Accounts e-mail HP

tech-city trading

Re: tech-city trading

Postby ifaesfu » Wed Oct 01, 2014 4:12 am

Corbeau wrote:BTW, how exactly did they disable conquering techs?


Oh! Again! How many times has it been said? Techloss is the only way and it is the way last ladder game is being played.
User avatar
ifaesfu
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 1:03 pm
Location: Huelva, Spain

Re: tech-city trading

Postby Corbeau » Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:12 am

Trade revenue can be decreased or removed and I have a hunch how caravans can be prohibited from airilfting. If that isn't possible, then simply ban trade routes like in LT33.
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: tech-city trading

Postby Corbeau » Wed Oct 01, 2014 9:31 am

thegrime wrote:I'm in favor of something simple to start with (at least until I figure out how to make the changes necessary).

Oh, and about this: what do you mean by "something simple to start with"? This is Civilization. It's complicated. It's supposed to be complicated. Also, once we start the game, we'll be playing it for moths with all the bad decisions we made at the beginning...
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: tech-city trading

Postby thegrime » Wed Oct 01, 2014 2:54 pm

At this moment, I'm not thinking of the "perfect game", I'm thinking of "a game". I'd prefer something that uses a known configuration (such as GT9), since it seems to me that it'd be easier to setup with incomplete knowledge of the system. Perhaps I'm being overly pessimistic in how much time it will take to tweak the game configuration settings, but since I'm not sure anything will work yet, I don't want to spend ages trying to get the game mechanics right while the underlying system isn't working...

Just my POV as the current caretaker..
--= the Grime =--

That is all.
User avatar
thegrime
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Chile

Re: tech-city trading

Postby Corbeau » Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:57 pm

Regarding knowledge of the system, it's certain that we won't implement something we don't know how to implement ;) Nor will we delay the game until we find out. However, I'm throwing ideas out to see people's opinion and then, if things get accepted, implement what we can, keeping in mind that things fit with one another.
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: tech-city trading

Postby morphles » Thu Oct 02, 2014 10:59 am

I'm against banning tech trade. As I already said in other post. It is far more important to remember to adjust tech costs according to map size and number of players.

For city trading, I do not think I care that much. In a way it makes sense, opens up lots of possibilites. In other way, it allows some stupid crap, and make alliances (official or otherwise) slightly stronger, by allowing trade of wonders, probably most important being statue of liberty (though if no anarchy is removed from it's effects, it might be allright).

@thegrime about GT7 (I was not there) seems like realistic and expected buisiness, allies helping to recapture cities, nothing fishy.

As for trade routes, one time bonus calculation must be adjusted, to variouos factors to avoid some crap like transport coming in with 8 caravans and generating thousands of gold on the spot. IMO something like 10-20 gold for distance equal to map diagonal length, and remove bonus from different nations (this is just pure bs imo, though I know why it was implemented) and different continents (as this is even worse, get city in some stupid 1x1 island and bam double revenue...). And what I think about permanent trade route output, you probably already know...
morphles
Co-Admin of GT10-Hexmap
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:43 pm

Re: tech-city trading

Postby IllvilJa » Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:31 am

Just a thought: no restrictions on tech trading per se, but instead use tech upkeep. If you have too little research, the total number of lightbulbs worth of tech you can upkeep in your country will be limited.

Could help limiting the value of tech trading, especially for small countries trying to get hold of hightech "for free". Now everyone have to work (or study) for their techs, even those that are stolen, given, etc.
IllvilJa
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:11 pm

Re: tech-city trading

Postby morphles » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:03 am

I hate the idea of tech upkeep. The aformentioned effect on small nations is the biggest part of all it's just an imbalancing bullshit. Also in reality there are plenty of small countries that are quite modern, take any small European country and compare to say india. Tech trading is not a big problem in my eyes. What is problem is retarded tech costs. GT9 had this in drows techs being plenty cheap world's tech level increased at ridiculous pace. If tech cost would have been doubled or quadrupuled I think it would have been much smoother.
morphles
Co-Admin of GT10-Hexmap
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:43 pm

Re: tech-city trading

Postby Corbeau » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:46 am

I believe the game should require that you research tech in order to have tech. With tech trading enabled, it doesn't matter how much you research and how well you actually manage the civilian aspect of your civilization, it matters how many friends you have. Simple as that.
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: tech-city trading

Postby morphles » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:08 pm

Blatant nonsense. Having techs does not really describe ether economy or industry. You can have all the techs you want, but if your production and income sucks (no improvements, terrain not worked properly) you'll not go very far. Tech trading is very important for diplomacy, and also important additional venue of attack. As for friends they can matter just as much even without tech trading.

Also I think I said that I would like to see unit trading, though thats not possible without city trading, this would allow even backward countries to have advanced units. And this can be fun in many ways. First of propping some nation can be very effective in certain situations. Second, it would impose bigger need for establishing of embassies, it would mean just because nation has advanced unit does not mean it has a tech for you to steal. This again can be useful in certain strategic situations. Nation deep behind front lines can be producing advanced stuff and sending them to the front lines, without giving tech to front line player, thus not exposing alliance to tech steal. And no simply sending units is not the same, due to upkeep and such. One can play democracy and pup adv units quickly giving them to communist who can deploy them all over the place without any penalties. Just imagine the possibilities!
morphles
Co-Admin of GT10-Hexmap
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:43 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Polls

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest