HOTW7 Set up thread

[LzPrst]

frank. we are all honorable men here. (and women)

[MMC]

Apart from the general backstabbing, of course.

[Frank Johnson]

Nah I'm serious. Part of the problem is you guys don't look at this kind of stuff. Putting in a game mechanic on a "session basis" is immediately gonna be broken.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by MMC

If deity picked Elizabeth, then he could have 'England', and I'll rename my civ to 'Britain' under Victoria. Then it would be historically accurate as far as the leaders are concerned.

I'm still not buying it. I'm not sure it is workable.

[MMC]

Shall we wait to see what deity thinks?

[Frank Johnson]

Put me down for the Inca for the time being.

[LzPrst]

ok. we can put in based on a number of turns. only one tech trade every 50 turns. sounds better?

[Frank Johnson]

That's a little better, but I don't know if that will cut it either. Most techs take 25 turns or so to research on marathon, or even more, so it might need to go higher.

Here are the 2 ends of the spectrum I worry about. One is the full tech trading whoring that usually goes on in the developmental phaze of the game. This makes the game proceed super fast. The other is a no tech trade game full of mediocre players who fall behind in tech and give up on the game because they suck.

I want to preserve some way to keep crappy/unfortuent players relivant, but do away with the tech trading super accleration that we have in most diplo games.

[OzzyKP]

And then what about deals that developed in HOTWV where an ally would go all gold, and give that in exchange for tech from its allies. I think that was a nice strategy that shouldn't necessarily be outlawed.

[MMC]

I don't see that limiting tech trading with specific values is going to help in anyway... I think a model which says that all tech trades must be agreed upon by, shall we say, two turns in advance, would be of most benefit.

And restricting to tech only invented by yourself is just entirely stupid. How about this scenario:
Three Civs with roughly equal size, tech, and power, are on the same continent. Civs A & B hate each other with a vengance, but are both friends with Civ C. Unfortunately both need to travel through Civ C's territory to reach each other. Civ C knows that if both sides start a full war, then there has to be a winner at some point meaning that Civ C would then be at a disadvantage in terms of size and power. So Civ C blocks both sides.
After a few turns, Civ B discovers Communism but is reluctant to trade it as Civs A & B have no new techs to trade in return. The next turn Civ C discovers Miltary Tradition, but Civ B isn't interested enough to trade for it. A couple of turns later, Civ A discovers Gunpowder, and for some reason wants Military Tradition. Civ C agrees to a trade and gains Gunpower, before realising that Civ B is now at a loss, because without gunpowder, it is quite vunerable. So, Civ C, being both a pacifist and a foreward planner, decides to trade for Communism using Civ A's gunpowder tech, knowing full well that Civ A would never trade with Civ B for anything. Thus Civ C can relax, safe in the knowledge that Civs A & B can keep each other occupied and leave Civ C alone, whilst also knowing that it will be able to step in without trouble.

[The Capo]

I mean at that point it is just up to strategy, I mean how do you yourself suggest we remedy the situation?

[OzzyKP]

I'm not sure. I like the rule we had in HOTWV where you could only trade tech you invented yourself. I thought that was a balanced approach that slowed tech trading, but didn't eliminate it.

However if we go for a bigger game this time we may need stricter restrictions on tech trade. More players means more tech research and more people trading tech potentially.

Honestly the best thing to do is restrict alliances to no more than 3 players, but that is too strict and artificial a rule for a diplogame, so I wouldn't support that. I think HOTWV progressed pretty well, the only point we were going too fast I think was before we split into 3 camps and everyone was trading tech with everyone else.

I think we are generally agreed that too much tech trading causes the game to progress unnaturally fast.

I think we also generally agree that banning it altogether would make it too hard for smaller civs, backwards civs to get caught up.

Maybe a deal where tech trading is outlawed except for peace treaties? Maybe give an incentive for more war. I dunno.

[condor223]

That still makes it difficult for the smaller slower civs, who could not consider warfare vs a larger neighbor. I like being able to trade a tech you researched.

Subs should know what was the last tech you researched, so they will act accordingly.

The games are so slow that getting multiple techs per session is a rarity.

Nolz

[OzzyKP]

Just to be clear, Nolan, do you confirm for HOTW7?

[condor223]

Sure.. if you take a restrained story from me. What time has been agreed on?