Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MP C4DG Chat Poll 3: GP Gifting

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

  • PLATO
    replied
    I've just read through this entire thread. Are there some really proposing that we break off into 2-3 team blocks of friendly little traders for the entire game? That's what it sounds like.

    If you want that kind of game then let's set locked alliances from the beginning and go for it...

    otherwise, let's keep it a balanced situation where multiple strategies are encouraged.

    Leave a comment:


  • NicodaMax
    replied
    @ Fried & binTravkin:

    It's amazing to me how these threads just feed up on themselves sometimes, ending up in rough arguments and ill remarks...c'mon guys, remember to have fun in the process

    Leave a comment:


  • BigFree
    replied
    Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx

    In this game here, however, I really have a hard time seeing any team sending GP to another team if that team has any sort of advantage on them. Who will help the larger team trigger their GA? It is suicide. No two teams are going to be equal, no matter how balanced the map. Are you going to help your neighbor who clearly makes more gold or production than you increase that lead?

    Conversely, it allows two weaker teams a possible means to actually remain in the game in terms of both tech and production, if only for a brief time. In the situations of the '2 team continent' you describe, it allows that continent a means of keeping pace with a theoretical 4 team continent sharing techs.

    I don't know. While I have a hard time seeing the leading team(s) finding trading partners, I see nothing but benefits possible for the rest of the teams since no permanent alliances has been decided on, I find the likelyhood of team blocks forming to be unlikely.

    I'm actually convinced it SHOULD be allowed in any competitive games with no permanent alliances.
    I had not thought about that before. Two teams that are not equal in stength BUT below the top team or two might use GP trading to help them get them caught up to the "top" teams.

    I agree with your point that a 4th place team would be adverse to trading GP's with a 1st place team unless it was bullied into doing so.

    Leave a comment:


  • Addled Platypus
    replied
    Team Banana is tied at the momement

    Leave a comment:


  • Chaos Theory
    replied
    Are GAs that cost 5 GPs really that helpful? After all, those are 5 very good units that could be used in other ways, and you sacrifice them for just 8 turns of substantially improved production/economy/research. Even if it's a good deal, the high cost lowers the benefit of GP trading for extra GAs.

    Leave a comment:


  • GeoModder
    replied
    Originally posted by Metaliturtle
    So I take it that Team AC thinks the game won't be fun unless they can trade GPs?
    Nope, just that it takes away part of the possibilities. (o yes, personal opinion )

    Leave a comment:


  • Golden Bear
    replied
    Sarantium has voted 8-5-1 on the topic of GP trading. As of 7 March, the Sarantines would vote no against this.

    Golden Bear

    [edit to update vote]

    Leave a comment:


  • Fried-Psitalon
    replied
    Yeah, I'm done here too. Let's vote.

    That play with Soren was really cute, btw - maybe if we explain the entire situation, he might have a different response, but since my nose isn't so firmly wedged, I'm not going to bother a game designer over it. Soren designs the game; that doesn't mean he has extensive experience in every implication of what he designs does.... it was my job to discover those implications for MP, in fact. Will it RUIN the game if we play with GP trading? By no means. Will it shunt people into very particular strategies and lower the overall flexibility and range of play options? By all means.

    Your ridiculous, baseless, and highly insulting remark as to why I might be arguing this point is actually factually quite wrong, by the way. I tend to play team games and 1v1s most of the time, so my experience is by far greater with GP-exchange strategies than blocked-trading strategies. So much so, in fact, that I have a very clear idea of exactly what this situation will create if GP trading is allowed. I really appreciate your carefully considered remarks on my character, though.

    It shows quite a bit about yours.

    Leave a comment:


  • Metaliturtle
    replied
    So I take it that Team AC thinks the game won't be fun unless they can trade GPs?

    Leave a comment:


  • Snoddasmannen
    replied
    Originally posted by binTravkin
    Team AC unanimuously wants to allow GP trading
    For the record, I voted banana

    and to have fun with the game.

    Leave a comment:


  • binTravkin
    replied
    Team AC won't continue to respond to this thread. We made up our minds and our opinion won't change. This thread unnecessary spoils the fun-experience for everybody. Some of our members even consider to leave this demogame because of the strict atmosphere around here.

    Team AC unanimuously wants to allow GP trading and to have fun with the game.

    Leave a comment:


  • UnOrthOdOx
    replied
    FP First thank you for citing actual experience with this in game.

    Second, I'm curious weather this is a subset of the locked alliances you refer to more than an indicative problem. Locked alliance games, all gold is shared between the locked teams, so assisting your partner to trigger a GA is a no brainer.

    In this game here, however, I really have a hard time seeing any team sending GP to another team if that team has any sort of advantage on them. Who will help the larger team trigger their GA? It is suicide. No two teams are going to be equal, no matter how balanced the map. Are you going to help your neighbor who clearly makes more gold or production than you increase that lead?

    Conversely, it allows two weaker teams a possible means to actually remain in the game in terms of both tech and production, if only for a brief time. In the situations of the '2 team continent' you describe, it allows that continent a means of keeping pace with a theoretical 4 team continent sharing techs.

    I don't know. While I have a hard time seeing the leading team(s) finding trading partners, I see nothing but benefits possible for the rest of the teams since no permanent alliances has been decided on, I find the likelyhood of team blocks forming to be unlikely.

    I'm actually convinced it SHOULD be allowed in any competitive games with no permanent alliances.

    Leave a comment:


  • binTravkin
    replied
    Sorens messsage is a clear indicator to me that GP trading was not a fluke that got left in the game, and therefore should not be banned arbitrarily because of that. Also, without games proving the overpowerdness of GP trading, i find the arguments of anti-GP traders made out of straw at best.
    Exactly my thoughts.
    If there was such thing as unintended GP trading, Soren would at least admit it (as he would be the first person to know it).
    Making up facts is not a good way to argue..

    Leave a comment:


  • Kataphraktoi
    replied
    Sorens messsage is a clear indicator to me that GP trading was not a fluke that got left in the game, and therefore should not be banned arbitrarily because of that. Also, without games proving the overpowerdness of GP trading, i find the arguments of anti-GP traders made out of straw at best.

    ''No one is going to be convinced of the other side, so lets make a poll and vote. Otherwise this could go on forever.''

    Leave a comment:


  • Krill
    replied
    I bet you would...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X