HOTW V - Set Up Thread II, or The Return of the Mods

[The Capo]

Well if you have to leave an hour early the two options would be to stop when you leave or to have a sub ready for your tribe.

I think that makes it simple.

[OmnipotentTrout]

Originally posted by LzPrst

example. persia invents feudalism. now persia has to consider, what is the odds that someone else will invent it shortly. cause if the odds of that is high, then they are better off just techwhoring it. otoh if the odds of someone getting feudalism soon is low, they can choose to sit on it or give it to one other civ (if 3 is the limit) without risking a spread.

the only thing is, it gets really complicated. what if persia invents nationalism. then egypt invents nationalism. the first of these to trade it away will allow for all their recipients to trade it between themselves. the result may be that they chose NOT to trade it.

What do you mean "they can trade between themselves"?

No-one can trade a tech they recieve from another Nation, or can they?

I'm really confused. Can someone give a consise answer?

[The Capo]

Omni, honestly we should have NEVER ADOPTED THIS STUPID RULE TO BEGIN WITH, and now we're trying to fix it. Basically.

[LzPrst]

sorry, I was being unclear. what I meant to say was:

if 2 civs have a tech, the moment any of them give the tech away to a third party the tech would be free game and would likely be techwhored by some nasty tech-pimps

this is if we were to expand the system where you can only trade away techs you've invented UNTIL 3 players has it. my point was just that the intention and the result might not correspond with eachother. the result may be that civs keep techs to themselves longer reducing tech trade, but it may also result in 2 techleading civs working together to stay ever ahead.

which is why I tend to agree with capo on the matter, rules reduce the flexibility of the game and they may cause as many problems as they solve. which is why I'm for a "guidelines system" that encourages people to restrain themselves by choice, not by rules that reduce game options. I cant see the problem of encouraging players to base their ingame decisions on IC reasons.

for example. nations would choose to have less contact with faraway neighbours and be more interested in regional diplomacy. when time progresses it becomes more "natural" for nations to expand their spheres of influence and by extension their diplomacy. again. not rules, just guidelines, nudging players towards a more "realistic" atmosphere for the era, which is imo desirable.

[LzPrst]

I should probably mention that I only have 2 weeks left to civ. or rather, in 2 weeks, the 12th of june I am going on a vacation. I will live in a wood cottage in the forest and eat bugs and roots and whatever else nature provides. or at least it will feel like it, my destination being a sleepy little town in south sweden with nothing going on. at all. the problem is of course lack of internet connection where I'm staying and as a result I doubt I will be able to play the following weeks. there is a slight possibility though, and that is internetcafe's. however, they close (dont know when) and we play until 3:30 in the night here, not all that practical really.

there are of course several solutions. one would be to put a sub in my place. though 3-5 weeks having someone else play my civ isnt very appealing. the other is to put the game on hold for a month or so during the summer, I'm sure some of you have stuff to do in the summer vacation that may exclude civ'ing and it may be good for all of us to take a break.

regardless, I wont know for sure what the situation really is until I get there and maybe I'll luck out. I'll bring my civ cd with me just in case, but I have no guarantees of anything. what do you guys figure we do? anyone else doing non-civ stuff in the summer?

[OzzyKP]

Yea, i'll be going on vacations and such this summer. If I can't make it we'll just find a sub. I recommend we find a sub for your vacation too.

[OmnipotentTrout]

I think we should test this "no trading of techs which you have not inventyed yourself" in HOTW7. And not include any "if 3 or 4 players yada yada yada".

Nice and easy, just as an alternative to the "no tech trade" option.

[Robert]

The "don't trade techs you didn't research yourself" things is easy maintainable. If you want to trade a tech, research it. This improves the value of alliances.

It's more flexible then 'no tech trading at all' and gives diplomatic options but it stops tech-trade-spamfests.

[The Capo]

I just don't understand why we can't play the damn game the way it was meant to be played.

[OzzyKP]

Diplogames weren't meant to be played.

"As it was meant to be played" is a free for all with all of us trying to eliminate the others.

But by making diplogames we are trying to create a different game experience. So when a game mechanic throws off the game experience we are looking to create - and I think tech trading does - then we are right to try and fix it.

[Robert]

As you can see in the SP AI behavior civ4 isn't meant to be played as in "Share your techs with all civs". Civ is meant to be played with alliances.

[deity]

Hi guys - just catching up again. Sounds like Capo's getting his knickers in a twist again

It's real simple: You learn a tech, you can trade that tech.

It doesn't matter if someone else has learnt it.

Any techs you receive from trade, you can NEVER trade.

Now, what was Spain's problem again, exactly

[deity]

lz, can you empty your PM mailbox, I can't send you anything.

[OmnipotentTrout]

Spot on, deity!

Hear hear!

[The Capo]

Omni, we need a sub tonight, if you see this IM Ozzy and I.