Reply With QuoteWell.. if you read the rules the vouchers are still in however their use is more limited and i belive the old system could help the less advanced civs while forbiding the trade eliminates that possibility.Originally Posted by bamf226
If I notice a civ going above and beyond in gameplay, I'm going to give points for it. If I see somebody being an ass, I'm deducting points. If you post 17 stories a day, points deducted. Fair play is going to come into focus when war times hit. Are demands for ceasefire appropriate? Does the person continue bombarding the other civ instead of talking about peace?
Nooooooo. I'd rather push a thumbtack under my nail than deal with the hassle of policing voucher trades. That was a serious pain in the last diplogame.- I think vouchers should be tradeable as they were in btp- maybe we could ad an extra thing: voucher can only be given away if it's used up in the same trade.
Well.. if you read the rules the vouchers are still in however their use is more limited and i belive the old system could help the less advanced civs while forbiding the trade eliminates that possibility.
I'm ok with trading techs with a voucher. I give you a tech, I lose a voucher. I am quite against I give you a voucher and a tech for a tech. That was just too complicated to deal with.
Who would do that? if i give a tech and receive a tech then both of us used up one voucher. What I'm suggesting that we should leave in the option to give your voucher to someone if that player use it to give you a tech for that voucher- it's actually a gift. the player who had the voucher receives a free tech. Obviously it would help the less advanced players because the advanced ones could use up their vouchers for 1 to 1 trade while those who cant offer any worthy tech still could have the vouchers and the chance to receive techs.
If we state that the traded vouchers must be used up immediately then it cannot be exploited. ( I did not really liked those trades in btp where one player gave two vouchers and received a single tech for them-1 voucher to cover the trade, the other was a free to use one for the more advanced player, potentially making him more advanced while the trade cost him nothing- I think this is the reason why Robert wants them to be untradeable this time, but imo we should keep the option)
I'm in and will stay in, barring AoG, but I think the numbers of P/W's and rather overly complex rules are a downer. I would like to have Pinchak in the game as he is both a competent player and a good contributor to the Story Thread.
If he will not play then can we have a genuinely ANON sub rather than a publicly disclosed one? I.E. Can it be solely be done by PM and not by answer to a Thread that we all can read. Respect for ANON really does need to be observed and real ID's on the Story Thread do need to be deleted. Likewise, real ID's should always be used on the ORG Thread.
Regardless, I still want to know how to change all of these frigging P/W's to the only one I ever use! I am a very old man now and cannot hold much in my memory and so will be a pushover in the game but I will struggle yet further if I have to try and remember more than the Civ I am playing yet alone different P/W's - I will find it hard enough to recall my DoC username.
“Quid latine dictum sit, altum videtur”
- Anon
mzprox, the current rules allow:
- techs to be given away (by giving a tech to someone)
- techs to be traded for techs (by trading a tech for a tech)
If I'm correct you ask for:
- trading a tech for a voucher (civ x gives tech and loses 1 voucher, civ y gives 1 voucher, which is being gained by civ x)
I've never intended this rule to forbid that, but I can see that it does so though.
I wanted to eliminate voucher trades for cities, money, end of war treaties, 2 vouchers for 1 tech, etc. etc.
If the others agree I can include the option to trade a tech for a voucher.
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
St Jon:
- you can change your apolyton password in your profile somewhere, I think.
- you can change your game password by ending your turn, then retire, thenp pick your civ again and set a new password.
I don't think there are more passwords then that.
Regarding the anonymous sub, we don't know which civ is being played by Pinchak, only Ozzy knows. Ozzy will tell the new player, so we will know who the new player is, but not what civ he's playing.
Yes, some rules are complex, unfortunately we learned from BtP that sometimes more detailed rules are needed.
If you have suggestions for making the rules less complex (but still covering everything it covers right now) please say so.
I can start to remove the ooc judgement from the rule list and place it in a secion on it's own.
I think that both anon and non anon accounts should be allowed to post here. Sometimes you want to say something ooc without giving up our identity. (like: "I'm going to be away for a week" may give away who you are)
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Clear and simple rules are needed, not necessarily more rules or more detailed rules. Furthermore, they need to be applied consistently. Lastly, there needs to be accountability.more detailed rules are needed.
