MiniMap Trading

[Jon Miller]

no

and I don't care...

you are allowed to talk together in the game.. (Afte ryou have met)

you are not allowed to trade maps until the requisite tech

the difficulty in communication is an intended effect in the game

image this as a normal online game with no timelimits...sure, people could talk together all they wanted.. but they would not be able to trade maps until they had paper

Jon Miller

[Krill]

Jon, Game play trumps realism. Every single time.

you are allowed to talk together in the game.. (Afte ryou have met)

Yes, as it has been in the last 4 demogames this site has been part of/hosted.

you are not allowed to trade maps until the requisite tech

PTWDG: Allowed to trade maps whenever. No problems.
PTW ISDG: Allowed to trade maps whenever. No problems.
PTWDG2: Allowed to trade maps whenever. No problems.
C3C ISDG first round: No screens until required tech, that tech is Navigation. Diplo completely screwed up from that one fact.
C3CDG: No screenshots until Mapmaking. Game was fine.
C3C ISDG: Allowed to trade maps whenever. No problems.

I draw the conclusion that allowing maps whenever, or at a early tech helps the game along.

Hence I sugest that the ability to trade screenshots out of the game is brought forward to an earlier tech (ie as soon as one team has a certain tech, they can trade with anyone for the map), or map trading is allowed whenever.

All in the name of DemoGame Balance.

[Fried-Psitalon]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
no

and I don't care...

you are allowed to talk together in the game.. (Afte ryou have met)

you are not allowed to trade maps until the requisite tech

the difficulty in communication is an intended effect in the game

image this as a normal online game with no timelimits...sure, people could talk together all they wanted.. but they would not be able to trade maps until they had paper

Jon Miller

Clearly, you were not an active member of Team Apolyton during the C3C ISDG.

[Jon Miller]

I Am not talking about realism

I Am talking about gameplay... the gameplay is that maps can not be traded until paper

by removing that requirement, you weaken paper and disrupt the tech tree...

you are playing a mod, not vanilla civ

JM

[Krill]

And? Every single demo game I have been apart of has been a mod. Look at the rules for the C3C ISDG, look at the rules for map trading in all previous demogames.

Demogames have always had the rules changed. Trying to dispute that is futile. And I don't see people complaining about the rule changes from any of the previous demogames, apart from the first round of the C3C ISDG.

[Kloreep]

Originally posted by PJayTycy
mweh, and who will controll all of this?

Even if their own team doesn't know it, 2 turnplayers can always share screenshots in private.

The same applies to any rule. We just have to trust one another one whatever rules we agree to.

[Jon Miller]

well, I for one, wish to play vanilla Civ4...

and what mod was in the PtW DG?

JM

[Krill]

Being able to trade maps without map making. For example, the border treaty between Vox and GS was done before mapmaking. That is a mod, under your definition...

[alva]

Whatever the decision is, is should all or nothing. The less ambiguity, the better imo.

[Arrian]

I would prefer no map trading - mini or otherwise until paper.

-Arrian

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Krill
Being able to trade maps without map making. For example, the border treaty between Vox and GS was done before mapmaking. That is a mod, under your definition...

ok, I agree that maybe we shold have used words.. not the image

but the image was cropped.. so tha no new sights were seen by either party

so in that way at least, no map was traded

JM

[Krill]

but the image was cropped.. so tha no new sights were seen by either party

so in that way at least, no map was traded

And what you are proposing rules out even this. I can live with trading of maps of unknown land being banned, but it makes the game alot more difficult, and unfan, if maps of mutually discovered ares are not allowed to be traded.

[Wittlich]

Originally posted by Arrian
I would prefer no map trading - mini or otherwise until paper.

-Arrian

I concur. There is a reason why "paper" is listed in the technology tree after all.

[Arrian]

Krill - I assume you mean screenshots for the purpose of agreeing to city locations (border treaties) and/or warfare (invasion planning)?

I'm ok with that conceptually, but the problem is making sure that neither team gets to see anything they haven't already seen...

-Arrian

[Krill]

Originally posted by Arrian
Krill - I assume you mean screenshots for the purpose of agreeing to city locations (border treaties) and/or warfare (invasion planning)?

I'm ok with that conceptually, but the problem is making sure that neither team gets to see anything they haven't already seen...

-Arrian

Yeah, pretty much. I would not mind not being able to trade screenshots for warfare, but it will play merry hell with diplomacy if the teams are not allowed to agree on borders. I mean, if you ban all screenshots, then you have to ban all methods of communicating the same data, otherwise you are just adding MM to a task of diplomacy, instead of making the diplomatic choice illegal. There is no way that either team can talk about the land, as even saying "Everything to the west of the cow in the south to the wheat in the north is ours, everything to the east is yours, and noboy builds a new city within 3 tiles of the other teams city" is against the rules, as this may describe infomation that the other team does not possess.


The only problem I see with saying that one can trade screenshots of land that both sides can see is that someone will have to verify that it is true. And I think the game admins would not have much fun running around trying to sort out screenshot trades. If there was an admin team that could do it, and a forum for said team, say, which could be used to house treties, like in the C3C ISDG UN, then it could work. It would have to be run past the admins though. We would have to get a team of them, as well.