Quick Questions = Quick Answers
- Thread starter gbno1fan
- Start date
As far as I know (and anyone should correct me if I'm wrong here...) the game will not begin before the next patch comes out, which some people (who may or may not know anything) have put around March 30.
That's the best I know..
That's the best I know..
Question: As I have no experience in MTDG games I can only assume that it is primarily combat based. From my readings on PBEM and multi-players games it appears that its nothing but warmongering. Am I correct in assuming that the MTDG is the same way?
gbno1fan
Emperor
The Civ3 MTDG has actually been quite peaceful. Of the 4 teams, 1 tried warmongering early, and is now being punished for playing poorly. 2 teams have remained peaceful, though there have been some tense moments, and have benefitted from the peace.
I think you can expect a similar situation in the Civ4 game. While in many PBEMs people go to war for the sake of fighting, it is difficult to convince a whole team of well-trained players that war is better than infrastructure.
fe3333au
Deity
Just to add another thing ... Epsilon is set as a democracy, for war to occur a majority of citizens (that vote at the time) have to agree for it. I assume that the majority of other teams will behave in a similar manner.
This suggests that for war to occur, an extended debate has listed the pros and cons for this action ... and the benefits of an aggressive stance have far out weighed peace or neutrality.
I've found in single and pbem games that one reason for war is boredom, this will not be a factor in this type of game.
While I've not been involved in a war in this type of game, even being near war is also an unexpected exciting situation ... more and more of the peace faction bolster the ranks of the war party, while the dedicated peaceniks continue to argue against. Diplomacy really adds to this environment ... on one hand trying to disuade the aggressive rival from action (while still maintaining a proud stance) ... on the other trying to rally support from neighbours using every trick in the book from bribing to badgering.
If you are a virgin to this type of game, you better hold onto your panties cos you are in for one hell of a roller coaster ride
This suggests that for war to occur, an extended debate has listed the pros and cons for this action ... and the benefits of an aggressive stance have far out weighed peace or neutrality.
I've found in single and pbem games that one reason for war is boredom, this will not be a factor in this type of game.
While I've not been involved in a war in this type of game, even being near war is also an unexpected exciting situation ... more and more of the peace faction bolster the ranks of the war party, while the dedicated peaceniks continue to argue against. Diplomacy really adds to this environment ... on one hand trying to disuade the aggressive rival from action (while still maintaining a proud stance) ... on the other trying to rally support from neighbours using every trick in the book from bribing to badgering.
If you are a virgin to this type of game, you better hold onto your panties cos you are in for one hell of a roller coaster ride
fe3333au
Deity
I was going to post in the Economy thread ... but as it seems to be purely for reporting I am unsure where to post queries to relivant Ministers.
I have an economic question ... do you see that setting aside a small sum of income for the Foreign Department to be able to tap into at it's discretion could be an option?
Could be related to how much income the Foreign Office adds to the coffers through trade and goody huts.
I'm thinking about the frustration that probably all Foreign Ministers feel when they want to utilise some of the more costly activities open to their department.
ie. establishing embassies and then later sending out the black ops and spies on missions to steal, disrupt production, insite rebellion among the target populous, etc.
So what about creating a special fund which the Foreign Minister can utilise for these darker purposes.
I'd assume some discussion would happen, but when these ideas goto votes, how many times are these ideas rejected because their is always more important things to spend cash on ...
Thinking more on adding to the 'fun factor' of the game.
It makes elections more interesting as well ... questions could be asked about intentions on spending the black purse
I have an economic question ... do you see that setting aside a small sum of income for the Foreign Department to be able to tap into at it's discretion could be an option?
Could be related to how much income the Foreign Office adds to the coffers through trade and goody huts.
I'm thinking about the frustration that probably all Foreign Ministers feel when they want to utilise some of the more costly activities open to their department.
ie. establishing embassies and then later sending out the black ops and spies on missions to steal, disrupt production, insite rebellion among the target populous, etc.
So what about creating a special fund which the Foreign Minister can utilise for these darker purposes.
