idea to solve rampant tech trading

[dikwhit]

Odd things seem to come into your mind when sitting on an extended computer turn while playing civ, and for a change I believe this one actually has merit.

One of the bigger complaints ive noticed (excluding spearmen vs. tank) is the rampant tech swapping by the AI. I dont know about anyone else, but I play generally monarch/emp huge games. I generally have a tech lead by the early industrial age and research then set at 80-100%, with the tree completeby 1850 give or take.Trading techs until they are 3-4 steps behind me is out of the question,however, due to the give to one, trade it to all because if you dont do it the AI does in a turn or two.

As a possible solution to this problem, how difficult would it be for Firaxis to enable yet another trade option? Adding a simple diplomatic agreement that is only enabled when tech-trading is involved. Tech may not be retraded by the civ receiving it for "X" number of turns.... where X is a negotiable number.

When the computer is the one trading the tech i would assume they would not allow the player to trade it until he could have researched it w/ a 50% science setting, or however many turns he has left if he is researching it. When the player is the one doing it... well their reasoning and motivation is up to the individual, but again there would be a top-end limit.

Im no rocket scientist, but i cant imagine that something along these lines would be difficult to add to the game and would make tech-trading/hoarding a much more interesting affair.

 

[BridgeBoy]

Sounds reasonable...and realistic too. Like Patents on new ways of doing things, or contracts to use someone else's ideas/discoveries. I like it.

 

[Mavfin]

I only do tech-selling on my turn, i.e. *I* call up the civ(s) and offer the tech. And, if I offer a tech to one, I offer to all, richest first, as best I can get the order right.

I never, ever, sell a tech to a civ that calls me up between turns. If I sell say, China, a tech between turns, all the others that have anything to buy it with will have it before I get to do anything on my turn. Therefore, if they call up offering for a tech between turns, I'll sell them something else, or give them a couple gold to keep them happy, and then call them up and sell the tech on my turn. They still all have it quickly, but *I* sold them the tech, rather than someone else making the cash.

In fact, I used this, getting obscene amounts of gpt, (in 1.17f) to finance running science at 100% and still making over 1000 gpt for about 20 turns, netting 2.5 more techs in the process....rinse and repeat, if you have the 2-3 tech lead to do it...I believe I sold Industrialization when I had 3 ahead of it, Sanitation when I had Hoover built, and sold Radio when I had 4 modern-age techs done...basically every AI gave me all they had, in lux/gold/gpt. I was making over 2000 gpt from other civs in a huge map game with 12 civs left...



Now, if I buy a tech from an AI, especially one of the 'extras', if I either know I can build the wonder before anyone else, I'll sell it to everyone on my turn, and even give it to have a 'gracious' civ if they dont' have the money sometimes....remember, I only do this on techs I got *from* the AI, so all would have it soon anyway..

 

[Grey Knight]

I agree, the "use, but cannot sell" clause would be invaluble. Many times I have a tech lead, and get into a multi-party war. I want to give the latest tech to my weaker partners, but I don't need them trading it away to a neutral 3rd party, and then ending up in the hands of my current enemy one turn later!

On the other hand, being that neutral party can be very profitable Even so, I'd like to see this implemented.

See my sig for my thoughts on tech devaluation...

Cheers,
Shawn

 

[dunk]

I've been able to sell techs at very high prices as well. I've sold techs for 200+ gpt, lump sum, and a map (which the computer players find far too valuable even after the entire map is revealed).

I think the devaluation based on the number of civs having the tech is a bad idea. Motorized Transportation is very valuable despite 7 civs having it. I beleive in Civ II, certain techs were valued by the AI more than others. They would always demand Gunpowder, Mobile Warfare, and Sanitation, regardless of how many civs had it... if they didn't have, they wanted it.

I think the initial selling price should be much lower, but you can still command a similar price from everyone in the game.

 

[Grey Knight]

International arms sales follow market economics. If there is only one supplier, the price will be high. If there are many suppliers, the price will be low (since the suppliers must compete for business).

Cheers,
Shawn

 

[dikwhit]

my main issue was not with the economics but more the give it to 1 give it to all ie give it to allies... hated enemies have it next turn.

wish i could get techs for a song and dance lol
not that i sing or dance but thats another subject entirely

 

[chiefpaco]

dikwhit, I like your bravery for trying to post solutions on a board where anyone is allowed to criticize. I am not trying to attack your idea, but I will say what I like/don't like about it.

First, I think there is a tradeoff of frustration & play balance. I agree the tech trading amongst your enemies is frustrating, but by the sounds of your Civ skill (3 tech lead on Emporer), it might be the only thing keeping you from running away from the game.

The nice thing about tech devaluation in its current form is that it doesn't allow your sneaky enemy to profit from trading.

Your system could help, but is it too complicated? I have wondered what would happen if purchased techs could never be traded. Or, if the buying civ couldn't sell for a static 5 turns or so. It might keep things simpler thereby avoiding some player exploits.

With a negotiable limit, I can't immediately see how the AI could make it work for them. I have a feeling it might offer more control for the human player over all the civs.

Grey Knight, I like your analysis & approach. I can't really follow the return on investment part but it sounds like the right track. I'm also unsure if it devaluates too slowly for pacing reasons.

