[GS] If you have 17 points, will you win a diplomatic victory after voting yourself down?

[Lily_Lancer]

Someone says this, if I have 17 points I'll first get up 3 points and win a diplomatic victory before the 3 points being subtracted.

I want to add that you don't need to win before the Diplo Vote. Since Diplo points are added before they are subtracted, all you need is to get 17 points before the first congress with a diplo vote, then win all three resolutions on that congress to get your victory. So it's even more flexible, you don't even need an aid request to win this early

Is this rumour true?

Let's do a test.

Spoiler :

As can be seen on T203 Mongol has 17/20 points, and then there's a congress.

If I vote myself up it's sure that I'll get a diplomatic victory, however this time I vote myself down by 3 to see whether the rumour works.

All resolution passed in my favor, of course. Japan has nothing to do with it.

Then, on T204:

Genghis Khan is still at 17/20.

Genghis: Hey, where's my diplomatic victory?

All victory types are still available on T205!

So if you have 17 points before the congress and cannot win the +2 resolution, the congress first subtracts you 3 points, then add 3 points to you. Or it first gives you +2 for the first two resolution, then subtract you 3 points and add 1 for winning that resolution.

You will NOT win a diplomatic victory this way!

 

[leandrombraz]

There's something else going on there. I know it works like that not only based on my own experience, but from others that I see all the time on forums. To give examples:

the AI winning by the points being added first,
A guy who was surprised by a victory
Another one


There's plenty more out there. Whatever happened on your game, your conclusion is wrong, the points are added first, at which point a victory can trigger. There might be some variable we're not taking into account that can prevent a victory from triggering. If you're really willing to figure out how this actually works, you should try to run different scenarios and find this variable, assuming there's one.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

There's something else going on there. I know it works like that not only based on my own experience, but from others that I see all the time on forums. To give examples:

the AI winning by the points being added first,
A guy who was surprised by a victory
Another one


There's plenty more out there. Whatever happened on your game, your conclusion is wrong, the points are added first, at which point a victory can trigger. There might be some variable we're not taking into account that can prevent a victory from triggering. If you're really willing to figure out how this actually works, you should try to run different scenarios and find this variable, assuming there's one.

So you never tested yourself but rather believe in rumours?
How interesting.

Attach the save here, anyone can vote in the congress and test himself.

 

[kaspergm]

So you never tested yourself but rather believe in rumours?
How interesting.

Or, you know, maybe a thing called bug-patching happened?

 

[leandrombraz]

So you never tested yourself but rather believe in rumours?
How interesting.

Their experience aren't rumors, they are just as valid as yours. They got a victory triggered, you didn't. If you're serious about understanding how this works, you need to figure out why, not dismiss their experience just because it doesn't favor your bias. Either they encountered a unique condition or you did.

This need to be tested on another game to see what will happen, preferably one where you didn't eliminate everyone, to replicate the conditions where this would actually be done. I'll do that in my next diplo game but I'm in no rush, I'll stick to my plan as I said before. If anyone else want to test this, that would be appreciated.

Or, you know, maybe a thing called bug-patching happened?

The first example I gave was this week, so I don't think Firaxis changed how this works.


One possibility I can think of is that the game behave differently when you need 1-2 points and when you still need 3. That's the first thing that jump to my mind.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Their experience aren't rumors, they are just as valid as yours. They got a victory triggered, you didn't. If you're serious about understanding how this works, you need to figure out why, not dismiss their experience just because it doesn't favor your bias. Either they encountered a unique condition or you did.

This need to be tested on another game to see what will happen, preferably one where you didn't eliminate everyone, to replicate the conditions where this would actually be done. I'll do that in my next diplo game but I'm in no rush, I'll stick to my plan as I said before. If anyone else want to test this, that would be appreciated.



The first example I gave was this week, so I don't think Firaxis changed how this works.


One possibility I can think of is that the game behave differently when you need 1-2 points and when you still need 3. That's the first thing that jump to my mind.

Many of the "bugs" posted on forums because they're using a mod instead of playing on standard games.

If you're sure these experience are "valid" and you are not making rumors why don't you attach a save? You're at 17 points, you vote yourself down, and still win a victory.

