There are some cold, hard facts that justify Stardock's decision though.  Only a tiny fraction of TBS players ever play multiplayer.  In fact, I bet most people would be surprised at how small that fraction is.  On top of that, the fraction of people who won't purchase a game if the multiplayer is disappointing is a tiny fraction of that tiny fraction.

It's not much consolation to the folks who are in that tiny fraction, but it's reality.

There's something else to keep in mind.  The players who are visible on forums are more likely to play multiplayer.  They're participating in the community and making acquaintances with whom they can play.  The invisible majority are the hundreds of thousands of customers who've never posted here, have neither the time nor the inclination to take part in a game's community, and who will likely never even click on the Multiplayer button in the menu.

I agree with you. However, my point is that it doesn't have to be that way.

Diplomatic Capital should be used to force trades then?  I like the idea of diplomacy being used to force the human to do what he doesn't want to do.  I mean, we humans do it to the AI.

In MP that would be my suggested use of it.  Maybe being able with large amounts to force peace treaties or alliances.

I don't really mind if Diplomatic Capital (DC) is useful for MP or not, but if given the choice and time I'd definately try to make work though. Regardless there are always ideas that could be adapted, I personally liked the "Espionage" use for DC but there are other good ideas floating around.

The only idea that popped in my head for MP purposes was to compare 2 players DC and if your DC exceeded that players DC by a certain threshold (1.5x, 2x?) then maybe they could have a negative effect on their population growth (influence?) and have that population come to your cities. Their citizens would see you as a more powerful civilization and desert to join you. Or something along those lines, also idk if this had been suggested before.

I agree that forcing a player to do something would be really frustrating, for example forcing a peace treaty. Let's say you spent a lotta effort to take someone by surprise and attack them, like going around the whole map in a ship for 20+ turns, then you attack them and bam DC screwed.

That would really suck, at least for war you could use DC to try and force a war to stop but if you didn't you should have  severe penalties if you chose to continue on. But you would have the choice to go to war or suffer the consequences of going against the DiploCapital treaty attempt. How harsh is harsh, well idk, maybe lose production, gold and morale nationwide. Maybe you could "bleed" your own DC's as long as you're in war (lose DC's every turn?).

AhhI just got another idea. Maybe there could be a high level Diplo tech that allowed you to interact with certain powerful "monster" tribes and you could use DC to make a pact with em and enabling you to hire them in a city to use for yourself. It would be like making a "reserve" for those "monsters". This could be useful for MP since you could get kickass high lvl mobs and cool at the same time

Yeah, I know it would be frustrating.  The player could avoid it by building up DC themselves though, at least in a decent enough ratio.   Larger empires would also naturally build up more DC as well in the later game, so it would mostly be an anti-rush, one-shot  card.

Plus you can always just attack again in a few turns (DC spent would determine length of forced peace, anything besides a few turns would be exponentially more expensive)  It would be cheaper more likely to get a war ally.

Just thought of a way to expand upon my idea.

As a way for the other player to defended against a forced agreement: after one player (the first player) uses Diplomatic Capital to force an agreement (as in hits the agree button), and before the meeting ends, the meeting goes to a sort of bidding system. The second player (the one being forced into the agreement) can use Diplomatic Capital or gold to raise their perceived value, and the first player (the one trying to force the agreement) can use more Diplomatic Capital to raise their perceived value in response (can't use gold). This continues until one player gives up or runs out of Diplomatic Capital (and gold for the second player). The player that has the higher perceived value in the end wins; they both lose the Diplomatic Capital that they put up, and the gold that the second player put up goes to the first player. If the first player wins the trade or treaty goes into effect, and if the second player wins it doesn't go into effect.

This is starting to get a little complicated, but the core idea is there. I hope this is understandable, I went back and made edits many times so some things may be out of place.

Wow, Frogboy comes in here to let everyone know that they implemented something that we the beta community helped create, and he seems to be immediately jumped by unhappy people. At least they listened to you guys.

Anyway, however Stardock decide to do this I'll be happy. They have my support, whether Dip. Cap. has MP value or not.

I'm more of a singeplayer person as well, but please make it work for multiplayer. The AI needs to be able to use it on me as well. The AI should offer me diplomatic offers, and they should have value. This resource needs to have actual value. As charisma of diplomats discussing deals between nations cannot be modeled, why not make DC have actual value, like a trade good, or being able to use it to force players to do something they wouldn't otherwise do?

I want this game to still be "realistic" in a sense, and "DC" as it is sounding really will ruin immersion.

