Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Balanced Pangaea PBEM

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Sir Ralph has convinced me concerning tech whoring.

    My (revised) vote:

    1. No communication outside of the game, even in the the turn thread.

    2. No tech whoring (i.e. if you acquire a tech through trade, you cannot trade it to someone else, unless the seller gives you permission).


    Number 1 includes renaming units to pass messages (and cities, for that matter). No communication will make for a very different game, but I think it will work for us, not against us. I think Nor Me is wrong in guessing that it will be a deterrent to war.


    Dominae
    And her eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming...

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Dominae
      ...you cannot trade it to someone else, unless the seller gives you permission.
      And how exactly will you manage to get that permission, in-game?

      That's two votes for in-game diplomacy (Dominae, alexman), two for out-of-game diplomacy (Nor Me, DaveMcW).

      Jshelr, Sir Ralph?

      Two votes for tech whoring (DaveMcW, Nor Me), two votes for no whoring (Sir Ralph, Dominae). I'll go with the majority on this one.

      Jshelr?

      Comment


      • #48
        Good discussion on everyone's part.

        There was nothing wrong with cooperation in the other games under the rules used. But I agree that we've made progress here on a game design that will be more fun.

        Let me put on my professional hat. Tech whoring is equivalent to allowing unlimited copying for resale of copywritten material. It will inhibit the market. Sir's proposal will produce an efficient market since the civ that spends the resources to research can recoup through sale.

        I vote with Sir on whoring since he feels the strongest on the subject. I think this vote will result in a much faster tech speed, however.

        I vote with Dom on method (1) above. Civ alliances are too powerful and reduce the fun. I approve of using them in already started games, for those rules demand alliances. Still, inhibiting communication will reduce alliances effectiveness and that is good.

        I believe the votes I've cast will let skills shine through and the better players win. But, I will vote that way anyway.
        Illegitimi Non Carborundum

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by alexman
          And how exactly will you manage to get that permission, in-game?
          By renaming your units, of course! Seriously, I guess it would be impossible. That's fine with me.

          jshelr, if tech whoring is barred, tech would go slower, not faster, right?


          Dominae
          And her eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming...

          Comment


          • #50
            - In-game diplomacy, when it comes to treaties.
            - No tech trading unless it's own research or the researcher gave permission.
            - Tech cost negotiations per email are allowed, but only after the techs being discussed are researched.
            - Bullying and no-treaty diplomacy per email (E.g. You withdraw that settler or else...!) should be allowed and would increase the fun.

            Comment


            • #51
              OK, at least we settled the tech-whoring issue. Nor Me, Dave, is that OK with you guys?

              I agree that bullying should be possible, as it is possible in SP.

              Perhaps we can come up with a list of things we can communicate by e-mail, so we all understand what's allowed.

              For example:
              • Trade negotiations, including demand of tribute.
              • Border negotiations.
              • Unit location demands.
              • After being in an alliance, attack coordination.
              • Permission to trade a traded tech.
              • Anything else?

              Comment


              • #52
                I'm not against a list of rules for communication, I just think that "no comm" would be simpler and more interesting. Basically what we would have is a SP game with really good AIs. Does the stunted diplomacy really bother you guys that much?


                Dominae
                And her eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming...

                Comment


                • #53
                  But will it really be like SP? In SP, you can tell the AI to get out, and you have knowledge of what they will accept in a trade. You can't do those things without some sort of communication.

                  So if we are going to allow some sort of communication, why not allow enough communication to make it more fun, or at least more fun for the bullies among us?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    jshelr, if tech whoring is barred, tech would go slower, not faster, right?

                    It is really the research rate that governs tech speed. Wtih whoring permitted, the average research rate may go down, slowing things considerably. the no tech whoring rule was part of the reason that research went so quickly last game.

                    i think barring whoring makes the tech market efficient and that it will go faster. people will want to trade as much as possible. whoring interferes with trading and also with tech production. with whoring permitted, researchers will think twice about trading and try to get everyone's bid before trading at all. Others will free ride as Sir points out. Why pay full price when the tech will be available on the whore market at less than half price soon? The only way to get everyone researching full out is to make sale easy and profitable.
                    Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      If we're having no communication, no tech whoring would make negotiations much harder. Not only can I not tell another civ that I want currency, I don't know which 1 civ I have to trade for currency with. I definately suggest we don't play with both.

                      I still don't think that research treaties or alliances can be prevented by forbidding communication.

                      The reason I suggested applying communication only to tech was because the only answer to my question of what the original problems were was that we were trying to avoid a situation where the advantage lay with a group of players researching ahead peacefully to get a military advantage.

                      By some strange coincidence, this kind of reasoning came from Dominae,DaveMcW and jshelr.

                      Sir Ralph, what exactly are you trying to achieve here?
                      Originally posted by Sir Ralph
                      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.
                      From many of the posts I've read, it appears that research helped in the last game. So why is no-tech-whoring being suggested to encourage research?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I agree with Dom on "no comm" but can easily live with a short list. expanding communications a little looks like a slippery slope problem and Dom's probably right that simple is best. i also have decided that I'm honoured that he apparently thinks i would be a really good ai.
                        Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          From many of the posts I've read, it appears that research helped in the last game. So why is no-tech-whoring being suggested to encourage research?

                          We used three ideas: first, you could buy tech on credit, paying later from the points scale in the editor. this makes your tech instantly marketable and you don't have to worry that others will get your customer. second, we agreed not to trade tech we did not research, third we planned ahead and set a joint schedule. This virtually created the max tech rate possible. Each tech you researched got you two in trade and the ability to sell the tech again, if possible. This is a three-civ job. So, it takes a lot of communication and arbitrarily excludes others, IMO.
                          Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Dominae
                            No communication will make for a very different game, but I think it will work for us, not against us. I think Nor Me is wrong in guessing that it will be a deterrent to war.
                            My theory is that open alliances are still possible but secret alliances are not. I don't think that's going to help war. They're might be more war early on but late on I'd imagine we'll all have sufficient defence and it will be reduced to the sit there and research staring contest you are trying to avoid.
                            The simplest result of one player attacking late on is for the others to gang up on them and attack them later. I think no communication will encourage this but diplomacy could result in a different outcome like one of the other players joining them.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              As I said before I'll play with no communications (if tech whoring is allowed; I think both would be unpleasant). I just don't think it will acheive what it was suggested for.

                              No tech whoring will achieve what it was suggested for but I was under the impression that several players wanted the opposite.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                "If we're having no communication, no tech whoring would make negotiations much harder. Not only can I not tell another civ that I want currency, I don't know which 1 civ I have to trade for currency with. I definately suggest we don't play with both."

                                The civ that has currency to sell -- the one who researched it -- will try to get you to buy it. It should not be necessary to ask around. I would not object, however, to advertising on the thread, open to all.

                                I can go with whatever is decided. This was an interesting discussion.
                                Last edited by jshelr; May 19, 2003, 16:52.
                                Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                                Comment

                                Working...