A Mercenary Team anyone?

[UnOrthOdOx]

All teams would have to first approve the concept.

A Mercenary Team would expressly NOT be interested in winning, but rather in providing a service. Specifically troops when and where needed.

Look for Team Mercenary to:
Expand aggressively to open areas.
Strive to never break any deals with any team.
Offer military units for rent for an equal cost to all teams.
Seek a strong economy to support as many units as possible.
Keep ALL negotiations secret.
Divulge ALL completed contracts to the public. (once in game contact is made with all teams)
Offer a privacy fee to keep your team name out of said public statements.

Team Mercenary will not, however, engage in:
Attacking a neighbor unless we are either paid to, or they attacked us first.
Permanent alliances of any kind.
Knowingly break agreements/backstab. (mistakes can happen, we are human, in such cases reparations will be made.)


If that translate into winning, we won't complain. It's just not our primary goal, Win uber alles

How the contract system has worked rather well in a Civ 3 demogame:

http://forums.mzocentral.net//index.php?showtopic=14703

For public discussion:

Reasons for Change

• To better serve potential customers, and include features requested.
• To better balance the Mercenary Concept.
• To close flaws evident in the old contracting system.

Disclaimers:

• This is still under discussion and subject to change. Any change will be added in to this public thread however, just as all Mercenary workings will be public.
• This is to be used as a GUIDE only. We will ALWAYS entertain lower offers and alternative forms of payment (tech, workers, etc).
• If your team has been quoted a price for a given contract already that has not been agreed to, this new standard pricing format will supercede past prices.

GOALS

• Provide a standard for all teams to see that they will know our dealing with them is fair and equal to our dealing with any other team.
• Provide a standard by which all teams will be able to reasonably predict, and therefore plan, for the expenses of hiring the Mercenary team.
• Keep the contracts affordable, yet not neccessarily cheap, that all teams will have the opportunity to hire should they choose.
• Open discussion with the public on possible changes with the format for how contracts are priced.

New Standard Pricing Format

• Team Mercenary will now rent out units on a 10 turn basis.
• Each unit's set price will be 1/5 the shield cost. All units are guarenteed to be vetran units or better. Pricing subject to negotiation, as always, but full price will not be declined unless Team Mercenary is unable to complete the order.
• Team Mercenary will provide delivery services (ships) at no cost, and Team Mercenary maintains full control of said transport ships. We can and will make combat boats available for rent in the future.
• Payment is due no matter what our units do. If our units all die on turn 1, or if they just protect a position for 10 turns, we get paid.
• During that time frame they can ask our units to do anything (except disband).
• The Hiring team is ensured that the units hired will not be used against that team for 5 turns after the contract is fulfilled OR they leave the hiring team's territory. Whichever is longer.
• The Hiring team is ensured that the transports used to transport their troops will not carry units to be used against them until 3 turns after dropping off the troops or they have left the hiring team's territory. Whichever is longer.

Acknowledgements

Team Mercenary would like to thank all teams that have made suggestions and recomendations on both the hiring and receiving ends of contracts. The understanding and assistance of all teams involved to date has been more than we could have hoped for.

Obviously pricing will need to be addressed, as well as a few other changes that come with Civ4, notably, the option to gift units.

Is there any interest in forming such a team for the (apparantly) upcomming MP demogame


Members:

UnOrthOdOx
Kloreep
=CrONoS_QC=
OctavianX

[Jon Miller]

I don't like the idea of a mercenary team (I think all teams should go for victory), but I would play in a game where someone was a mercenary team

JM

[Jon Miller]

I also reserve the right to change my mind

JM

[Beta]

I do not like the idea of a team not having 'winning the game' as its objective. This gets us into the idea of playing for second place, which IMHO is paramount to a shared victory, and I do not want this game to go anywhere near there. The premise to a civ game is that each team is trying to win. Pure and simple. Anything other than this is an aberration I believe does NOT belong in a demo game. It corrupts the diplomatic dynamics, in the same way as two teams playing for a shared victory does.

[Rysz]

Although I don't intend to join the team, I think it's a cool concept. Gives a nice differentation to the game.

I assume this only works in a all-human-players game?

