RULE PROPOSAL for making money.

[Inverse Icarus]

I am very yinterested in seeing this game through and want everything to be clear upfront. If you want to sign on MSN I could elaborate and discuss with you

[TORARADICAL]

I would like in on that as well. I am signed on, and would greatly appreciate an invite.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Okay, I'm logged in on MSN now.

[Aidun]

Ghenghis, I think that it is better to postpone the moment that you can sell to all the cities in the empire to Engineering or even to the steam engine:
Only with the emergence of trains goods could be transported all around the world, while bridges and better roads helped to transport faster and the wheel helped simply to transport by charts than on the backs of donkeys.

Furthermore, a road must always be a requirement to trade, except in the pre-wheel time, but then you can't trade to other cities.

I think that this should be the limitson trade:
Pre-wheel: only at home city
Wheel: in neighbouring cities of home city that are connected by a road
Engineering: to all cities within a range of 20 tiles from the home city
Steam engine: to all cities of the empire.

Exceptions: until the lighthouse has been built or the caravel is invented (Navigation), you may not trade to cities that cannot be 100% safely reached by galleys.
Until Magnetism you may not trade in cities that cannot be 100% safely reached by caravels.
Coast, sea and ocean tiles do not count when you measure the distance of a city.

Aidun

[Tassadar500]

Thing is, we have to decide whether we want it to be more realistic, or we want less time to get fully involved.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Aidun, your proposal is pretty much what I proposed only I didn't go into the far off details (no sense in confusing people in more than necessary).

[MrWhereItsAt]

/me flounders

OK, I think I know that city build orders will, from now on, be decided by individual Town Council units. Does this then mean there is no incentive for planning things on a civ-wide scale? Say that two towns want to settle an area, and they know they are in competition, so one town may decide to abandon the construction of something important (like a military unit) to get the settler quicker in order to pre-empt the other town settling the site they want. Even if the other town then recognises it has no chance and changes to the military unit in return, we could potentially be getting the unit later than is useful, and thus start to lose out gamewise.

And something that really worries me is war against other civs. This is going to happen sometime, unless we are going to give them everything they demand yet somehow maintain the military to deter an actual attack (which means we need at least to not be too far behind in tech, which in turn means playing at least a little seriously). If a city is menaced, why should the units of any other city help out? Other town councils lose nothing, but in the meantime we weaken overall and another civ could get closer to those selfsame other cities....

Unless I'm gravely wrong, we are going to lose the specialisation of builds that is what civ is based on, and instead having each individual city be self-supporting, or dead. Could we perhaps circumvent this with a system where other cities buy a stake in a settler or in military units using their resources, thus preventing competition to the level where it is detrimental to our chances of surviving as a civ? Even if we did this it would result in a delay whenever a city needed to hire another city's unit to defend them from an unforseen unit loss - is this OK?

It's all very well playing in a fashion that is deliberately Feudal and inefficient, but we are in Emperor mode with another civ already having scoped our territory. I am not so sure we can be totally complacent in our Civ-playing style. Perhaps if this was Chieftain or Warlord we would be able to dominate easily enough whilst playing in an inefficient manner, but this is Emperor, where you need to make somewhat of a coordinated effort to do well (or even survive).

I know that our goal is not to win, but our goal is certainly tied to our survival, for at least a large part of history. Can we meet this 'basic need' whilst playing with divided interests?

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
* MrWhereItsAt flounders

OK, I think I know that city build orders will, from now on, be decided by individual Town Council units. Does this then mean there is no incentive for planning things on a civ-wide scale? Say that two towns want to settle an area, and they know they are in competition, so one town may decide to abandon the construction of something important (like a military unit) to get the settler quicker in order to pre-empt the other town settling the site they want. Even if the other town then recognises it has no chance and changes to the military unit in return, we could potentially be getting the unit later than is useful, and thus start to lose out gamewise.

And something that really worries me is war against other civs. This is going to happen sometime, unless we are going to give them everything they demand yet somehow maintain the military to deter an actual attack (which means we need at least to not be too far behind in tech, which in turn means playing at least a little seriously). If a city is menaced, why should the units of any other city help out? Other town councils lose nothing, but in the meantime we weaken overall and another civ could get closer to those selfsame other cities....

