1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

ISDG ~ Ruleset

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Democracy and Team Games' started by Furiey, Oct 8, 2010.

  1. kleinerheldt

    kleinerheldt Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    51
    Perhaps we can delete this rule? I'm not sure about this.
     
  2. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    It may be an unecessary rule. The reasons that justanick brought up are valid reasons.

    War can be ended at any time the two tribes agree, so that's not at issue. There are many other ways of cancelling a trade agreement besides declaring war, so that's not really the issue.

    One way of looking at this rule is if you are party #3 and want to declare war on party #1 and disconnect the trade route between it and party #2. But I can't see this either (although it is a good strategy).

    So it comes back to the two parties involved with the trade agreement. Can anyone give a good reason why this rule is in place, such as which party it might protect and why?
     
  3. justanick

    justanick Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Messages:
    711
    Location:
    Germany
    I don't see any necessity for this rule. I guess this is just an "Altlast" that has never been relevant. :lol:
     
  4. PaGe

    PaGe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    247
    Location:
    Germany
    One reason for the rule 5.1 could be:
    You are team A and have only one ressource of iron. You are in war with team B and have peace with team C. Team C has no iron and wants to buy it from you. You will never give team C your iron for 20 turns, but 1 turn would be OK. You start the deal but not the by Civ3 intended 20 turns.
    Team C can then upgrade a bunch of units, declares war on team C and team B and C kick team A out of the game.
    The iron in this situation harms team A twice.
     
  5. I. Larkin

    I. Larkin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Messages:
    4,392
    If we remove 5.1 what the reason to have 5.2?

    I want some explanation about RoP. Can scout enter to Terriory and the ask RoP? Or team should send RoP question "during the turn"? How fast another team must reply?

    As a compromise CA2 -presave it must be a rule like " it is forbiden to send to another team save, pre-save, pastsave ets, exept "clear copy" to the next team to play".

    Why we need Semiamphibious units?
     
  6. PaGe

    PaGe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    247
    Location:
    Germany
    You have to ask the team whose territory you want to enter before you move inside. Else you have to declare war. The RoP mustn't be signed inside the game, but in a thread in the embassy.

    I think, the semiamphibious units are a relict of our last DG. It was an island-DG and we wanted to prevent, that a small strategic island is covered with some warriors, that block the whole coastline.
     
  7. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    PaGe, your example doesn't really work for me. I'm not fluent in German, so maybe I lose something in translation. Looks like we can eliminate 5.1, as it doesn't really protect anyone or serve an obvious purpose.

    I. Larkin, I believe if we eliminate rule 5.1 we should still keep rule 5.2, but 5.2 needs to be re-worded. Maybe this...

    5.2. A resource or a city that has control over a resource may only be traded once per 20 turns between two trading partners, unless the interruption of the trade was caused by a third party (3rd Tribe, to include Barbarians). In the latter case, the trade may be activated again. This would keep Tribes from loosely setting up trade deals and then cancelling them for personal gain or trickery. If you make a resource trade deal and break it, before you can include that resource in another deal with the same tribe, you must satisfy the 20 turn wait period set up by the first deal.

    I do like your CA2-presave modification. :)

    And I believe PaGe answered your other two questions.
     
  8. I. Larkin

    I. Larkin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Messages:
    4,392
    But if I ask for RoP and they do not reply: can I enter and finish my turn? Sometime border is seen only at second half of the scout move. The same true for Curragh
     
  9. Memento

    Memento The World is mine

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2003
    Messages:
    866
    Location:
    Bremen/Germany
    Against Semiamphibious units.
     
  10. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    No. You get permission or you don't enter their borders. You end your turn, send the save as normal and request permission to enter. If you wind up within their borders by accident, you have broken the rules. Just like Single Player, they can boot you out (by way of a Referee).
     
  11. I. Larkin

    I. Larkin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Messages:
    4,392
    In this case we should set time limit to reply for RoP offer. Galley often have no choice : stay in the sea or enter to the border. What referee action will be in this case?
     
