Balanced Pangaea PBEM

[jshelr]

Last game was not a great experience. Communication outside the game dominated ability to play the game. Sir covered this ground well. I loved Dom's idea -- it makes the game civ. I also like this addition:

The object of this game is to permit and encourage more combat. To that end, I would recommend serious restrictions on tech trading. Last game, there was little time to build up a decent stack in the ancient era because tech trading had us in the middle ages so quickly. Moreover, the Zulu were punished for fighting to some extent in that aggression makes a civ less attractive as a tech trading partner. What do you think of no tech trading unless both civs have researched education? It's a little artificial, but it will make for much more time in the era that is probably going to be the most fun.

[Dominae]

Tech whoring, as in SP, is a downside of tech trading. I say leave it in.

jshelr, I'm afraid that no tech trading until Education would change the game too much (for me). The problem with Strat 4 is that all of us were peaceful for a long time, so we were actually one big tech research team. With six civs and the restrictions on communication, I think tech will progress slowly enough.


Dominae

[Nor Me]

Personally, I think secret communication should encourage warmongering because it is easier to organise military alliances. Dominae might have been more successful if he hadn't fought alone.

Every man for himself would make us more militaristic but probably not more aggressive.

I'd imagine no tech-whoring would discourage warmongers because they would fall behind in tech faster.

[Dominae]

Double-post.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Nor Me
Dominae might have been more successful if he hadn't fought alone.

There was a lot more to the situation than is being described here. Let's just say that fear of not being in the "researchers" camp made finding allies very difficult for Shaka. This was not unreasonable on anyone's part, as defense is so strong.


Dominae

[Nor Me]

Originally posted by DaveMcW
If a small group of researchers gets an age ahead, they can kick the butts of everyone who didn't research, thus eliminating half the competition.

Why is this a problem. It's a result isn't it? The winners still win by war in the end.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Nor Me
Why is this a problem. It's a result isn't it? The winners still win by war in the end.

It's a problem, because the staring contest leading up to Infantry/Artillery (maybe Tanks) is pretty boring.


Dominae

[DaveMcW]

The problem is that everyone realizes it, and tries to organize mega-alliances to be sure they are on the winning side.

Edit: Dominae beat me to it.

The two counter-strategies, 3 on 3 and world peace, seem to be unacceptable.

Personally I have no problem with world peace, especially if we plan for it by using accelerated production.

[Nor Me]

What exactly is wrong with 3 on 3 if it ends with war.

I can understand why we want to stop research agreements but why planned military alliances?

Why:

You can also not say: I will attack Z in about 50 turns, when I have Cavalry, If you want to join me, prepare now for it.

I would have thought that even non-agression pacts would make war more likely.


I just think that no communication or Sir Ralph's suggestions would discourage warfare so much that they might help the researchers.

[Nor Me]

So this is my proposal: No discussion of specific techs outside of the civ diplomacy screen. No discussion about when techs are going to be discovered.

Tech whoring, even exclusive research treaties allowed so long as they don't break the above rules. You'd still be allowed to discuss knights before chivalry was diacovered but not how or when you'd have chivalry to get them.

What would the effect of just that be?

[Harovan]

I'm still in favor of a general No-whore rule. I would feel very uncomfortable, if somebody used me like an AI in SP, bought a tech I invested 15 or more turns in, and then whores it to all civs I'm currently negotiating with by offering dumping prices. I would be greatly annoyed, if he ended with twice the money he gave me and I remain with the finger in my arse. I almost entirely dropped SP, because this stuff is a game breaker for me, and I would be very disappointed, if it took over in MP too.

Another question is: If we're not entirely satisfied with a deal, how do we say our counterpart, what we'd need to complete the deal? This can't be done in the diplo screen. Example: I offer somebody Iron Working, and he offers me Alphabet in return. I'm not happy with that deal, but would be, if he added 15 gold. How do I tell him, that I'd like to see these 15 gold? This can be done easily in SP by playing with the diplo screen, but without explaining PMs or emails it can take long to negotiate by just accepting/declining offers.

[DaveMcW]

If you're uncomfortable with tech reselling, don't be the first to discover anything. You could also sell techs to everyone on the same turn, giving them a small discount to make sure they buy from you.

I think it is a great way to prevent a research team from running ahead of everyone.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by DaveMcW
If you're uncomfortable with tech reselling, don't be the first to discover anything. You could also sell techs to everyone on the same turn, giving them a small discount to make sure they buy from you.

You can't do this. According to Dominaes rules, you can not tell anyone what you want. You can offer a tech and accept the counter-offer or reject it.

This mechanism is a competition killer. Just play like against the AI. Stockpile money, buy and resell. Somebody will be dumb enough to research.

I think it is a great way to prevent a research team from running ahead of everyone.

I thought there wouldn't be research teams?

[alexman]

I think we are getting confused here, because there are two proposals.

1) Follow in-game mechanics for everything. You're allowed to communicate with other players only to request that they put a specific quantity on the trading table (if they have it, or want to do so). For example, Alphabet + 15g, and you would then be able to offer Iron Working in-game, in SR's example.

2) No discussion of specific techs outside of the civ diplomacy screen. No discussion about when techs are going to be discovered. No incomplete trades for future (even unspecified) goods. All other private communication between players is allowed.

For both proposals, we have the option of disallowing tech whoring.

Do I have this right? All these options sound good to me, by the way, but I think my favorite is 1), with whoring allowed, to keep as close as possible to SP. My second favorite is 2), with whoring banned to slow down the tech rate.

Let's vote so we can get started!

[Harovan]

It's not the tech pace I want to lower with no-whoring. With active trade, it will remain almost the same. It's the fact, that research shall be worth something. I really really hate in SP, that I can win by space race not having researched a single tech myself. That's a big fun killer for me.