Dictator 3 - War Poll!

curtsibling · November 6, 2003, 06:56

Hi there!

Just a quick poll, to help me decide on what kind of playing style should be used for my WW2 Scenario, Dictator 3.

This will determine if diplomacy or limited contact is allowed between civs, or if there is to be just full scale war, till the death!

I have these styles in mind.

1. Fully historical alliances - no diplomacy.

2. Fully historical alliances - open diplomacy.

3. Every civ for themselves - no diplomacy.

4. Every civ for themselves - open diplomacy.

5. Anything goes after 1940 - open diplomacy.

No diplomacy would mean that war is permanent, once it begins.

Diplomacy opens up the cunning tricks and traps of alliances, etc.

Also an 'Axis vs Allies' fixed alliance structure would mean teamwork and big battles.

The ablility to do anything after 1940, would open up many an interesting battle.

So it's up to you all.
I want to get this baby done soon, and I want to make sure I am giving you all the scenario you want.
I also want to make just one file, not a confusing array of civ scenarios for the one theme.

A MP and SP version might be possible however.

Vote and let me know!

Cheers!

rmsharpe · November 6, 2003, 13:39

I'd say a version with completely open diplomacy, including being able to attack the neutrals!

The American Empire must expand to Canada and Mexico! Viva America!

curtsibling · November 6, 2003, 15:01

Damn right!

Same goes for Great Britain!

We're taking back those 13 colonies!

rmsharpe · November 6, 2003, 15:12

Give me Churchill over Roosevelt any day of the week.

Lft Marks · November 6, 2003, 17:12

i didnt vote because i have a diffrent idea, if u'll permit me..........
how about having america as the "anomaly", (kus we all no hitler wud have attacked the glorious USSR eventually, being the fascist pig-dog that he is) and having an event that causes them to come into the war on someones side? either axis or allied?
Perhaps something to do with the soviet union? maybe IF japan attacks the ussr an the ussr takes a certain city, americas troops are mobilized to prevent the spread of communism an thus on the side of the fascists?
i may jus be being arrogant and difficult to please however

yaroslav · November 6, 2003, 17:30

I'd say open diplomacy for both a change and historic reasons... How close was UK to enter in war against soviets by helping Finland?? Had the US' house and senate moved on war against German (and not only Japan) if German wouldn't have declared war on US? Those are questions hard to answer...

Arthedain · November 6, 2003, 17:35

why not make a bat-file so we can have the two upper versions?

:) Smiley · November 6, 2003, 23:26

The idea of events based limited diplomacy sounds good

POTUS · November 7, 2003, 01:16

I like the idea of events causing war. Maybe, if Germany sinks a British ship, America attacks Germany for sinking a ship carrying Americans, i.e. WWI.

curtsibling · November 7, 2003, 05:59

Thanks, chaps!

I will take all these ideas into consideration...

I'll give it a few more days yet...

Cifer Almasy · November 7, 2003, 07:14

I agree with Yaroslav and Potus!
I think event-based diplomacy is the best solution (not for MP of course!!!). The idea of an Anti-Communism Alliance between the USA and Germany or the question what would have happened if Hitler hadnt declared war on the USA, really is interesting.
Some other idea: Imagine Germany had invented the Nuke. Perhaps the USA would have tried to sign a non-agression pact, i.e.
Give the what" if´s a lot of space and PLEASE give the "evil" civs ability to attack the Neutrals!

One minor thing: Have you thought about your city sizes, Curt? Hold them low and you wont have to create #50 Food- giving terrains any more!

And last but not least:
If you send me thefile, please give me a .ZIP ! (Not a .dat)

Thanks in advance,
Bye,

Cifer

academia · November 7, 2003, 17:11

My vote goes for fully historical alliances - open diplomacy.

Recreate the original ww2 situations with all the alliances. But after that, the players should be able to choose their own path.
However, i wouldn´t like to see a Nazi Germany-USSR alliance... that´s impossible.
You should establish some limits...

Henrik · November 8, 2003, 05:44

Quote:

Recreate the original ww2 situations with all the alliances. But after that, the players should be able to choose their own path.

curtsibling · November 8, 2003, 06:55

Things seem to be almost neck and neck between historical alliances, with open or closed diplomacy.

As I only have limited events space, it will have to be a total close down or a total free reign.

Events based diplo would be good, but with limited space, some things might be tricky to implement.

Remember the Barbarossa problem?

One one hand, I would have to close diplomacy to ensure that all civs kept to the alliances till they are to be broken.

With open diplomacy the alliances will end after a turn or two.