I hope my leaving does not cause a problem. I truly hope the game is a fun one for all involved, but IMO the lessons learned from BtP are not addressed in DoC. Therefore, I have elected to spare myself the stress.
i think allowing a tech for avoucher trade will only force the larger more advanced civs t odmenad the voucher for each trade as it occured last game and therefore bascially mean the weaker civs will not be able to gain gifts and there by advance abit, they wil llose their Vouchers and be unable to trade whilst the stronger civs will still be able to trade.
Gifting a tech to a weaker civ should not cost anyone a voucher. only trading techs.
GM of MAFIA #40 ,#41, #43, #45,#47,#49-#51,#53-#58,#61,#68,#70, #71
That is just a good way to help larger civs to control weaker civs.
Thats why i'm saying that the gifted voucher must be used up in the same trade so the advanced civs cant gain voucher from these kind of trades (they still have the right to ask for something else,)
Here are all the possible tech trades:
-1 to 1 trade, both civ pays 1 voucher
-"gifting tech" for a voucher. The receiver gives his voucher to the advanced civ for a tech. For the advanced civ this trade cost nothing, the other gets a tech and loses a voucher (this is that i think should be in but the current wording of the rules forbids)
-gifting/selling a tech-this is allowed according to our rules. (voucher=give away tech so as long as you have vouchers you can use them for anything you want ) players should be carefull though. If a weaker civ gifts a tech to a stronger player it's suspicious.. maybe we should even forbid it.
-demanding a tech; connects to the previous point. in one point of view it's the tool to make strong civs even stronger, on the other hand paying with a tech could be a reasonable "price" to pay after a lost war for example.
-gifting/selling a voucher: this is forbiden. you cant give away vouchers-in my suggestion we should be able to give away, but only if you immediately receive a tech for it-so it gets used up in the same trade.
-do I miss anything?
Free tech gifting is a very bad idea, setting up your allies with free techs could really alter the game. (imagine the effects in btp: I (Japan) was a smaller civ than Greece so they could had gifted me every tech they had, as we were allied i could just give up researching altogether.. what's the point if i can get the tch for free? Then poor Russia should have had to receive the techs from an other big guy to have the chance against me.. etc etc..)
Hey guys, saw a topic on a different forum about needing another player.
If you still need one, and wouldnt mind someone who has never played a diplo game before, i would be more than happy to play and learn as i go along. Please get back to me if im in or not.
and the alarm bells ring whnever a Setleer asks to paly...
GM of MAFIA #40 ,#41, #43, #45,#47,#49-#51,#53-#58,#61,#68,#70, #71
Welcome, dont mind the alarms and please pm Robert Plomp to see if the spot is still open.
Hey Linus, thanks for applying! Unfortunately for you Hercules signed up a few hours before you.
I'll add you to the first position of our reserve list and approach you if a new spot will open or whenever we start a new game.
Thanks again!
@mzprox,
- Regarding the vouchers, I'm fine with allowing giving away techs. I'll start a vote about that. according to the rules 66% of the votes must be in favour to change the rules after the game has started. Reading the responses to what you said that'll most probably not be a problem.
- regarding the story and diplo categories, I think that story telling and diplomacy are two very different things. One is public, one is mostly behind the scenes. Both require completely different skills. It's up to the players to determine how they vote.
Civs that have diplomatic bounds with more civs will gain more votes in that category.
I see no support for your case from others. As soon as such support comes up I'll organise a vote for you.
- I'll explain the Game Attitude category more detailed in the opening post.
- I'll move the entire ooc-conflict solution system from the rules to a different category in the opening post.
- I think adding 2 techs per era will only bring more complications to the game. I'll try to keep an eye on the era's players are in and announce it when we passed into the next era. Please pm me if you think that my era info is wrong.
VOTE:
Do you agree with the following additions/changes to rule 4: (underlined part)
- 4a. Trading away a tech costs 1 voucher. All players get 8 vouchers. Vouchers cannot be traded away for anything but techs. (this means that civs can give away 8 techs, receive 8 techs for their vouchers, trade 8 techs for 8 techs or a combination of these options.)
