History of the World XI [Diplomacy Game] [Setup]

[Robert]

Seems like we end up with 10 players:

1. Arvcran - Hayuna Capac - Inca
2. The_Aussie_Lurker - Zara Yaqob - Ethiopia
3. Lincoln - Stalin - Russia
4. dacole - Elizabeth - England
5. Beta - Augustus - Rome
6. Nolan - Darius - Persia
7. CyberShy - De Gaulle - France
8. Deity <--- need leader/civ info!!
9. Toni - Pacal II - Mayan
10. mrboo123 - William of Orange - Netherlands

Since I want to create the maps tonight, I suggest the following, based on the votes that have been casted so far:

- epic or marathon
Epic: (1) Aussie_Lurker
Marathon: (1) CyberShy

I'll switch my vote to Epic, to secure a win for "Epic".

Epic: (2) Aussie_Lurker, CyberShy
Marathon: (0)

We play Epic, unless between now and 8 hours 2 or more people vote for Marathon.

- map size
Large: (0)
Huge: (3) Aussie_Lurker, CyberShy, Toni

This is a difficult one. To ease Arvcran video card, and since DD is sadly missing and we only play with 10 civs, we may better go for "Large" with "low sea level"

If Toni or Aussie_Lurker (or 2 others) agree with me on this, we can make that a democratic decision

no tech trading: (0)
no tech brokering: (4) CyberShy, Aussie_Lurker, Nolan, Toni
free tech trading: (0)

No Tech Brokering it is.

- goodie huts
no goodie huts: (1) CyberShy
goodie huts: (1) Aussie_Lurker

I'll cease my "No goodie huts" attempt and change to "Goodie huts" (to make the democratic process easie r)

no goodie huts: (0)
goodie huts: (2) Aussie_Lurker, CyberShy

Goodie huts it is, unless in the next 8 hours 2 or more people vote "No goodie huts"

- map type
Big & Small: (3) CyberShy, Aussie_Lurker, Toni
Others: (0)

Let's go for the "busy" Big & Small map

choose religion after discovering religion tech first:
- Free Religions: (2) CyberShy, Aussie_Lurker
- static religions: (0)

Another new BtS feature that's in: Choose religions!

-----------------------

Last problem, what civ/leader do we pick for Deity, assuming that he won't pick a civ in the next 8 hours. (I tried to contact him in all possible ways) (granted, there aren't much ways to contact him, since I have nothing but PM and AIM)

We can:
a) pick a civ based on information we have about which civ he may wanna have. (Ozzy, Nolan, you know this?)

b) put his civ on 'random' for every map type (which gives him 10 possible leader/civs, and his map vote may depend on it

c) Just pick a civ for him which is the best according to us

d) Pick the civ he played in HOTW 8 or HOTW 9

since (d) is not a good option, IMHO, I suggest to go for (b) unless somebody can give us some (a) information.

Am I forgetting about anything?

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by CyberShy

By 1000 times I meant Civ IV not BtS.

Well, in BtS there's a *new* game option that's in between tech trading and no tech trading. That's why we kept asking you, because you kept insisting that you already had played "No Tech Brokering" games, which you thus didn't, as we espected.

I am aware of the option (originally I wasn't aware of the name it was givien),. We have all played the same option in other games, we just didn't have the ability to "click it" on in a setup screen.

I have stayed out of the "philosophical" debate until now because I am really not interested in debating the different merits of settings anymore. (I did that enough in Civ II with 2x2x king vs 1x1x deity) But, as a "lesser skilled player" I will explain why I am so vehement on this issue.

If people can trade or broker techs it diminishes the value of researching them. That is an undeniable fact. And as a "lesser skilled player" or perhaps a "more science oriented player", I believe the value of the library I build should be equal to the value of the barracks someone else builds. Tech swapping allows others to build the barracks, or the settler or the worker etc.... and still get the value of any library thru a "no-cost" exchange.

OK here is an example that is definitely used for illustrative purposes (so please don't tell me that the numbers are off by x%) but, will hopefully express my point of view:

5 players get together, each research a different tech individually, then broker them to each other while they build barracks, settlers, workers, military units etc...., or pursue some other strategy. They get 5 techs in the time they shoudl only get 1 but are still 4/5 on the way to their other strategy.

Player 6 builds libraries, cottages, chooses traits that promote science, and concentrates on researching techs. He seeks a non-military stance (in a diplo game ). He out researches others 2-1 and still ends up behind in techs or, at a minimum, is not rewarded for choosing a scientific strategy as opposed to others., If 5 players come to a tech agreement, they effectively research at 1/5 the cost. this makes a person who chooses a scientific strategy or a combo of science and other staregies impotent to the extent of the science portion. Thus, this strategy is eliminated from the game. Techs are something that are researched and passed around as opposed to researched and valued.

TECH BROKERING would be equivalent to 2 players entering in an agreement where Player A sends X units to Player B in exchange for Player B sending X units o Player A, BUT BOTH PLAYERS STILL KEPT THE UNITS THEY SENT EACH OTHER AS LONG AS THEY BUILT THEM THEMSELVES. There is no cost to the transaction to the 2 players only benefit. More Important, it seriously downgrades the value of units.