Unless I'm gravely wrong, we are going to lose the specialisation of builds that is what civ is based on, and instead having each individual city be self-supporting, or dead. Could we perhaps circumvent this with a system where other cities buy a stake in a settler or in military units using their resources, thus preventing competition to the level where it is detrimental to our chances of surviving as a civ? Even if we did this it would result in a delay whenever a city needed to hire another city's unit to defend them from an unforseen unit loss - is this OK?

It's all very well playing in a fashion that is deliberately Feudal and inefficient, but we are in Emperor mode with another civ already having scoped our territory. I am not so sure we can be totally complacent in our Civ-playing style. Perhaps if this was Chieftain or Warlord we would be able to dominate easily enough whilst playing in an inefficient manner, but this is Emperor, where you need to make somewhat of a coordinated effort to do well (or even survive).

I know that our goal is not to win, but our goal is certainly tied to our survival, for at least a large part of history. Can we meet this 'basic need' whilst playing with divided interests?

Every single point you made was BROUGHT UP WHEN WE STARTED. Every point was well understood. It was pointed out that a city may very well be on its own in a war. I suggested we try a lower level than Emperor on the first run also.

Its something we are just going to have to deal with now that we've started. Perhaps a city in desparate straits may willing become a vassal of a stronger city to gain military support?

[MrWhereItsAt]

Uk. It was? I knew that not reading those old threads would bite me/us in the ass sometime...

Well, I hope we can stay at peace long enough to get something out of this game. Military operations (except against Barbs) will basically be out of the question unless we somehow work together on an amazing scale.

[Ennet]

Well, I guess any captured cities should be owned by their conquerors right? so if me and ghengis conquered a city together, we would split the tiles between us..

And another rule proposal:
The city will buy goods equal to it's income(or what it works)..

Like i posted in the other thread:

Originally posted by Ennet
The goods bought by the city should match the tiles being worked..
Example: City income per turn:
6 Food, 4 Shields, 5 Commerce, 15 total
then 6/15 of the money should be spent on food, 1/3 on commerce and 4/15 on shields..

This should be the same even in corrupt cities, so even if 4 of thoose 5 commerce are lost in corruption the city still buy them..
Corruption would only matter in the Pop x Cap + Com formula stated above.. etc, the city would have less money to spend on buying things but still buying as much..

[Aidun]

And how do you actually trade? Will there be a "trade thread in which everybody posts what he traded and where and how much money he made?

Aidun

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Uber KruX
There really should be some PHP script to help us with this

Once Farb clarifies all the rules, and we play through a couple of rounds so I can get the hang of it, I may look into making one. I made one for the Feudal Team in the MZO DG, but it was a different concept, and it never finished (we got screwed in the game )

I'm a bit of a self-taught newbie with PHP.

I've put together a few scripts already. Signup/login. Map administration (generate blank map, edit tile details). Business administration (create/edit business types). Auction tile/unit. Bid on Auction (no determination of who wins the auction yet though). I've been waiting for the $game details before doing anything further.

GF has the files. If you'd like to work together doing this, that would be great. We can either build off those, or start over completely (if you really don't like the format).

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Aeson


I'm a bit of a self-taught newbie with PHP.

I've put together a few scripts already. Signup/login. Map administration (generate blank map, edit tile details). Business administration (create/edit business types). Auction tile/unit. Bid on Auction (no determination of who wins the auction yet though). I've been waiting for the $game details before doing anything further.

GF has the files. If you'd like to work together doing this, that would be great. We can either build off those, or start over completely (if you really don't like the format).

I was discussing this with Esoteric before we knew some of the scripts already existed, and we were thinking about creating a new forum on his webserver, and building the feudal system right into it.

We were thinking of making a seperate forum for a bunch of reasons, the biggest one being that we could have little subforums for guilds or secret clubs, or each city, whatever.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

I wonder if I could set up some passwords on my site so the you guys could upload and test this stuff out without having to go through me......

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Uber KruX
I was discussing this with Esoteric before we knew some of the scripts already existed, and we were thinking about creating a new forum on his webserver, and building the feudal system right into it.

Sounds cool. If you want any help with the coding I'd be willing to pitch in.