Greenrow: noobs, slowpace -- game on

[solmyr]

Originally Posted by Klepto

Personally I was planning on role playing all the diplomacy using in-game messaging. I'm happy for there to be a list here although it may remove some intrigue from negotiations, I can think of a few instances where covert alliances could be useful.

Yeah, I agree with the covert treaties. What I want to address is the open treaties. A nation will be under a lot of pressure to default on a disclosed peace treaty or military alliance than to back down on a undisclosed one.

BTW, I'm planning to RP all the diplomacy through in-game message, too. It will be one turn delay, but it's really realistic.

[Tifone]

Originally Posted by licker

http://www.llamaserver.net/gameinfo.cgi?game=Greenrow

Still there for me...

Yep, for me too now. I was panicked bcuz for around 20 minutes the server said "there wasn't a game with that name" in the same page.

Originally Posted by solmyr

BTW, I'm planning to RP all the diplomacy through in-game message, too. It will be one turn delay, but it's really realistic.

Oh, it's ok for me too so forgive me if I sent you a forum pm before you said that

Btw I agree with covert treaties, i find them more fun and roleplay-friendly. Having to describe on the forum every little change of the relationship with neighbour and friends and enemies would be terribly boring, also

EDIT Sorry, almost double post, thought the old one wasn't posted and I can't edit them now no more.

[GrudgeBringer]

As far as 'Covert' Alliances and NAP's go, they are fine and perfectly acceptable.

The purpose of the 'Public' declaration is to ensure that Naps and Alliances have a way of being recognized and regulated.

In a nut shell.....IF you have a covert NAP with a 3 turn warning with me and for some reason I just decide its over and attack you, then there is no whining that the agreement wasn't kept because it WASN'T public.

IF you put your agreement in public the other players in the game know who is honorable and who isn't and will react to the agreement breaker in there own way.

[Klepto]

Originally Posted by solmyr

BTW, I'm planning to RP all the diplomacy through in-game message, too. It will be one turn delay, but it's really realistic.

That's the way I see it, what would be really realistic would be a requirement that you can only send messages if you have troops in or adjacent to the recipient's provinces. Just an observation, it's not how Dom3 works, I'm not suggesting we play that way.

Originally Posted by GrudgeBringer

IF you put your agreement in public the other players in the game know who is honorable and who isn't and will react to the agreement breaker in there own way.

That's a very good point, is this how things usually work? I think perhaps I mistook solmyr's initial suggestion for something more restrictive than it actually is. We don't seem to be talking about a requirement that treaties are made public, only using the forums as a, uh, forum from making proclamations of the public parts. This is IMO a good idea, it will make it easy to keep track of events.

Assuming we do this I will begin in-game negotiations concerning exactly what details are made public next turn.

[Fakeymcfake]

Originally Posted by Klepto

That's the way I see it, what would be really realistic would be a requirement that you can only send messages if you have troops in or adjacent to the recipient's provinces. Just an observation, it's not how Dom3 works, I'm not suggesting we play that way.

Eh, not really. I could imagine that each group would be capable of sending messengers alone or with a small entourage to other groups even if they weren't neighboring each other. If you look at it in that light it works with how messages are dealt with now as the turn it takes for the message to reach the recipient acts as that month of travel time for the messenger.

[Klepto]

Originally Posted by Fakeymcfake

I could imagine that each group would be capable of sending messengers alone or with a small entourage to other groups even if they weren't neighboring each other.

I'm perfectly satisfied as it is, I was just thinking aloud really. Stealth units could play the role you describe. Are they still taking feature requests for Dom4?

[solmyr]

Originally Posted by Fakeymcfake

Eh, not really. I could imagine that each group would be capable of sending messengers alone or with a small entourage to other groups even if they weren't neighboring each other. If you look at it in that light it works with how messages are dealt with now as the turn it takes for the message to reach the recipient acts as that month of travel time for the messenger.

On second thought, I think I will adopt this kind of messaging system:
On first contact, I will use in-game message to greet the foreign nation;
For all the neighboring nations, I will use forum PM because they are neighbors and messengers won't take month to reach them.
For all distant nations, I will still use in-game message to reflect the actual distance issue.

I will probably honor all public treaties (who will not?)
Covert treaties? who knows

[Klepto]

Just to clarify my position, I'll use whatever communication medium people prefer, but I will default to in-game messaging. Even if another channel of communication is open I will probably still use in-game for role play.

As for covert treaties, I read some of the discussions on NAPs and came to the conclusion that they seem inflexible. I hope my diplomacy amounts to more than "20 turn NAP, 3 turn warning please", role play aside a treaty can contain much more detail than that. In the real world it's often the case that the agreements between nations are so complex that the conflict occurs when the parties interpret it in different ways, rather than a unilateral breaking of the agreement. I hope to be an honourable player, I certainly see the value in being worthy of trust, but in the end there can only be on True God and I will always want that to be me.

I'm new here, I know I have a lot to learn. I don't want to drag our game thread off-topic. Perhaps I should go post in a NAP discussion thread

Originally Posted by Fakeymcfake

Oh and Klepto, out of curiosity, did you happen to have a character by that same name in a WoW server a few years ago?

Nope, never played WoW. I get my name and avatar from a character in this very old CRPG.