TECH TRADING would be like 2 Players sending each other the X units, while they still kept the units they sent... JUST AS LONG AS SOMEBODY BUILT THE UNITS REGARDLESS OF EITHER PLAYERS ABILITY TO DO SO..

I wonder if people would be for free unit trade IF YOU DIDNT LOSE THE UNIT WHEN YOU TRADED IT. The outcome would be tons of units each unit being less meaningful because the players didn't have to expend the energy to build them.

That would be an "OK" game... I guess. But, it wouldn't be a game that I wanted to play. Nor do I want to play a game where techs are passed around at no cost.

Thats my opinion. Like I said I don't want to debate settings anymore. So if I don't respond to future posts that differ with my opinion please understand..

[deity]

I don't have BTS yet so no decisions from me yet

If I play I really want marathon, no tech brokering, huge map pls.

And I'd like no goodie huts.

And I don't mind a map change but it can't be called HOTWXI - note the single X Cyber

[OzzyKP]

I understand where DD is coming from. And I wouldn't be opposed to a no tech trading game (not that I'm playing). It would also be interesting to check out those mods Aussie_Lurker suggested where you don't trade techs directly, but if you have open borders with a civ who has X tech researched, you research it quicker.

It is a more accurate type of tech exchange governed by the treaties. There are many good points to it that might satisfy everyone:

1. You still have to research all the techs yourself.
2. It makes open border treaties more important
3. It cuts down on fixed tech trading alliances
4. Weaker players still get a big leg up with their research.
5.. More historically accurate

That's my recommendation at least to hopefully resolve this dispute.

[Robert]

Originally posted by deity
I don't have BTS yet so no decisions from me yet

If I play I really want marathon, no tech brokering, huge map pls.

And I'd like no goodie huts.

And I don't mind a map change but it can't be called HOTWXI - note the single X Cyber

Deity: we really need your leader/civ choise!

Oh well, maybe it's better to wait 2 more weeks, then I'll produce the maps then.

Toni, you'll continue to urge all players to vote, right
If Deity votes "Marathon" then I'm back to Marathon as well, so we get a majority for Marathon

@Deity: why can't it be HOTW 11 if we're not on Terra map :P

@Deity_Dude, indeed, tech alliancies are possible with No Tech Brokering. Which only makes it more interesting! It's important to have an allie, instead of being an isolationist! It's a diplogame after all!

[Robert]

Such a mod would be interesting, but is that mod ready for BtS before we start playing?

[Robert]

Epic: (1) Aussie_Lurker
Marathon: (0) Deity, CyberShy

- map size
Large: (0)
Huge: (4) Aussie_Lurker, CyberShy, Toni, Deity

Note: maybe we should go for Large with low sea-level to spare the graphics card of Arvcran, and prevent possible problems during the game!

no tech trading: (0)
no tech brokering: (5) CyberShy, Aussie_Lurker, Nolan, Toni, Deity
free tech trading: (0)

Big & Small: (4) CyberShy, Aussie_Lurker, Toni, Deity
Others: (0)

- Free Religions: (2) CyberShy, Aussie_Lurker
- static religions: (0)

1. Arvcran - Hayuna Capac - Inca
2. The_Aussie_Lurker - Zara Yaqob - Ethiopia
3. Lincoln - Stalin - Russia
4. dacole - Elizabeth - England
5. Beta - Augustus - Rome
6. Nolan - Darius - Persia
7. CyberShy - De Gaulle - France
8. Deity <--- need leader/civ info!!
9. Toni - Pacal II - Mayan
10. mrboo123 - William of Orange - Netherlands

@Ozzy: regarding your suggested mod, it seems like you'd better just have Open Borders with all civs with such a mod, it makes no sence to not open borders, because you just only cut yourself.

[OzzyKP]

If you were ahead in the tech race you wouldn't have much of a motive to open borders with people, because they'd benefit - not you. So, as with tech trading, it'd be usually limited to allies. But instead of just being handed a bunch of tech, your allies still have to research it, they just get a big boost doing so.

And if a civ is truly neutral they can go for open borders with everyone.

I think it gives more strategic choices.

[deity]

Cyber, HOTWXXI = HOTW21!

[deity]

Also, I think a History of the World should either be an Earth map or a Terra map. No big deal

[deity]

How can I pick a leader if I don't have the game? Or am I being lazy and not reading about the civs? Send me a link = me very busy at moment...

Hey listen, get Toni to pick it if it holds up the map. He knows what I'd like.

[Robert]

Deity: I'll send you a link with a list of all leaders and traits through PM.

it's excellent (will soon be released through poly) but not public yet, so you can beta test it

Check your PM! (I don't have your e-mail!) (wish I had it though, it's hard to reach you these days )

[Robert]

Originally posted by deity
Also, I think a History of the World should either be an Earth map or a Terra map. No big deal

Thanks! It's fixed now

@Ozzy: You have a point there. Anyway, I'd be interested to test it for sure! Maybe for the next HOTW game with all veterans back in

[Toni]

Hey listen, get Toni to pick it if it holds up the map. He knows what I'd like.

Toni will take care of the old aussie boy

[Toni]

By the way here is a nice doc to help ppl with BTS (DEITY)


Thanks Arvcran