Diplogames Rule Discussion Thread

[MMC]

Originally posted by CyberShy
1. I don't think we should let a 'game' to be ruled by the 'real world'.

My impression was that Diplogaming was meant to be a chance to try out alternating 'What if?' scenarios. This method works best when you change as few things as possible.

Originally posted by CyberShy
2. PRETT isn't really a 'real world' situation either, since why would someone who has technicall knowledge be unable to share it when he wasn't the first to invent it?

PRETT is the only rule that has been suggested so far (other than OTT) that has no restrictions on what can be traded, nor with whom. The only restriction is where.

[Prussia]

Diplogames are our way of interacting as World Leaders would, responding to situations and dealing with them accordingly through diplomacy with real, intelligent, tactful and sometimes malicious (:evil) opponents, and not obsessive, predictable drones.

In a way, it's our key to put the laws of the real world into a game, and amplify to an enjoyable level.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by CyberShy
n/m just realised what PRETT is. too difficult imho

If im correct its now:
TORaCT: 3
TORTO: 3

Since these two are leading we should focus on these I believe, for sure since theyre close together and therefor a 6 vote all together at least.

Both have a quality that can be shared as well, a new option, TORaCTO is possible as well
(trade only researched and conquered techs once)

I still believe that the TORTT (trade twice instead of the TORTO trade once)

I am willing to switch over to TORaCTT as a compromis:
- you can trade techs you researched twice
- you can trade techs you got for peace twice
- trading for peace falls under the same rules as normal trading (dont give techs for peace that you didnt invent or conquer yourself or that you traded twice already)

maybe TORaCTT is the acronym that we are looking for since the TWICE part is much more acceptable to though who hate the ONCE part in TORTO

I've thought it over again, and I've changed my mind.

I now cast my vote for TORaCTT.

[Robert]

Originally posted by MMC
PRETT is the only rule that has been suggested so far (other than OTT) that has no restrictions on what can be traded, nor with whom. The only restriction is where.

I'm sorry, you're right, I mixed up 2 acronyms.
I agree with you that the PRETT system is pretty real-time accurate, it's pretty complex and complicated as well though, and I think too much complications won't be any good imho.

[Robert]

Originally posted by OzzyKP


I've thought it over again, and I've changed my mind.

I now cast my vote for TORaCTT.

Great!

If the other TORTO / TORaCT (not TORaCTT voters want to concider to adopt to this compromis as well we may have a solution!

[deity]

With such a wide range of players trading techs for peace will easily be an uncontrolled rort with no limitations. Civ2 had techs from conquest. Civ4 doesn't.

I'm dead against TORACTT - You or subs have to keep track of each tech traded a maximum of twice; AND you and your warring partner/s may trade techs for peace BUT what is the limit? What type of war? A border dispute where one unit dies? Goody, you give me those 6 techs...

Absurd possibilities. Sorry Cyber, I appreciate the thought that you've put in on this but TORTO is way simpler.

But now I prefer NTT.

[Robert]

Well, if you're that serious against the conquest thing (I think you make too much of it, how many civs are willing to give techs to other civs, who can trade them, for a stupid reason) neither do I think it makes it more complicated (just have a list of civs you can trade, which you should have for the TORT part anyway)

But if you don't want the conquest thing anyway, do you accept a trade-techs-twice at least? no tech trading or tech trading once really ruins the game. You were not in HOTW6, which was a very boring game. Removing tech trading removes so much from the diplomacy part of the game, and trading it only once is about the same as no tech trading.

[LzPrst]

PRETT isnt difficult. its probably the simplest of all the choices. the only requirement to keep in mind is: Do I share a border with the civ I wish to trade techs with?
If yes - then go ahead.
else - you cant.

the only problem with PRETT is its time limit. somewhere along the line it will become obsolete and that will create a OTT situation. but all in all I think it a very interesting rule that I would like to seen tried out. the result would be that a tech would spread from a point of origin and outwards instead of jumping over whole continents. also, trading certain techs to your neighbours wouldnt happen as everyone knows you cant trust an aztec with nukes, or tanks for that matter.

considering that this is a debate we could compromise and decide to go for PRETT for a limited time period. and end it when the first civ invents astronomy or some other renaissance tech. it will be a test and if it works we can consider its extension. if not we scrap it.

the only question is what to do when PRETT expires?

as for our other options, TORTO, TORTT and TORacT all seem like viable solutions to me. I'm gonna update the vote board in a short while.