I agree with this. It should be enough to make diplomacy a viable option, but forcing certain agreements or being necessary to go to war? That seems way over board. I wouldn't mind if it could be used for espionage or things like that. It should be a bonus to diplomatic/foreign affairs, not something you need to do anything. It'll be tricky to make it viable for MP, but it shouldn't be daunting.

It is really awesome to see Brad so excited about something the community suggested though

Pulling out of the other thread and refining:

Looking at this again, elaborating using it as a consumable, more like materials than food, since that's the direction we're going.  I am trying to make it useful to both Human-AI and Human-Human interactions.

Current Traits:

1. Capital can be used to balance deals.
2. Large Capital Stores boost Relations.

New Trait/Ideas:

1. Capital is Expended to Offer Treaties, but accepting a proposal is free - counteroffers require capital since you're offering it now.  War is Free.
2. Capital is Expended to Break Treaties ahead of time - Give Treaties Durations (Settable, and effecting value of treaty and how much dipcap it takes to offer it).  War is not free if you're breaking a standing treaty.
3. Capital is Expended to Gather Information (Espionage, City Vision, Statistics of an Enemy Empire, Location of Sovereign etc.)
4. Large Capital Stores can boost prestige (with tech/building) but consumes constant capital.
5. Capital is used to hire mercenaries (along with Gildar).

Additional Thought:

If you want to go another step. If there is a diplomatic meeting like the UN/Apostolic Palace of CIV or the Galactic Council of GalCiv here's how I would use dipcap in it.

Council is set to be held (player spends dipcap to call it, some space necessary between councils) - players get a popup asking them two questions.

1. The 1st turn, Will you Attend (Yes/No - players nominate a champion/sovereign to attend)? and how much DipCap will you bid to be able to set the resolution/thing to be voted upon, and the location of the meeting.
2. The 2nd turn, the Highest Bidder sets the resolution, highest bidder is hidden.
3. the 3rd turn all players are told what will be voted upon, and have a number of different dipcap options, for instance:
   1. Attempt to Assassinate a Representative
   2. Increase Guard (costs cap because you're not trusting other players)
   3. Disrupt Proceedings
4. The 4th turn, dipcap events are resolved and players vote (if the representatives are still alive!) Votes are weighted by the level of the representative, the populations they represent, and a bonus based on capital stores (so primary controllers are population and representative level, with capital stores acting as tiebreak).  Sovereigns get a bonus, as do family members.  If the resolution passes, the sponsor and all ayes gain dipcap from the losers

You need at least a majority or plurality of players to agree to attend or the council doesn't happen.  All council attendees are at truce (cannot attack, but can move through each other's territory) during the council (eg. a player who is campaigning abroad does not want to attend the council if his opponent is likely to attend).

Multiplayer Idea:

Diplomatic capital used for toggled spell like abilities - e.g. enforced cease-fire = drains your diplomatic capital and prevents additional troops entering your borders - each unit in your territory drains diplomatic capital for it's owner and requires a large inital cost to enter. (while active your capital cannot increase, i.e. if you earn 20 per turn, it costs 10 per turn while active your income is set to -1 maximum)

Missionary troops - units generate diplomatic capital in own lands and decrease it in enemy lands, can enter enemy territory and use diplomatic capital fueled culture bombs (DoT or instant) on towns and resources. Causes diplomatic capital penalty upon death to owner of current location and unit owner.

Resource embargo - prevents trading while active for player - disables caravans with external links and at higher costs can disrupt internal caravans.

Research embargo - temporarily disables any research trade deals and reduces research rate, can cause research adventurers to avoid the empire territory

Convince NPC - can spend diplomacy points to (temporarily) turn an empires NPCs when the empire doesn't have the diplomacy points to sustain prevent the actions. Or can revert an NPC to neutral and eject from territory for a single large payment.

General thoughts... need some use for diplomacy capital that can be powerful in offensive or defensive ways but cannot make someone invulnerable. Diplomacy ability should be possible as a counter or have other costs as a soft counter. - e.g. you can spend gold instead of diplomacy capital when required to enter borders or to save an NPC but it's cost would be based on it's perceived value. So you'd be flat broke because each military unit would pay a massive toll to attack a peaceful nation. However while active the enemy would be losing the ability to gain diplomatic capital which for a diplomatic nation this would be very painful to maintain.

Great to hear about the Diplomatic Capital. It's a great idea for another intangible resource that provides benefits. Glad to hear the community came up with it and I'm personally glad it came along.

As far as it being the multiplayer and having some or no use.. well doesn't bother me. To me it's an intangible force that let's you buy materials or gold or whatever, for the equivalent of being highly diplomatic. And for folks who don't realize the value of it yet, even as it currently stands in the form presented, that's their issue.

I think it's a great idea.. it's an intangible that you can use to spice up numbers. 

Great idea community!