Soren posted that the AI will no longer trade techs during your turn. Check out this thread at Apolyton:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=42288
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=42288
No more tech trading during your turn
- Thread starter NY Hoya
- Start date
he also clarifies the changes to despot rushing. Here is the text of his quote:
"I just wanted to clarify a few issues.
First, pop rushing has not been eliminated. A few change, however, have been made. You can not sacrifice over half the population of you city anymore. Also, city unhappiness can "go negative," which means if your city has 1 citizen and 4 have been sacrificed recently, you will need 4 happiness points (from temples, luxuries, military units, whatever...) to keep that 1 citizen from being unhappy. In previous versions, just having a spearman in the city was enough to keep that 1 citizen content, even if you had sacrificed an infinite number of citizens.
Second, the AI will no longer trade techs during your turn."
"I just wanted to clarify a few issues.
First, pop rushing has not been eliminated. A few change, however, have been made. You can not sacrifice over half the population of you city anymore. Also, city unhappiness can "go negative," which means if your city has 1 citizen and 4 have been sacrificed recently, you will need 4 happiness points (from temples, luxuries, military units, whatever...) to keep that 1 citizen from being unhappy. In previous versions, just having a spearman in the city was enough to keep that 1 citizen content, even if you had sacrificed an infinite number of citizens.
Second, the AI will no longer trade techs during your turn."
I really like this idea. I think it was intended to be this way from the start. It will certainly cause most players to get out of despotism much earlier than we did before. In fact, I may start switching to republic as soon as I research it.
Minuteman
Minister of salty snacks
Thanks for the info. It certainly does appear that Firaxis was determined to tie up all of the remaining loose ends with this next patch.
NY Hoya, thanks for posting that info from the 'Poly site. Looking through that thread, we see this post from Soren, where he quotes another person and replies:
quote:
Originally posted by Pembleton
Does this mean you can exploit the AI like you could before the first patch by trading for a tech and selling it to all other civs during your turn? I only played a few games after the first patch because I desperately wanted stacked movement, so forgive me if there was some other changes to compensate for this that I did not become fully aware of.
Well, I suppose so, but the AI is now _much_ more aggressive about trading techs with each other, on their own turn.
.................
Hmmm. A possible concern here- say the AI buys a tech from Civ X and then proceeds to sell it to all the other civs, much as the Human player might do. The AI goes the rounds, finds the max price it can get, and then in selling to the other civs the price keeps dropping (as more civs have it, its worth less). "Being much more Aggressive", the AI sells the tech to every civ, perhaps, (even for a pittance to the last few) and gets the max $$ they can. OK. But the last purchaseers or two get a REAL deal on the cost. Now EVERY one has that tech. Regardless of their technology investment rate or ecoomy. This penalizes civs who have actually invested in building tech infrastructure like libraries and University's and science wonders. And tends again to make everyone about the same in tech, no matter what. At least it could anyway.
COUNTER to this: Have a MINIMUM price that you (ie an AI civ) will sell a tech for, if you ain't got the dough, you don't get that tech. THe minimum will of course vary with the tech, and maybe how long the tech has been around. Ths way civs with poor economies (wastrel warmongers too!), or lack or resources, are penalized, and those who build their economy up, are rewarded. They will most likely have the cash to buy.
This might be a little harder to implement, but I think that if not, we'll see a further leveling of the field ... and more giant wars of exactly matched opponents ... time consuming for the player and indecisive in outcome.
Of course I could be totally wrong, wouldn't be the first time ...
quote:
Originally posted by Pembleton
Does this mean you can exploit the AI like you could before the first patch by trading for a tech and selling it to all other civs during your turn? I only played a few games after the first patch because I desperately wanted stacked movement, so forgive me if there was some other changes to compensate for this that I did not become fully aware of.
Well, I suppose so, but the AI is now _much_ more aggressive about trading techs with each other, on their own turn.
.................
Hmmm. A possible concern here- say the AI buys a tech from Civ X and then proceeds to sell it to all the other civs, much as the Human player might do. The AI goes the rounds, finds the max price it can get, and then in selling to the other civs the price keeps dropping (as more civs have it, its worth less). "Being much more Aggressive", the AI sells the tech to every civ, perhaps, (even for a pittance to the last few) and gets the max $$ they can. OK. But the last purchaseers or two get a REAL deal on the cost. Now EVERY one has that tech. Regardless of their technology investment rate or ecoomy. This penalizes civs who have actually invested in building tech infrastructure like libraries and University's and science wonders. And tends again to make everyone about the same in tech, no matter what. At least it could anyway.
COUNTER to this: Have a MINIMUM price that you (ie an AI civ) will sell a tech for, if you ain't got the dough, you don't get that tech. THe minimum will of course vary with the tech, and maybe how long the tech has been around. Ths way civs with poor economies (wastrel warmongers too!), or lack or resources, are penalized, and those who build their economy up, are rewarded. They will most likely have the cash to buy.
This might be a little harder to implement, but I think that if not, we'll see a further leveling of the field ... and more giant wars of exactly matched opponents ... time consuming for the player and indecisive in outcome.
Of course I could be totally wrong, wouldn't be the first time ...
Thats one of the things I was wondering about. I bet there will be some effect here, but how much?
We'll have to wait and see, after playing with the new patch for a bit.
I don't like that idea of even more leveling of the tech competiton. In history, usually, the leader in tech has a big advantage, including KEEPING that lead. Now, I don't want to see whoever gets a lead initally have it forever locked in, but I do want to see some advantage to investing in science infrastructure and in economic development.
We'll have to wait and see, after playing with the new patch for a bit.
I don't like that idea of even more leveling of the tech competiton. In history, usually, the leader in tech has a big advantage, including KEEPING that lead. Now, I don't want to see whoever gets a lead initally have it forever locked in, but I do want to see some advantage to investing in science infrastructure and in economic development.
Guardian
Chieftain
Then don't sell your cool techs to the AI.
They can't pass it on to each other if none of them have it, can they?
-But of course, if you're WAY ahead of everybody else, it is only natural that some of them may decide to cooperate in an attempt to keep up, wouldn't you think? Could be a nice touch to the game, I'd say.
But of course, there should be certain limitations to this. Like, they shouldn't be selling off MAJOR techs for pocket change, and they shouldn't be cooperating too closely with their enemies.
Similar threads