I think the solution to dikwhit's problem may lie more in the AI recognizing who are its friends & enemies. If each game tended to evolve into more of an "Us vs. Them" rather than "Me vs. World", it might make other things easier to swallow, such as crazy tech trading. I don't mind so much the AI sharing amongst its friends. Stiffer penalties for poor relations, like no trading between civs that aren't polite, & a clearer & more meaningful relation status could well contribute the problem, IMHO (and many other problems too).

They also upped the trading frequency between civs in 1.17, which made things even worse. AIs seem to be always friendly to each other in all the games I've played under 1.17. So, even my solution won't help unless they go back to 1.16 AI trading.

 

[dikwhit]

i dont know thats its frustration as much as consistency. you covered that fairly well with the hated enemies trading..... yeah like we would give the taliban enriched plutonium as an example.
generally i dont get that big a lead on emporer.. monarch is worse, kinda was averaging.
there are two popular schools of thought, set science to 0% or 100%. Unfortunately, the 100% setting leads to nothing more than " do i need cash for ..... lets sell every1 steel while im reasearching computers, or the like. One tends to end up realistically unbeatable once a three tech lead is reached, short of a major boo-boo. Maybe im asking for too much, but when i trade my ally motorized transpotation to help him out, id expect him to keep the tech...... at least til the war is over.
anyone that plays the 0% route, id be interested in hearing their points of view, mainly looking to build a" different mousetrap"

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by dikwhit


As a possible solution to this problem, how difficult would it be for Firaxis to enable yet another trade option? Adding a simple diplomatic agreement that is only enabled when tech-trading is involved. Tech may not be retraded by the civ receiving it for "X" number of turns.... where X is a negotiable number.

To make it practical, 20 turns, like all treaties. But of course, then you know that the checkbox would always be checked, so you don't need a checkbox.

 

[dikwhit]

I thought of the twenty turn idea and it just seemed excessive simply because even w/ a 50 % science setting... by the late middle/early industrial ages it doesnt take 20 turns to research a tech thats why i had suggested a negotiable amount of turns., but on the other hand anything that slows the trade it to 1 trade it to all situation we play w/ now would be an improvement.

 

[warpstorm]

How about 10% (give or take) of the time it would take you to research it yourself? This would cover the assimilation cost. You can't trade it till you can understand it yourself.

 

[Corvenus]

All those arguments are nice, and i agree that a new option to negotiate the # of turns for which techs cannot be traded would be a great idea.

But the only scenario discussed here are when you have a tech lead. I only play diety, and there is no way on earth i can be ahead of the other civs technologically (perhaps i suck, i dunno..). At most stages of the game, even if i put science all the way up it still takes something like 20 turns to discover new techs. Needless to say that they take alot less time to discover them. More often than not i'm anywhere between 5-20 techs behind everyone else, because of course they pretty much share all their techs.

What irritates me most, is that they trade techs among themselves for peanuts, while i have to buy them for big bucks, even if i'm at peace with everybody. And the price is barely lower with civs polite towards me.

The suggestions to fix a limit of X turns before a civ can trade a new tech (not only during trades, but also for techs you discover yourself) could help alot minimize the effects of the insane trades. But i'm sure there would be a way for Fireaxis to lower the rate of tech trading by the AI in the actual code. Perhaps they could limit the trade to 1 tech per X turns or something like that, to show that it doesn't make sense to just discover 10 techs just at once.

Anyway, i sure hope they're gonna do something about it, cause i'm getting tired of the game solely for that reason..

-corv-

 

[dikwhit]

Corv i agree with you on most things except 1...... If you research the tech yourself you should be able to reap all the inherant bonuses of figuring it out first...... and i mean not only for the player but the AI as well. BTW goody huts are not included as researching it yourself for this line of thought

 

[Corvenus]

>>If you research the tech yourself you should be able to reap all the inherant bonuses of figuring it out first

i'm not sure what exactly you're trying to say.. if you mean that you want to keep the benefits from selling techs when you're the first to discover them, well, if you're the first to discover it, you'll be the first to have the opportunity to trade it. If you meant something else can you please explain more in more details?

Btw, except in recent history, i don't know many countries who eagerly share their new discoveries. Usually countries try to keep their secrets for a while before sharing, especially for discoveries involving warfare. So the X turns limit before trading new techs could symbolize that..

-corv-

 

[dikwhit]

No what i mean is if you research it yourself ... human or AI you should have the right to do whatever you want with the tech sell, trade, or give it away. However, if you gain the tech by any other means than research there should be some sort of wait before you can profit from it.
My theroy on this is basically say the United States researches fusion technology. We may share this tech with anyone of our allies... UK and Canada leap to mind as probables. When we give this kind of technology away though it is generally with the express intent that while they could use this technology, they dont pass it on, say to north korea or iran.

 

[cegman]

How about the ability to sell or lend weapons to other nations that might save you the need to sell the tech

 

[Corvenus]

Ok i see what you mean.. ya it makes sense

But in any case i still believe that Fireaxis should somehow tone down the tech trading amongst AI, even when you're not the seller, cause as i said, if you're technologically backwards, this solution won't be of much help

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Why not make it mandatory??????

Why not block trading for say 4 turns ancient, appropraite values later every time?

Then give me the option to demand more????

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Killer
Why not make it mandatory??????

Why not block trading for say 4 turns ancient, appropraite values later every time?

Then give me the option to demand more????

Yes, it should be a certain number, representing the time it takes to assimulate the new knowledge.