[OzzyKP]

I don't like PRETT. For one thing your allies won't necessarily be your neighbors. Think France & Russia in WW1. Plus as you note, at some point when we've got cities everywhere, then everyone will be on someone's border.

I think just keeping track of how many times you trade a tech isn't too hard. Twice is still more restrictive than we had in HOTWV.

[MMC]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
For one thing your allies won't necessarily be your neighbors.

That's what makes it fun...

By the time PRETT expires, both sides will be at a stage where it doesn't matter about OTT anyway. Just remember, if you set the cut-off point at Radio, then both sides will need Radio to be able to recieve as well as transmit.

Or, if you set it at Railroad, then you'll need an un-broken railroad through your neighbour's territory to reach your allies. This means you either need to make sure your neighbour has Railroad or you have Open Borders, so you can build it yourself. Now somebody tell me that isn't diplomacy at it's best.

So don't forget... PRETT isn't just scrapped when the first civ invents something. Other civs need to be on an equal level already to trade with them, unless they share a border. This helps to stimulate diplomacy and home-brew researching.

Of course, I see an exception in the case of Vassal States. Free tech trading should be allowed, unless the Vassal is cut off from all normal trade routes (such as coast, ocean, road, etc...). Think of the current situation in Iraq:
US invades; Iraq becomes US Vassal (doesn't take much truth-stretching); US rebuilds Iraq using US know-how (ie. US technology); Iraq decends into civil war...
Ok, the last bit doesn't prove (or dis-prove) my point, but I hope you see why Vassals should be allowed free tech. Especially if you remember that tech level isn't counted when it comes to Vassals being allowed to go free. Only population and land coverage.

But anyway... If we set a late-game expiry on PRETT, then by the time that stage is reached, OTT won't have anywhere as near as much impact. The most obvious choice would be Radio, but I like the idea of Railroad, since that leads to negotiating treaties to build railroads across continents... Just think of the Orient Express, and the impact that has had on the world.

[OzzyKP]

Vassal states only work with the AI, not with MP.

Also, I am very much against PRETT. Not only is it much more complicated than the other options, but it is a much laxer standard than the others, ending up, as you said with open tech trading. If Deity is leaning towards no tech trading at all, and you are leaning toward open tech trading, then lets find a compromise in the middle then?

TORaCTT I think is a nice compromise.

[MMC]

1. PRETT is hardly complicated: Do you share a border or not?

2. How is it lax? You can only trade with your neighbours, and if you don't like them... tough.

3. What the hell is wrong with OTT? If you mean someone who is still researching Alphabet, suddenly getting a ton of free tech from an ally who has reached Electricity... then yes, that's no good.
If you mean someone negotiating with 5 other people and playing them off each other by making secret alliances with them to get them to each research something different in return for the one tech that he has researched himself... I'm all for it. If a player like that gets caught, he'll have hell to pay - in-game.

4. If you're going to Roleplay a game like Diplogaming, you don't want to skimp on something like Vassal States. Whilst I understand it doesn't work in a standard free-for-all MP game, it certainly has its place in a Diplogame.

Finally, imagine this scenario:
Russia: "We have AK-47s to trade. We'll give some to China, and some to India... Hmmm, we're not allowed to trade with anyone else"
India & China: "We now have AK-47s from Russia. Our allies don't have them, but we're not allowed to trade them..."
Everyone else: "Is that going to stop the spread of AK-47s? As if!"

[Robert]

The problem with OTT is that all human players will trade all techs among each other so that 80% of the civs has the same techs and there's no real tech-race for about all players are equally advanced.

HOTW5 had a nice endgame where the different alliances didn't got the same technologicall knowledge (oftenly they were all ahead in 1 specific part of the tech tree)

After I read Ozzy's arguments against PRETT I agree with him, PRETT forces civs to be allied with their neighbours.

TORaCTT is a good compromis

[Toni]

TORaCTT sounds good to me!

[KunojiLym]

Acronyms are EVIL!!