(I always liked this "creative" bending of the rules... In monopoly we always created agreements, although in later rules this sort of things were forbidden, it gave lots of fun at the time)

Good luck with it!

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Beta
I do not like the idea of a team not having 'winning the game' as its objective. This gets us into the idea of playing for second place, which IMHO is paramount to a shared victory, and I do not want this game to go anywhere near there. The premise to a civ game is that each team is trying to win. Pure and simple. Anything other than this is an aberration I believe does NOT belong in a demo game. It corrupts the diplomatic dynamics, in the same way as two teams playing for a shared victory does.

Where do you get such drivel?

If two teams form an alliance and emerge as the sole survivers of a game why cant they declare a shared victory? Its in the dam game mechanics now to do that! And what about the coalitions of the past?

WWI?

WWII?

I dont like this "There has to be one winner" BS. It leads to the kind of backstabbing and lying BS we have seen in the C3C Demogame.

Wake up and think about this Beta!

[Jon Miller]

I think that there is a difference between:

1 shared victory
2 going for second (or worse) place
3 going only for first

1 and 3 are well and good (especially if the game supports them)

2 I don't like, but as I said, I would probably play with a group that had 2 as their goal (like the mercenary nation would have)

Jon Miller

[notyoueither]

Yes, con, if we agree that shared victory conditions will be active, it is in the mechanics.

However, what Beta is questioning is whether we should agree that those mechanics be employed.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Yes, con, if we agree that shared victory conditions will be active, it is in the mechanics.

However, what Beta is questioning is whether we should agree that those mechanics be employed.

NYE part of the arguement Ive seen in the past is that IT WASN"T in the mechanics. Just trying to counter that one before it came up

Go for your Merc Team UnO. Part of the fun playing with Humans is NOT having to play like an AI and doing diplomacy and building relationships. And not having to worry about the necessity to screw over your best ally in the end because heaven forbid if we had shared victory

[GeoModder]

It sounds like the Indian civ would be perfect for this.
How does Where do you want your worker today! sound?

[UnOrthOdOx]

In response to Beta:

A little explaination of how the Mercenary team works might reduce some of your fears.

First of all, Team Mercenary is announcing it's intentions from the beginning. There is no surprises here, everyone knows what we are about.

Team Mercenary does not make alliances, period. We rent units for 10 turns at a time, period. The price is equal to all teams. No one will be turned down if it's within our ability to provide the service.

Team Mercenary will fight no offensive wars on it's own behalf. We get what we get territory wise. We are not out to expand. For the sake of fairness as well, we will not engage in receiving territory for payment. (My understanding is this is much less an issue with Civ 4 anyway, allowing a decent military without vast territory)

ALL negotiations with other teams are shared publicly once Team Mercenary has contacts with all teams, much similar to this thread:

http://forums.mzocentral.net//index.php?showtopic=15246

I will agree this is outside the 'normal' game concepts, it also is a steady factor that teams can strategise to, and plan for: Costs are known, can be planned/saved for.

Allot of folks were concerned at the beginning of the above game. Team Mercenary has had no complaints with our implimentation of the concept, and all in that game would testify to our fair implimentation of it. We began that game on a continent with 3 other nations. Each one has hired us against one of the others to date. Details in the above thread.

[Daddy-O]

I have no problem with a mercenery team.

Loyalty & troops - for a price of course.

[James]

Fun concept. Make sure you do this, it will add to the game.

[John-SJ]

I think a mercenary team could be an interesting idea. I do think that things other than money might be considered for services though, trade deals being one possibility. Another question, does the mercenary team provide its own defense? Or might a mutual protection also be considered as part of a deal to provide troops?

Depending how the team was constituted to operate I might be interested in joining such a team. Could be a very interesting experience!

[binTravkin]

The idea is very good, yet there aren't much people wanting to join it.

Unorthodox, maybe you need to announce it as a team where you can see everything what is going on (a mercenary team is likely to open borders with everyone), an observer team.
For example, as Mercenary team's plans would not be so secret as other team plans, one could join mercenaries, have a look of things and then leave and join some other team (but only one with whom Mercenaries have contact at that time) - so say, 'be hired'.