  12. PaGe

    PaGe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    247
    Location:
    Germany
    Or I've lost some things at translating :rolleyes:
    The only thing that would harm the balance of the game is to give a team a resource for 1 or 2 turns for upgrading. In this time you can complete units, that you already have started and needed the resource, while the other team also starts the building of units, that need the ressource, and upgrades units. In this case the ressource is used by two teams.
    After 2 turns the first team cut the ressource from trade-net and reconnect it, so they can again build units, that need the ressource, and can switch projects, that have been a prebuild for the units. Even in the time you sold your ressource, you can "use" it.

    I think a better way to replace this rule is, if you say:
    A ressource is traded for at least 20 turns or til it is cut off by a third party. If it is cut off you can reconnect it and have to options.
    1. You continue the trade for the rest of the missed turns (which is of course less then 20 turns), but you aren't allowed to use the ressource in the turn you reconnect it (=> No upgrading or starting of buildung new units).
    2. You use the ressource after reconnecting, but then have to start another 20-turns deal, if you want to sent it again to your former trade partner.
     
  13. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    If you can't get around the other nation's border in one turn, you don't go. Unless you have received permission.

    If you end your turn and send it off, then ask fo permission in the diplomacy thread, you are documenting your request for permission. If the nation you have requested permission from doesn't respond with a yes or a no by the time the save gets back to you, send a message to the referees explaining that you have covered your responsibilities. The Referees will either stp the clock for your team or allow you permision to travel through their waters (the same would be tru for land travel).
     
  14. PaGe

    PaGe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    247
    Location:
    Germany
    Repeating the turn with declaring of war.
     
  15. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    :) Page, I reread my post about being fluent in German and edited it before you posted your quote of me saying it. :dizzy: I hope I'm a little more clear now.

    I think we are getting way too complicated here. :dunno:

    I don't mind loaning a resource to a team so they can upgrade and then cutting that resource off from them. But if you have done this, you can't resart another deal with this team that includes the resource for the remainder of the 20 turns initiated by the first deal.

    What I don't want to see is a team that says, "Sure, we'll trade you some Coal for 50 gold per turn so you can build your railroads." Then after a couple of turns that same team says, "If you don't end your alliance with Team A, we'll cut off your Coal!", thinking they can cut it off and then continue the deal after they have pressured the other team to end the alliance. No, once you end your deal voluntarily, you can't restart it until the 20 turn wait period is over. It will make you think twice before making threats of ending trade deals.
     
  16. PaGe

    PaGe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    247
    Location:
    Germany
    You aren't allowed to move in the territory. It will be an irreversibel action and you would gain information you can't get, when not entering the territory. Either you have to wait for an answer or to wait outside the borders.
    If the other team didn't answer in time and you go in => declare war
    If the other team didn't answer in time and you don't want war => keep outside (and remember it for next diplomacy ;))

    In most cases you have 96 hours. That is really much time to wait for an answer.

    edit:
    The server is a bit overloaded. Another reason to install the embassies at civforum. Else the 96 hours could really by short.
     
  17. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    The reason it slowed was because you and I were both in the same threads at the same time.
     
  18. PaGe

    PaGe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    247
    Location:
    Germany
    :lol:

    :thumbsup: I only imagined the reason for the rule. There are some people that want everyting to be fixed. The funny thing, which makes the rule needless, is the opportunity to break treaties. The only thing, that should really be fixed, is the 20 turns rule.
     
  19. I. Larkin

    I. Larkin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Messages:
    4,392
    I disagree with that. It is too contraintuitive in comparison to normal game. I think if RoP not granted after turn you may simply leave territory, that it.

    Still, do not understand meaning of 5.1, 5.2 and 5.2 without 5.1
     
  20. Cyc

    Cyc Looking for the door...

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,736
    Location:
    Behind you
    Then I can't help you, I. Larkin.
     

Share This Page