Should Diplomatic Victory be renamed economic victory?

Truthy · Mar 20, 2011

Bosh said:
I agree with this. Diplomatic victory is a problem, if you have enough gold you can buy city states when its time to vote, however I´m amazed that AI Civs who have thousands of gold are not using it to do that.

A recent thread described a diplomatic victory in which the player won against immortal AI, each tens of thousands of gold.

Spoiler :

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=415869

Zyxpsilon · Mar 20, 2011

Drawmeus said:
The best bet for creating a true financial victory would be to decide what the best financial model to use for the game is, and then figure out what 'winning' that model would look like, rather than trying to fit the game to the victory condition, basically.

Yet, sooner or later you'd have to address the "Balance" between multiple Victory conditions.
Which is why i imply that UN, Diplo, Domination, Science & Cultural wins *must* be redesigned to integrate and Economic(Financial) condition that halts gameplay.
If i were to pull the CS buyout schemes, i would also consider Influence.
If i insert a tech race to SS-Launch, i should also match an Era driven concept that coordinates strength & features necessary to provide a clear choice of "Fortune vs everything else" with a pseudo Fort Knox or cumulative Launch Parts while still having the UN Wonder to deal with & a number of other concerns.

Not as easy as it sounds.

Zyxpsilon · Mar 20, 2011

Derrick CB said:
Of course, you cant win a cultural victory without culture, but my point is that gold is such a huge part of the game. Having the most money will easily equate to victory.

Stalker0 was absolutely right and there you were claiming Gold leads to everything.
Not so, says your Military & Foreign advisors.
If AIs keep saving accounts, one could very well perceive it as a flaw, given.
Please do declare a formal War against any of them, just to see how quick they can buy out a defensive force or an overwhelming plan of attack against your current target for a Victory condition.
But, don't call their bluff on a stockpile *WE* also use as often as necessary.

Zyxpsilon · Mar 20, 2011

Derrick CB said:
A recent thread described a diplomatic victory in which the player won against immortal AI, each tens of thousands of gold.

Gee, it's *THAT* obvious, isn't it?

Zyxpsilon · Mar 20, 2011

eric_ said:
Totally agree with this.

I posted a thread with an idea about how to make Diplo Victory more...diplomatic:
Diplomatic Pact. I think this could be expanded by taking into account efforts to end wars between two other civs, building up a bloc to pressure an aggressive civ to stop warring, etc.

There's also another idea in there about a Trade Pact, allowing for foreign trade.

Read it all... strangely these principles are *also* tackled in this!
Except Influence isn't bought or built (by UN, or otherwise) in my model - it's deserved.

jtb1127 · Mar 21, 2011

Strategist83 said:
Sorry, but 'economic victory'? By building the UN? Really?

Thats exactly the point of this thread.

Strategist83 · Mar 23, 2011

You obviously didn't catch my point.

---

I'll state my opinion again, just to annoy you all (and hopefully get some of you thinking): There's absolutely nothing wrong with any of the victory conditions - the only problem is the AI's failure to grasp them. In a multiplayer game you'd never be able to win 'economically' by buying up CS because the opponents would never allow it. Ideally, in a MP game each player would be allying and/or conquering nearby city-states (average: 2 per player) - not allow you to buy their allegiance from under their noses like the dysfunctional AI does. Diplomatic victory would be insanely hard in a such scenario where actual competition for the CS exists. Indeed, if the game had a strong AI, both Domination, Diplomatic and Science victories would be much, much harder to obtain, bringing them more into line with the Cultural victory.

Tabarnak · Mar 23, 2011

Strategist83 said:
You obviously didn't catch my point.

---

I'll state my opinion again, just to annoy you all (and hopefully get some of you thinking): There's absolutely nothing wrong with any of the victory conditions - the only problem is the AI's failure to grasp them. In a multiplayer game you'd never be able to win 'economically' by buying up CS because the opponents would never allow it. Ideally, in a MP game each player would be allying and/or conquering nearby city-states (average: 2 per player) - not allow you to buy their allegiance from under their noses like the dysfunctional AI does. Diplomatic victory would be insanely hard in a such scenario where actual competition for the CS exists. Indeed, if the game had a strong AI, both Domination, Diplomatic and Science victories would be much, much harder to obtain, bringing them more into line with the Cultural victory.

They only diplo victory you get in a multiplayer game is when everyone agree that a player have won the game. And city states are only milk cows for nearby civs. Cultural, science victories are possible, cultural being the hardest of all(including domination).

Economic victory?!? Useless.

Edit : Didn't want to be critical...i've just added infos from your statement....

Should Diplomatic Victory be renamed economic victory?

Truthy

Chatbot

Zyxpsilon

Running Spider

Zyxpsilon

Running Spider

Zyxpsilon

Running Spider

Zyxpsilon

Running Spider

jtb1127

Deity

Strategist83

King

Tabarnak

Cut your lousy hairs!

Similar threads