Please vote 'agree', 'disagree' or 'abstain' in the next 48 hours.
If 66% of the not-abstaining votes agrees the rule will be updated.
Please vote using your NOT ANONYMOUS ACCOUNT!
If you support mzprox in any of his other suggestions, please say so. If there's enough support I'll organise another vote.
Last edited by Robert Plomp; August 20, 2009 at 05:04.
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Hercules was first to apply for the opening we had in this game.
Welcome to the game Hercules!
Ozzy will inform you about the civ you play and the password you need.
The game will continue in a normal way now. All civs please play your turn so that we can progress into the next 8 hour per turn phase of the game!
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
I've regrouped and re-ordered the rules to make it a bit more intuitive. No textual changes have been made.
If people have suggestions for better phrasing / working of the rules, or making them easier to understand or read, please speak up!
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
I've included two new sections:
- game score mechanism (forgot to include it)
- conflict handling
Regarding the three voting categories, I've included the following explanation:
The 3 categories:
- Story telling
Story telling / role playing is about how a player tells the story of his civilization. Handles his characters, shows the relation between story and in-game actions, explains the behaviour hof his civ, includes graphics and images, is able to entertain it's readers, etc.
- Diplomacy
Diplomacy is about the achievements of a player to reach the goals of his civ through the means of diplomacy. Both public diplomacy (letters in the story thread) and hidden diplomacy (behind the scenes in secret communications by ie. PM)
- Game Attitude
Game attitude is about the attitude a player has for this game. Does he try to make the game fun for everyone, does he try to help others, does he stay away from conflicts or is he trying to be cooperative when conflicts arise, is he willing to help weak players in the game, does he vote in time, does he play his turns, is he not spamming the story thread, does he try to help the game by reporting era changes, bring solutions for problems, etc. It's a combination of both in-game and out of character behaviour.
The vote tool will be explained later. WarningU2 is still busy on that. It looks awesome and it'll help us a lot to streamline voting!
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
My vote to the rule 4 change: YES
Votes so far:
YES: 1
Robert Plomp
No: 0
Abstain: 0
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Obviously I support it, however I have to say that the voucher system sounds very complicated
I want to stress this point:
The suggested changes will have only one effect on the game:
With the original rules a backward civ who cant offer worthy techs for others can't use its vouchers for anything. If we allow them to be able to receive a tech for its own voucher he could receive "gifts" from other players.
(This part of the suggested rule: "trade 8 techs for 8 vouchers " is not really correct since in theory you could trade away any number of techs as long as he other civ pays the voucher for it. I'd change the explanation part to this: ...(this means that civs can give away 8 techs, receive 8 techs for their vouchers, trade 8 techs for 8 techs or a combination of these options.-basically the same we had in BtP with an important addition: traded vouchers must be used up in the same trade)
I agree with mzprox that is all sounds complicated, but I guess that will become clear when I use the system for the first time.
I agree with the intent behind the change, so vote me YES, please
Insanity within Reason
It's a bit complicated. The alternatives are:
- plain x voucher trades with no free trades for specific ages (like BtP)
- no tech trading at all
I think that for the weaker players this rule is best though, but more rules is more complication, unfortunately.
I've updated the rule vote suggestion with mzprox's suggestion. (since all 3 voters so far supported it that is possible).
YES: 3 (100% of voters, 20% of players)
Robert
mzprox
Jeroen
No: 0
Abstain: 0
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Yes
I vote yes as long as this is a one for one trade. None of this multiple vouchers for a tech stuff.
vouchers can't be traded away, so that effectively disables the possibility to pay more vouchers for 1 tech.
Yes: 5 (100% of the votes, 33% of the players)
Robert
mzprox
Jeroen
Toni
bamf226
No: 0
Abstain: 0
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
yes
Yay! (that means yes, we're men, we're men in tights, tights, tights)
You are all individuals
uuhh yes
Is this the time to look for my pike again? Maybe Sitting Bull can get off his ass
Insanity within Reason
Maybe I should let Ozzy look who it is.
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks