Diplogames Rule Discussion Thread

[MMC]

How? If a civ is falling behind, they can choose to become a vassal. They can then demand techs from their master, but the master has every right to refuse. The master can demand techs from the vassal, but that would probably be pointless, if the master already has most of the techs that the vassal has.

As Frank said, human nature basically prevent any meaningful exploit coming from this. The only way it could be done is through constantly taking vassals and then releasing them. Now, whilst it is possible to absent-mindedly trade away techs, it's not very easy to keep flipping vassals to get the best tech advantage. You would have to be actively trying to break the rules.

[Robert]

Me and my two allies decide that we want to share our techs, update our armies and attack some cities. One becomes the vassal of the others and they freely share techs.

I think the rule is easy, only trade techs you invented twice. You can give them to your vassal, if you want to, but you can only do that twice with every tech.

[OzzyKP]

Maybe frank can confirm/deny this, but I don't think vassals work with MP. I think it is an arrangement that can only be made with the AI.

[Frank Johnson]

No its just that a human can't be the vassal on an AI. Humans can readily capitulate to each other.


Note that, the "peaceful" vassalage option is NOT what we're talking about at all. The only a capulation from a war will count. We will all balk if someone is waging fake wars and saying "oh nos I capitulate."

Besides, capitulation as a game mechanic will pretty much suck in a game with no AIs. No one want a vassal much less be one. The only advantage is that your war/peace status is the same as your masters, which with the AI means they'll send out there troops to fight. A human is under no obligation to do so though. ^_^

[deity]

I think permanent vassalage avoids any fear of exploits and allows a hoplessly behind civ to remain in the game, possibly with their master as the winning civ.

[LzPrst]

I'd rather have just vassalage than permanent vassalage. I dont think permanent anything is good for the dynamics of a game. what if the world situation changes and a vassal wants to liberate itself? war of independence anyone?

I say we go with the game mechanics as they are. add the TORaCTT and we're good to go IMO. that will allow for the most flexibility and the most fun. if anyone is pounded and agrees to become a vassal, it should still be possible to get out of it. being reduced to a permanent sideline just because you agree to vassalage once is kinda silly and against diploing as well.

[Robert]

America was a hoplessly behind civ in HOTWV. I allied up with India and my game became fun again. It was even possible within the TORT (basic form of TORaCTT) rules to buy my way to the top again, without any form of research.

I think that TORaCTT rule gives lots of opportunities for civs to be the junior partner in an alliance.