[Public Diplo] The Planetary Council

[spellman]

What's the reason why public diplomacy is so common on RB? There seems to be a desire and need for private diplomacy.

It's a recent development so there's less backchannel craziness.

[Nicolae Carpathia]

Yeah, the old Civ4 paradigm was that if a decent player manages to sign NAPs with everyone, they will be able to get away with a skeleton military and push economy and wonders. And autowin the game.

[Maniac]

Doesn't that player deserve to win if no one is smart enough the counter the winning guy, non-agression pacts be damned?

Hey Iskender, who did you kill to get your first great general?

[Mist]

Doesn't that player deserve to win if no one is smart enough the counter the winning guy, non-agression pacts be damned?

Ah, but then you get a reputation of being untrustworthy and people won't sign any deals with you in the next game. Can you see the problem here?

There's also the fact that private diplo tends to be very time-consuming and awkward if negotiating parties are in wildly different timezones.

[Maniac]

Ah, but then you get a reputation of being untrustworthy and people won't sign any deals with you in the next game. Can you see the problem here?

Sure, but personally I think that's taking "always keep your word" a step too far. IMO all deals are subject to cancellation due to the requirements and limitations of the balance of powers. That is: always form a counteralliance against the strongest.

[Iskender]

Hey Iskender, who did you kill to get your first great general?

I defended Spartan soil against the agression of a bloodthirsty neighbour, which, in due time, shall be avenged.

[Bigger]

maybe this thread should be stickied?

[Maniac]

*shrug* It's unlikely to fall off the first page.

[Bigger]

yeah, I know. I just like diplo threads first in the sub-forum. some OCD thing I guess . Anyway not too important.

[Maniac]

Sareln, what do you need all those siege tanks for? Now I need to waste hammers to regain military parity. :rolleyes: