. I love them immensely, but I would fully expect THE LAST GREAT WAR to start immediately upon my assumption of the throne in Lydia. Much better to spread the love around and let other people see what it's like to lead them. :wink:

Morbio
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2073
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
Location: Wokingham, UK

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by Morbio » Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:14 pm

13obo wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:20 pm
Btw, I agree with ledo that this sharing of private communique on the public forum (seen in the other MP game out there) to be terribly bad taste. Diplomacy is done on the basis of trust and when that is not possible, then there can be no diplomacy.

Could we agree not to share private messages?

For reference, this happened recently and shows the bad repercussions of such actions in real life:

BBC News - Sir Kim Darroch: UK ambassador to US resigns in Trump leaks row
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48937120
It's an interesting concept that private communiques must not be shared because it is terribly bad taste (and in many respects I agree), but when you are betrayed by a friendly neighbour and essentially wiped out, then you have to be nice. Why? The only hope, which was almost infinitesimally small, was that I could garner public outrage by exposing my neighbour's scheme and that might lead to some in game support (financial and/or military) to help me survive. Failing that, then my dying wish was to cause problems for my foe. Without publishing the communique then it would just have been the usual accusations and denials that you see between US/Russia, US/China, UK/Russia, UK/Iran, etc. that you see on a daily basis on the world stage. Even with the publication there was the denials of what it meant, I'm surprised that there wasn't even the 'fake message' accusation... and who is to say it wasn't fake? :D

However, having said that, if we all agree to this then I'd abide by it in the game. I may, from time to time, be dishonourable in the game but I'm honourable IRL.

By the way, I will repeat what I've said a few times: I applaud the strategy of my opponent, it was excellently planned and executed (pun!). I blame myself for my blind trust that allowed it to happen. It is a lesson I've learnt that I'll apply in future games, irrespective of who the player is because this, in many respects is a role playing game as well as a strategy game, and even the nicest player could, and maybe should, do the dirty from time to time if it means achieving an objective. I'm sure this happened many, many times throughout history.

Geffalrus
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 698
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by Geffalrus » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:10 pm

My view is that if you post private convos publicly, people notice who you are and they make judgments. At some point, that hurts your future attempts to communicate in this game, whether it's this match or a later one. Reap what you sow, and if you do something, make sure it's for a cause worth the effort. Stand by your actions.

MARVIN_THE_ARVN
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:37 pm

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by MARVIN_THE_ARVN » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:23 pm

The more I read these messages, the more I think I'm a goldfish in a tank full of sharks :lol:

I'm going overseas from mid to late Sep, so I may miss the next one.
"I'll gladly trade you some ARVN rifles, never been fired and only dropped once"

devoncop
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:46 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by devoncop » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:53 pm

Geffalrus wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:10 pm
My view is that if you post private convos publicly, people notice who you are and they make judgments. At some point, that hurts your future attempts to communicate in this game, whether it's this match or a later one. Reap what you sow, and if you do something, make sure it's for a cause worth the effort. Stand by your actions.

+1

Blanket bans are not the answer but anyone who posts a private message suggesting or discussing plots against another player in the forum is going to get frozen out and isolated very quickly I suspect.

In certain circumstances however such as a dispute over one player breaking a clear commitment to another (see allegations in this game between Epirus and Macedonia or in the other game between Judea and Egypt) then the release of such messages can in my view allow other rulers to judge the reliability or otherwise of third parties.

13obo
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 863
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:01 am

Re: Field of Diplomacy - Calling Players for an MP game

Post by 13obo » Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:07 pm

Fair points.

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory: Empires”