LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Planning and discussing Freeciv Longturn gaming
User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby Corbeau » Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:27 am

pungtryne wrote:I really hope for tech trading + tech upkeep. This sounds like a very elegant solution to me.

The only problem with this is that there are two parameters that change the thing drastically, Some heavy experimentation is needed to check the results. Although, setting some basic upkeep (as set in the current ruleset, only need to switch it on) would produce moderate results (tried it solo), which would be a good start.

Canik
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:26 am

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby Canik » Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:30 pm

I was heavily in favor of tech trading initally but now that I've read about tech leakage I'm more neutral on the issue. I may even start to lean towards tech trade disabled (and tech leakage enabled) because it probably is more balanced but.. like Corbeau said before, I think we should still have some mix no matter how the majority votes. Unless it's a total and complete landslide one way. So say 2/3 vote they want tech trading then 2/3rd of the games make with tech trading but still make 1/3 disabled.

User avatar
AndreasR
Elite
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 10:26 pm
Location: Norway

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby AndreasR » Fri Jul 28, 2017 5:41 am

I'm still in favor of having the game setting wanted by the majority of players. "The biggest reason for disabling the tech trading is that it makes the game unbalanced." is a pretty strong argument against, though.
Last edited by AndreasR on Sat Jul 29, 2017 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby Corbeau » Fri Jul 28, 2017 9:04 am

Well, I wouldn't call it "unbalanced" nor would I use this argument against tech trade.

Firstly, in what way "unbalanced"? Some alliances get ahead more than others? Well, with no tech trade it also happens that some players get ahead of others and it also doesn't depend on skill. It will mostly depend on who your neighbours are and if you get lucky with bribing idle settlers.

Also, even if you call it unbalanced, like someone said, that's how world functions. Multiplayer is not singleplayer. Cooperate or die. Successful "alliance leaders" will recruit everybody whom they can, the argument "I don't have time for diplomacy" doesn't stand, you just have to say "yes" when asked to go into alliance. And yes, it will depend on whether your neighbours are also cooperative or not, but everything else also depends on it, so, tough luck. Civilization isn't a fair game. No massive multiplayer game is.

And most important of all, like someone said, if you lose tech trade, you lose an important layer of the game.

All that said, I strongly believe that tech trade should go hand in hand with tech upkeep. I don't understand why nobody is playing with it already. I did a test game with default values from the Multiplayer ruleset, got to industrial age, it worked just fine. It smooths out, but doesn't eradicate, the difference between big and small nations, disables technically backward neations (no libraries, low Sci percentage) to receive high-techs. It is somewhere between "no tech trade" and "yes tech trade", how close to either depending on the numbers, and is basically an excellent compromise because it takes best from both and nullifies some downsides.

Canik
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:26 am

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby Canik » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:03 pm

Some good arguments there, Corbeau. Even with tech trading disabled lone nations have very low odds of winning.

Really the only way to make things fair for isolationist nations would be to make free-for-all games.

I guess I'll side with the pro-tech traders but I think a variety of game set-ups is best. Then everyone gets a little of what they want + I just like variety. Variety is the spice of life. :)

User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby Corbeau » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:08 pm

What do you mean by "free for all"?

cazfi
Elite
Posts: 1345
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:54 pm

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby cazfi » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:16 pm

When enabling/disabling tech trade, try to adjust sciencebox accordingly to keep overall speed of going through tech tree about the same.

User avatar
Corbeau
Elite
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:13 pm

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby Corbeau » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:19 pm

You mean that all players get tech roughly at the same time? Is that even possible?

Anyway, that would result in everybody setting Sci to a minimum and putting all to tax. Although, that may be an ineresting experiemnt. Although not really in the spirit of Civilization, but still.

But tech leak and tech upkeep roughly go in that direction. Especially tech leak.

cazfi
Elite
Posts: 1345
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:54 pm

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby cazfi » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:38 pm

Corbeau wrote:You mean that all players get tech roughly at the same time? Is that even possible?
No, I meant about same speed between different games. You don't want one game to last 4x as many turns as the other, I think.

Canik
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:26 am

Re: LongTurn game 6 for Freeciv-web

Postby Canik » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:51 pm

Corbeau wrote:What do you mean by "free for all"?


I mean a game that is every man for himself. Diplomacy disabled. Everyone is locked in war with everyone. Nations could still make unofficial agreements behind closed doors but it should reduce the size of alliances and make things as fair as possible for loner nations.

I wouldn't want every game like that but it'd be interesting to try one out.