If you(or anyone) really had such an experience a save is more persuasive, and helps us to analysis the condition when it works.

 

[leandrombraz]

Many of the "bugs" posted on forums because they're using a mod instead of playing on standard games.

If you're sure these experience are "valid" and you are not making rumors why don't you attach a save? You're at 17 points, you vote yourself down, and still win a victory.

If you(or anyone) really had such an experience a save is more persuasive, and helps us to analysis the condition when it works.

Because I don't keep my saves. I have only my most recent save, where I got my last points in an Aid Request. I asked on reddit for people to send theirs. If anyone here also have a save where that can be tested, please, post it here, lets figure this out.


You shouldn't just assume mods and dismiss it. You're not the only one who plays Civ unmodded. I want to know exactly how this works, don't you? If I assumed wrong how this works, lesson learned. I don't have a problem with being wrong if proven wrong.

 

[Victoria]

@leandrombraz you are right, you can win. You read the posts and know it can be done, I know it can be done. In fact it was even mentioned by Karl in the introduction of the change I believe.

 

[leandrombraz]

@leandrombraz you are right, you can win. You read the posts and know it can be done, I know it can be done. In fact it was even mentioned by Karl in the introduction of the change I believe.

Yes but he is also right, you can't trigger a victory on his save, I tried. I want to know why.

 

[KayAU]

I'm slightly confused...did you vote for double Great Scientist or double Great Admiral points? I assume you changed your mind, but if you voted for Great Scientists and Great Admirals won, it would be a bug.

 

[Victoria]

Yes but he is also right, you can't trigger a victory on his save, I tried. I want to know why.

I sent you the answer in a PM. There has been plenty of threads about it,
Working as designed.

 

[bengalryan9]

Many of the "bugs" posted on forums because they're using a mod instead of playing on standard games.

If you're sure these experience are "valid" and you are not making rumors why don't you attach a save? You're at 17 points, you vote yourself down, and still win a victory.

If you(or anyone) really had such an experience a save is more persuasive, and helps us to analysis the condition when it works.

Dude, you need to chill out. We play the same game as you do. It's not a "mod" and it's not a "rumor", we've seen it happen.

Considering I don't always remember to save right before my victory and that autosaves get overwritten over time, I don't have a save with 17 DV points right before congress. I *do* happen to have a turn with 19 points (Kristina) and 18 points (Amanitore) right before congress meets, though. Both get voted to have points taken away, but both can win regardless, and both will have less than 20 DV points if you click the "One More Turn" button.

And be forewarned: I don't really care what you think about how I play. I'm sure the turn counter will give you a heart attack, but you'll get over it.

 

[leandrombraz]

You wouldn't win with 17, I assumed that wrong since it seemed logical that if you can win with 18-19, you would also be able to win with 17 since you get 3 points but it doesn't work that way, I stand corrected on that. Off course, we would have sorted that out way sooner if we had a normal, respectful discussion, which was just impossible with Lily.

That matter in the context of winning a fast deity victory, so Lily is not wrong on his own turf. If your objective is to win as soon as possible, as reliably as possible, therefore without relying on Aid requests, you need to win the diplo vote or you gonna get a 30 turns delay. I'm not sure about immortal but if you're playing Emperor or lower, you will have 5-6 pre-modern congresses instead of 4, so you will inevitably get there later than deity without an Aid request or just win before your first post-modern congress if you get one. You can get to the first post-modern congress with 19-21 points without an Aid request, opposed to 17 on deity.

That bring me back to my original point on the context of the elimination thread, which started this whole discussion. We're not choosing which Civs are good to win fast on deity, we're choosing which Civs are good at achieving a diplomatic victory. That include all difficulty levels and isn't limited by the need to win reliably early, just win. We're not in Lily's turf, you can take that extra 30 turns, you can rely on aid requests which, like it or not, is part of the victory. Flavor is also being considered and there's nothing more flavorless than eliminating everyone to win a diplo victory. You will trigger the victory but was it diplomatic or just a domination game that triggered a diplo victory? Above all, people are voting based on their experience and on how they play. If you would rather play diplomatic diplomatically, instead of eliminating everyone, does it matter how early you could win that way? It's not how you gonna play and regardless of each ones opinion on Canada, I didn't see anyone but Lily interested in playing diplo like a domination game. Nobody starts a diplomatic game wanting to play domination. It's more interesting for people to see how each Civ rank on the way they play than on a playstyle that they are not planning to engage with, which is the direction the thread is going, despite Lily's best efforts to pull it on his direction.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Won with 18 points at the start of the vote. I got both resolutions correct and voted for myself to lose 3 points.