I'd assume some discussion would happen, but when these ideas goto votes, how many times are these ideas rejected because their is always more important things to spend cash on ...
Thinking more on adding to the 'fun factor' of the game.
It makes elections more interesting as well ... questions could be asked about intentions on spending the black purse
lost_civantares
[Insert Title]
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2005
- Messages
- 1,803
There are no embassies in civ4. 
Yes, it does make sense, though I wonder how much the Economic minister would be willing to give up?
Also remember that it takes about 200 gold per attempt by a spy at destroying an improvement.
Yes, it does make sense, though I wonder how much the Economic minister would be willing to give up?
Also remember that it takes about 200 gold per attempt by a spy at destroying an improvement.
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
yes - also in Civ4 spies don't come until very late in the game. It's totally possible this game won't ever get that far.
However - having a budget for Foreign to use to give/loan to other teams for other purposes is certainly a possibility.
However - having a budget for Foreign to use to give/loan to other teams for other purposes is certainly a possibility.
fe3333au
Deity
Does it still cost to steal tech and such ... or is this done with a unit?
classical_hero
In whom I trust
Speak for yourself.gbno1fan said:
lost_civantares
[Insert Title]
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2005
- Messages
- 1,803
Here's what the civilopedia says on spies:
So remember that you have to build a national wonder to be able to build spies in a very limited amount (and only 2 National Wonders can be built per city!), and there is no ability to steal a tech.
Spoiler civilopedia info on spies :
So remember that you have to build a national wonder to be able to build spies in a very limited amount (and only 2 National Wonders can be built per city!), and there is no ability to steal a tech.
classical_hero
In whom I trust
I doubt that we will go that far.
fe3333au
Deity
Don't speak too soon C_H ... just look at the Civ3 MTDG
Proof of the unpredicibility of not only human opponents ... but a meld of differing personalities, playstyles and agendas.
Proof of the unpredicibility of not only human opponents ... but a meld of differing personalities, playstyles and agendas.
classical_hero
In whom I trust
If I had it my way, things would be so much different.fe3333au said:Don't speak too soon C_H ... just look at the Civ3 MTDG
Proof of the unpredicibility of not only human opponents ... but a meld of differing personalities, playstyles and agendas.
lost_civantares
[Insert Title]
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2005
- Messages
- 1,803
It's what makes the game interesting personally, and it isn't like there is just one person, with his/her own personality, it has a large mix of personalities, and so is not quite as easy to predict.
ItalianVoice
Chieftain
Hello, I think this is where I can ask questions?
Any advice on where I should start to catch up?
How long until we start, now that the patch is out? (that is why I waited to join a team)
Any advice on where I should start to catch up?
How long until we start, now that the patch is out? (that is why I waited to join a team)
ItalianVoice said:
I think we'll find out in the next few days. I would check the main Civ4 Multil-Team Demogame forum. (The parent forum for this one) The projected start date will certainly be posted there.
But there are still a few things to finalize before we start. We have to have a map to play on (Sirian is building a custom map for us); we have to establish the ruleset. There aren't many things to decide on before the ruleset is established, but you can follow the discussion here
fe3333au
Deity
Memphus proposed that an internal discussion be made and a UN vote be taken about the new option of a civilization surviving until all units are killed.
Judging by GA's (one of the two game administrators) lack of support ... I sense that we are only now waiting for the map to be subitted ... and that he is very very very eager to start the game
Judging by GA's (one of the two game administrators) lack of support ... I sense that we are only now waiting for the map to be subitted ... and that he is very very very eager to start the game
Indeed I am fe3333au! 
I can let you guys know the most of the map has been made, we're soon to be testing it out, but other than that, we should be good to go very soon! (Also just waiting on the ruleset, which shouldn't take more than a few days to edit, then a few days to poll).
I can let you guys know the most of the map has been made, we're soon to be testing it out, but other than that, we should be good to go very soon! (Also just waiting on the ruleset, which shouldn't take more than a few days to edit, then a few days to poll).
