Game Settings - Runoff Poll - Tech Trading

[Sommerswerd]

This is a Final runoff poll...

The original poll was Game Settings: Tech Tradings

Choices

Tech Trading ON - Teams are allowed to trade techs with each other as well as trade techs that they received through a gift or trade

Tech Trading OFF - Any request for a poll will require at least two sponsors

Explanation of Choices
With tech trading ON, forming and maintaining tech trading alliances will be a critical part of the game... So diplomacy will be very important.

If tech trading is ON, we will have lots and lots of diplomacy-related talk, mostly revolving around making and managing tech alliances, and one time tech trades. We will always be talking about diplomacy, and meeting our rivals before the other teams do will be one of the most important things in the game.

With tech trading OFF, mastery of tile, city, and specialist micromanagement will be essential, because it will be those small advantages... an extra beaker here, an extra commerce point there... who gets a great person first and what type etc., which will allow one team to get ahead in tech, growth, everything.

If tech trading is OFF, the discussions about what we will do each turn will be dominated by MMing (micromanagement) talk. For example... Whether to work the corn or the gold and how many versus how much we will generate by doing one or the other. We will talk about this stuff anyway, but with tech trading off, it will be a much more important part of our game.

MMing is a little more technical and requires a little more research and calculation than diplomacy, because it is all about the numbers.

Diplomacy (diplo) on the other hand is a little bit less about CIV and more about people, politics and interpersonal relationships. The skills needed for good diplo are different from the skills needed for good MMing, but generally, it takes more CIV experience to be good at MMing than it does to be good at diplo.

ONCE YOU HAVE CAST YOUR VOTE, TRY NOT TO POST ON THE POLL THREAD TO SAY YOU ARE CHANGING VOTES. VOTE CHANGING CONFUSES THE POLL RESULT. ALL VOTES SHOULD BE FINAL.

Happy Polling!!!

 

[damnrunner]

There will still be plenty of diplo in a no tech trading game.

I think the greatest difference is that every team will have to play a more balanced game and we won't see as much specialization as was the case in the last game. This is the main reason why I support a no tech trading game.

Another reason is that it prevents an alliance with more members from completely running away with the game.

 

[remake20]

I vote normal, because I ing and I think it is a very fun thing deciding who to trust and who not to. IMO it adds another layer of fun and excitement.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I also think that depending on how diplomacy is handled, teams with more players and more active players have a big advantage in diplo because there are people available to handle diplo (writing messages, sending team emails, checking team email etc.).

On a Team that is run mainly by one person, that person does not have time for turnplaying and diplo, so their diplo usually suffers and they don't do as well in the game as a result.

This was what happened in the last game. The game leaders Cavalieros, SANCTA, and Kazakhstan had alot of active players and thus better results from diplo and as a result, did better in the game. Saturn and MS on the other hand were basically being run by one or a couple of people most of the time, and so they did no tdo as well.

 

[remake20]

So most likely everyone gets diplo advantage over Merlot huh?

 

[SilentConfusion]

Quatronia has a very few people too.

 

[nabaxo]

I vote on. Diplo will be really fun between teams.

 

[SilentConfusion]

There will still be plenty of diplo in a no tech trading game.

I think the greatest difference is that every team will have to play a more balanced game and we won't see as much specialization as was the case in the last game. This is the main reason why I support a no tech trading game.

Another reason is that it prevents an alliance with more members from completely running away with the game.

I agree with damnrunner that there will still be plenty of room for diplomacy, and I too think having "no tech trading" will force everyone to play a more balanced game.

With tech trade on I am worried that whom you are next to on the map can be too much of an influencing factor on the outcome. If your nearest to two teams who are non-responsive, whether due to lack of participation or a Tokugawa-esque foreign diplomacy policy, it won't matter how good you manage your land if all the other teams cooperate in tech trading. I am against any option that would make it possible to lose even if we as a team played the best out of anyone.

 

[Sommerswerd]

So most likely everyone gets diplo advantage over Merlot huh?

Not necessarily, because even though Melot has a "King" they still might have alot of people participating and advising the King. Merlot is taking a long time to elect their King. To me that is an indication that they are having alot of discussion and alot of participation.

Also, Merlot's King is accountable to do what the team wants, because he can be voted out. On the other hand, teams that have a self appointed dictator, that makes all the decisions and does not listen to anyone will probably be disadvantaged diplomatically.

 

[remake20]

Like SC said, Quatronia doesn't have many people either so we could have an advantage with more participation.

 

[Gingi]

Not necessarily, because even though Melot has a "King" they still might have alot of people participating and advising the King. Merlot is taking a long time to elect their King. To me that is an indication that they are having alot of discussion and alot of participation.

Also, Merlot's King is accountable to do what the team wants, because he can be voted out. On the other hand, teams that have a self appointed dictator, that makes all the decisions and does not listen to anyone will probably be disadvantaged diplomatically.

We have a lot more room so that mostly everyone can have a governmental position. (Diplomats, captain, pollmaster, etc. etc.) Also we have incredible participation from everyone. As SC said, if the people around us are unresponsive and non-participating then it would be hard to make a lasting alliance with them, especially with tech trades. On the other hand, if they are unresponsive because of lack of people, then their system will be weak and vulnerable. That way we can cripple their civ in the early game so they will be crippled for the entire game, giving us an edge that way. EDIT: No one said that we have to ally with the people around us.

 

[RasmCiv]

Im leaning towards no tech trading, since i think it would balance the game out. Team alliances could get a bit overpowered if both teams shared techs. Haven't voted yet though.