But to give partial closed diplomacy, it will take events space.

This is the dilemma that faces me...

Case · November 8, 2003, 07:59

I voted for open democracy. It's always a lot more interesting then when restrictions are placed on diplomatic options.

Palaiologos · November 8, 2003, 08:05

Why don't you use the diplo system of the original Microprose scenario?

Dr Kellogg · November 8, 2003, 09:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos
Why don't you use the diplo system of the original Microprose scenario?

That's a great idea.

curtsibling · November 8, 2003, 09:21

I'll check it out!

curtsibling · November 8, 2003, 11:08

Good show.

I have decided to go with the open diplomacy and giving certain civs a bad rep to make sure no silly alliances are made.

In regards to 'war triggers'...It would involve an events silencing of certain civs.

Any ideas on what could bring the US into war with Germany?

Or what could make the USSR and Germany fight?

Or should it just be left to the AI?

Cifer Almasy · November 8, 2003, 13:12

Send me that file, Curt!

I want to critizise your city placement!

curtsibling · November 8, 2003, 15:20

Help yourself!

http://apolyton.net/upload/files/curtsibling/D3v1.zip

http://apolyton.net/upload/files/cur...g/D3-Sound.zip

And I am still using your city placement!

yaroslav · November 9, 2003, 17:29

Quote:

Originally posted by curtsibling
Good show.

I have decided to go with the open diplomacy and giving certain civs a bad rep to make sure no silly alliances are made.

In regards to 'war triggers'...It would involve an events silencing of certain civs.

Any ideas on what could bring the US into war with Germany?

Or what could make the USSR and Germany fight?

Or should it just be left to the AI?

I don't think it should be left to the AI, becuase in MGE the AI is too agressive... And make peace after losing one city

Imagine USA signing peace with Germany after Germany captured New York...

I think that US would not enter in war against Germany unless German herself enter in war with USA. Even after Pearl Harbor there were a discuss wheter USA should enter in war with Germany or not... It's not sure that the war option'd have won, but the Germany declared war on USA and all the mess was fortunately solved (or all Europe will be Rusian's puppet right now

).

And about USSR and Germany figthing... I think that Stalin'd have attacked Germany when he feel ready, but I don't know what event could you use.. However, an allied avance into France would probably move Rusia in war in order to take some of the German's spoils...

curtsibling · November 9, 2003, 17:50

Thanks, Yaroslav!

I have new events in place, triggering the USA to fight Japan or Germany, when the moment arises...

About the USSR and Gemany?

Still wondering what to do, as these two despots can't help fighting each other on turn 1 or 2!

Case · November 10, 2003, 00:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos
Why don't you use the diplo system of the original Microprose scenario?

Are you talking about the wwii scenario that came with the game? The diplomatic system in that scenario doesn't work with any other scenarios - from my understanting, all it consists off is a few diplomatic events hardcoded into the game engine.

Panda · November 10, 2003, 01:12

I voted for "anything goes" (like the musical). You should be okay setting the Vendetta flag between historical enemies; beyond that and some attitude modifiers (this is TOT, right?) leave it to the player.

curtsibling · November 10, 2003, 03:06

@Case:
I think the Microprose scen has the WW2 special AI activated, meaning basically that the British civ suffers from insanity and wont make peace.

I recall using it in an old WW2 scen I made yeas ago, and having the final Brit city surrounded by overwhelming armoured force,
and the Brits still wanted to fight! Madness!

@Panda:
"anything goes", the musical! LOL!

I might just leave the Germans and Russians as is, or reinstate the DV2 barbarossa system...
I guess the Germans could have invaded in 1940, if they wanted...

:) Smiley · November 10, 2003, 04:56

So that's what the WWII only AI is? Has it ever been used in any other scenarios?

curtsibling · November 10, 2003, 11:15

Only one that require an insane commonwealth!

I guess it is useful to keep civs aggressive if you have diplomacy off...

Palaiologos · November 10, 2003, 12:09

Hey dudes, the diplo system of the wwii micropose scenario is excellent.

No matter which side you choose the alliances develop as they did historically.

Unless you choose the allies and declare war on the Russians that is.

Sometimes the French cancell their alliance with the Allies, but that is acceptable as one could think of it as Vichy France.

N35t0r · November 10, 2003, 12:51

hah, with the 'special wwii only AI', as soon as a white human talks to a blue AI, the blue AI declares war...

Curt, if you're willing to forfeit a unit slot, (or if you have some immovable unit and a civ allied with the Soviets and Germans, you can place a 'wall' to prevent them talking with each other (that would mean they still don't have contact though..)