Is there any point to a diplomatic victory in a multiplayer game?

[Yitzi]

In a game with no AIs (or with all AIs being aliens), is there any point to a diplomatic victory?  Won't everyone just oppose the decision and you have to conquer them anyway?

[Mart]

I played once an MP game, 4 players. My pactmate was a beginner and did not develop fast enough, but I played University and my tech rate was good. Two other players decided to cooperate and their alliance was researching better than my faction. When they began assault on my faction we all agreed, that they won - their Alliance. It was a good game for all of us, I think. I would call it a diplomatic victory.

[Yitzi]

I played once an MP game, 4 players. My pactmate was a beginner and did not develop fast enough, but I played University and my tech rate was good. Two other players decided to cooperate and their alliance was researching better than my faction. When they began assault on my faction we all agreed, that they won - their Alliance. It was a good game for all of us, I think. I would call it a diplomatic victory.

Oh, that sort of diplomatic victory can definitely happen.  I'm asking if there's any significance to the "Unite behind me as supreme leader" proposal in Council, which in single-player wins you the game if you manage a 75% majority of votes for you.

[Unorthodox]

I've seen a diplomatic victory in a civ MP game on several occasions (same basic concept of in-game voting).  All depends on who you play with.  Many players fight to their dying breath, and others don't always adhere to their alliance beyond serving their own self interest, but on those rare occasions, it can be done. Especially if you get a bunch of role players together. 


I've seen 2 basic situations that made it possible:

1:  Leading player has several vassalized humans that stay loyal and vote for him in a planned diplomatic victory over a close rival.  (perhaps more strength/land but a bit behind in tech level makes this a situational strategy)

2:  Leading player is seen as a jerk, and the rest of the players unite to vote for #2 to prevent #1 from winning. 

[Green1]

Well it may not be the most exciting victory, but it would avoid the boring mop up phase when everyone knows who will win anyways.

Certain leaders like Lal favor this kind of victory.

[Yitzi]

Well it may not be the most exciting victory, but it would avoid the boring mop up phase when everyone knows who will win anyways.

Certain leaders like Lal favor this kind of victory.

I know that Lal does, and it's one of the few strengths he has in the late game (where talents are easy to get and hab domes are available).  But that won't help him if it's only usable when he's essentially won anyway.