Post victory shows this...



If we combine this info, I would guess it goes in this order

18 + 2 (correct resolutions) - 3 diplomatic points + 1 correct resolution.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Won with 18 points at the start of the vote. I got both resolutions correct and voted for myself to lose 3 points.



Post victory shows this...



If we combine this info, I would guess it goes in this order

18 + 2 (correct resolutions) - 3 diplomatic points + 1 correct resolution.

So nobody can win at 17. If you have 18 or 19 whatever you choose in the 3rd resolution doesn't matter.

I'm just against those rumors of "vote down yourself and you can get victory at 17" continuously.

You wouldn't win with 17, I assumed that wrong since it seemed logical that if you can win with 18-19, you would also be able to win with 17 since you get 3 points but it doesn't work that way, I stand corrected on that. Off course, we would have sorted that out way sooner if we had a normal, respectful discussion, which was just impossible with Lily.
.

Such discussion seems impossible with you, it is you who continue spreading rumors about 17 point victory, however you never tested it until someone points out your fakeness.

Unless I do a test you'll continue on your rumors and there's no chance of "sorted that out way sooner". Expecting you to play a game and do a test? Funniest Joke ever heard.

If you learn to respect others instead of spreading rumors I'm always welcome to discussions.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Using the power of math, I can simulate 17 though!

I reloaded and decided to fail the one in the middle. I don't get a diplomatic victory and it leaves me with 17 points. (remember I started with 18).



It would definitely seem that you need to have 20 after the first 2 proposition, so winning with 17 shouldn't be possible unless you win the 3rd proposition.

Bleh, I don't know how any of this crap works.

 

[Victoria]

someone points out your fakeness.

Funniest Joke ever heard.

If you learn to respect others

But you do not respect others you continually mock them

 

[Lily_Lancer]

But you do not respect others you continually mock them

I really dislike rumor makers. They're really misleading. They have a pattern that

1: Their sources are not from their own experiences. I doubt whether they have any own experiences.
2: They continue spreading rumors which mislead everyone, this is their goal.
3: If nobody points out their rumor, they continue spreading them. When there are enough people believing in their rumors, the real fact becomes "rumor" and they start to blame people who follows facts.
4: If someone points out their rumor, they just defend with "Hey, my sources are from others you cannot identify(e.g. Chinese forum players, Reddit players), you shall not blame me."

As one who follows facts I really don't want to see people being misled by rumors.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: This needs to stop. The nasty finger pointing adds nothing to this, or other, threads. Please take the time to prove your point through analysis and example that disprove "rumors". Everyone that wants to make a point should be able to do so and should be responsible for their analysis and examples. The rest is pointless bickering.

 

[bengalryan9]

I really dislike rumor makers. They're really misleading. They have a pattern that

1: Their sources are not from their own experiences. I doubt whether they have any own experiences.
2: They continue spreading rumors which mislead everyone, this is their goal.
3: If nobody points out their rumor, they continue spreading them. When there are enough people believing in their rumors, the real fact becomes "rumor" and they start to blame people who follows facts.
4: If someone points out their rumor, they just defend with "Hey, my sources are from others you cannot identify(e.g. Chinese forum players, Reddit players), you shall not blame me."

As one who follows facts I really don't want to see people being misled by rumors.

Speaking of people making stuff up and starting rumors, you know how many times it was mentioned that you could win with 17 DV points in the diplomatic victory thread? ZERO. I just went back and read through the whole thread, and not a single person made that claim. The only person attempting to start this rumor seems to be... you. To argue with yourself, I guess?

"Hey, my sources are from others you cannot identify, you shall not blame me", says Lily.