On technology brokering

[saamohod]

I always disable Tech Brokering before I start a new game (the poll says Tech Trade, but it was my mess-up I'm trying to figure out how to edit it).

Before, it always seemed that whenever I played a game with Tech Brokering enabled I ended up with the short end of the stick. Majority of AIs used to trade techs intensively between each other while denying any tech trade with me, which caused me to gradually lag behind in tech progress. It could have something to do with my poor diplomatic gameplay though, I don't remember.

What's the situation in the latest iterations of VP? Do you people find Tech Brokering balanced and fair? Or do you not?

Any thoughts are welcome.

 

[Deljade]

Wait so what exactly does tech brokering do and how is it different from tech trading?

 

[civplayer33]

Wait so what exactly does tech brokering do and how is it different from tech trading?

Tech Trading is sellings Techs you researched yourself or buying Techs other civs researched themselves; Tech Brokering is buying and selling Techs that the other / you did not research, but also bought.

 

[Deljade]

So it basically allows you to sell a tech that you bought. The description confused me first time I saw it and I've kept it off since then..

 

[JamesNinelives]

Huh. I think I get it. I don't think I play with tech brokering. I can't imagine using it if even if I had it on though. Buying techs from the AI is usually super expensive. I'd hate to give so much of my income to someone who is ahead of me in technology.

 

[Dolen]

I always disable Tech Trading in general.
You can, almost cheatingly, get TONS of money by selling useless tech to feeble civs that have zero chance of winning the game, which is kinda exploiting on the player's part.

 

[JamesNinelives]

I always disable Tech Trading in general.
You can, almost cheatingly, get TONS of money by selling useless tech to feeble civs that have zero chance of winning the game, which is kinda exploiting on the player's part.

I'd hardly say that stronger troops, more trade routes, and better yields from improvement are useless, particularly when the AI gets bonuses for things like entering a new era. Even better if that civ has progress or Way of Transcendence. Finally, being on par in science means that civ can focus on other things than desperately trying to catch up in techs.

Small civs may not be able to win the game, but they can prevent others (including you) from winning, particularly if they team up. I've had civs go from zero threat to a military menace by trading techs too greedily. Remember that if they declare war on you all that gpt from them disappears. I've also had those smaller nations tip the balance in the world congress no votes to embargo and decolonise me, or (if they like me) vote for me as world leader.

Researching Scientific Theory first is certainly powerful, but making money from tech trading also depends on you having a tech lead in the first place. Happily I've found that in recent patches the tech gap (even for backwards civs) is less than it used to be. And a least in my games I've found it relatively common for that a science-focused civ that to get to Scientific Theory before me.

 

[LifeOfBrian]

I too always disable any kind of Tech Trading, it seems to make the game much easier for the human player.

 

[randomnub]

I always disable tech trading/brokering while re-enabling the (vanilla) research agreements, and curse every patch that resets the standard values. Why tech trading and events are considered standard still baffles me.

 

[CrazyG]

I'd hardly say that stronger troops, more trade routes, and better yields from improvement are useless, particularly when the AI gets bonuses for things like entering a new era. Even better if that civ has progress or Way of Transcendence. Finally, being on par in science means that civ can focus on other things than desperately trying to catch up in techs.

I think what he means is if a civ is 10 techs behind everyone, you can sell to them basically for free without threatening yourself, which in my experience is extremely true. Civs who get eaten by warmongers but stay alive often will give you everything they have. I can recall a game where the Dutch having only a single city on an island, but being in the game and buying my techs one game. The agreements alone provided majority of my gold but didn't cost me a thing.

Also you can buy a tech for a ton of GPT then just declare war or intentionally go bankrupt for a turn to end the deal.

 

[saamohod]

Also you can buy a tech for a ton of GPT then just declare war or intentionally go bankrupt for a turn to end the deal.

This seems like a valid point because it can be cheesed easily by a human player. I doubt AI can identify the risk that a trade partner can cheese his obligation to pay gold per turn.

 

[JamesNinelives]

This seems like a valid point because it can be cheesed easily by a human player. I doubt AI can identify the risk that a trade partner can cheese his obligation to pay gold per turn.

That's really up to the player though. The same is true of trading for luxuries - buy up a bunch of luxuries so that all your cities get We Love the King Day, or rewards from city-state quests (also applies to strategics) and then declare war. It's obviously exploitable, but that doesn't mean you have to play that way.

I doubt AI can identify the risk that a trade partner can cheese his obligation to pay gold per turn.

Perhaps, but AIs who are ahead of you will only very rarely sell you techs. By that point in the game they know you are competing with them - you have to invest in the relationship to get that kind of payoff. If you decide that the relationship is worth sacrificing for a free tech that's your call. It is exploitable, but it's not as easy as it sounds.

Civs who get eaten by warmongers but stay alive often will give you everything they have. I can recall a game where the Dutch having only a single city on an island, but being in the game and buying my techs one game.

That's true, but 'everything they have' isn't that much if the civ only has one city. You can get about one good deal before their income tanks.

I'm not saying tech trading isn't exploitable, but my experience on recent patches is that it's not as bad as it used to be. I used to play without it for exactly that reason, but IMO the AI's trading is a lot savvier these days - you can still get a lot of gold, but only if you trade a lot of techs to people who have a high income. That means people who are competing with you.

Something else that people don't realies is that this isn't repeatable. Once people catch up to you that's it. So if you base your income around it you will find yourself loosing gold fast when the agreements end. The kind of situation where tech trading is most exploitable is when you have such a large tech lead that you have effectively won the game anyway.

 

[Favorius]

Research Agreements ON.
I think playing nice guy and having allies should be rewarded.

Tech Trading ON.
I like having option to buy or sell techs. Time to time AI can gift technologies to my surprise. Also I like to help civs that suffer at the hands of warmongers and give them military techs for free.

Tech Brokering OFF.
I do not want to add an extra layer of decision at best that can be exploited by me or AI and at worse forces me to min-max every few turns.

 

[4CV]

I used to play with tech trading sometimes, and tech brokering always "off". But thinking about it now, maybe I'd better turn "both off". Or turn "both on", and think twice of what I sell to whom.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I always disable tech trade and brokering.
It feels too much exploitable on the one side, even if you didn't use the war after treaty trick, and on the other side, it was making running away in tech sometimes extremely hard, cause several AI's were researching their stuff "together" and deny this to the human.

 

[065tdsa]

Even my own vassals never sell me techs as warmonger, so really tech trading is only good for the gold. Fact is that if I'm ahead enough to trade like that often I'm probably going to win, since a wide empire with tech parity will crush the smaller empires.

As peaceful on the other hand, you're gambling that whoever you trade with will stay irrelevant, and there's not always a one city civ with plenty of gold around. And they still don't sell me techs most of the time, unless I'm behind.

Considering this I usually leave tech trading on. Brokering on the other hand I'm pretty sure it favors the AI more than me, since me being able to buy techs is so rare, and I just leave it off.

 

[General_Drax]

I did not remember AI willing to sell me Tech. Always tagged 'Impossible'. Those options can be deleted from advanced options menu.

 

[JamesNinelives]

I always disable tech trade and brokering.
It feels too much exploitable on the one side, even if you didn't use the war after treaty trick, and on the other side, it was making running away in tech sometimes extremely hard, cause several AI's were researching their stuff "together" and deny this to the human.

The AI don't 'work together' in some way you don't have access to though. They're as stingy to one another as they are to you. The only time I've bought tech from people it's been for very large sums of money. If you are nice to people however, sometimes they will give you gifts .

Spoiler A :

Spoiler B :