(Hopefully this is not a repeat thread, I did a quick look.)
I think that the more complex diplomacy of Civ3 will present a real challenge in MP. My guess is at first people who have played a lot of games against the AI will remember the AI's "price structure" and attempt similar deals. For example, the 30 gold territory map mid-game. Once people get used to MP, the market for tech and agreements will change dramatically (in my prediction). I think humans will be much better at things like:
***2nd place and 3rd place teaming up to beat-up on 1st place
***Two level diplomacy: I'll give you a break for iron working now, but you owe me chivalry later!
***Value based pricing instead of cost based pricing. (I think the AI essentially normalizes everything to gold, or the cost in terms of game resources to produce an amount of gold. This is cost based pricing.) "So, Mr. Roman, just how bad do you want this here extra iron I have laying around?"
***Trading cities: This can REALLY help in an alliance situation in the airpower era. Give an ally a city with an airport so he can attack your enemy. This could allow two offensives per turn.
I am sure there are lots of variations on these and lots we haven't even dreamed of yet.
What do all y'all think?
You are correct that life becomes more complex. What will make PBEM games miserable is the realization, after a year or so of emails, that you are dealing with undeclared teams that work together. And don't think that your buddies are going to respond when you are attacked to alliance requests in the same way. My civ's available to the highest bidder right now.
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
I certainly hope that such meta-game thinking is very rare. How much fun can it be for a pair of friends to play a game for nearly a year or more, knowing full well that they have an unfair advantage from the get-go. The victory would be so hollow and the frustration it would cause to the victims is so needless. The game could hardly even be called a game, there was no challenge because for the most part the end has already been unfairly determined by the two or more cheaters.
I keep a record of all my civ games here.
aštassi kammu naklu ša šumeri ṣullulu akkadű ana šutēšuri ašṭu
"I am able to read texts so sophisticated that the Sumerian is obscure and the Akkadian hard to explain" (King Assurbanipal of Assyria 7th century BC)
Another new diplomatic angle:
Cooperative Research
"If you research Bronze Working and I research Warrior Code then we can trade them to each other for free once we've completed the research."
If I'm posting here then Counterglow must be down.
I think that I slightly misunderstood jshelr's post. What I condemn is the out-of-game friends teaming up in the beginning to "win" a game. Especially in a PBEM game, that behavior is incredibly frustrating and childish.
Cooperative Research is a very exciting new aspect to the game that looks very enticing. This sort of in-game diplomacy and allying is very interesting. Befriending your neighbor can now be even more benificial than an early rush. I love the many new facets of gaming playing with humans will open up...
I keep a record of all my civ games here.
aštassi kammu naklu ša šumeri ṣullulu akkadű ana šutēšuri ašṭu
"I am able to read texts so sophisticated that the Sumerian is obscure and the Akkadian hard to explain" (King Assurbanipal of Assyria 7th century BC)
I have always wanted to trade someone the tech they need to build a new unit, using a resource they didn't even know they had, on the condition that they trade the extra to me. This sort of activity was common in the world in the 19th and 20th centuries with oil, and it would be a lot of fun to recreate.
I keep a record of all my civ games here.
aštassi kammu naklu ša šumeri ṣullulu akkadű ana šutēšuri ašṭu
"I am able to read texts so sophisticated that the Sumerian is obscure and the Akkadian hard to explain" (King Assurbanipal of Assyria 7th century BC)
I've done that with the AI a couple of times, when I was in my peaceful builder mode. I knew they had extra uranium but they didn't know it. I gave them the tech, then traded for their uranium. Now though, if I don't have it, I take it.And hoard all the oil I can.
badams
The last two posts bring up another interesting fact about MP. The AI does not think more than a few turns ahead ecept for rushes. Humans do, so diplomacy becomes much more strategic and less tactical.
Got my new computer!!!!
How about this...
Addressing Player 1
"if you do not cease your war with so-&-so (player 2), I (Player 3)will come over there along with Players 4 5 and 6 and show you what RAZE really means"...
I have always wished for bargining for some others behalf
Mss
Remember.... pillage first then burn.
I've always envisioned world summits and private deals, as well as being able to take alliances to a higher level. eg., sharing transports, etc. Or, making a deal where one civ will dedicate it's production to building naval or aerial units or artillery, while the other civ cranks out tanks.
Or, if you allow me RoP to get to this civ, I'll remember you when I beginning slicing that civilization up.
And as someone said above, giving another civ technology in exchange for 1 of the resources that would appear on their map.
The possibilities for diplomacy are endless. Now I just wish PtW would resolve it's MP issues...
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks