[NFP] Reason that I ban trading in my games

[Lily_Lancer]

Because it is seriously BUGGED

Spoiler :

When you meet an AI you can sell 1 diplo favor for 1 GPT, and buy 3 diplo favor for 2 gpt. Repeat this and you get everything as soon as you meet the AI.

Combine with "cancel trade" exploit (gift GPT and luxury together to make AI full of GPT, trade diplo favor to take away those GPTs, and remove your luxury the turn after to cancel the initial GPT given), you can make AIs in large debt while you yourself gain infinite money.

 

[Infixo]

Exploits exist. Fortunately it is NOT obligatory to use them. It is your choice what to do with them, like e.g. in the above post restrict yourself from some key functionalities. I report them to Firaxis and simply don't use them.

 

[bengalryan9]

Man, clicking through that over and over again sure sounds fun. Now no one will be able to stop me from getting what is currently the easiest victory condition to achieve! Bwahahahaha...

 

[Victoria]

Because it is seriously BUGGED

So you will not trade a luxury for 4-6 GPT?
I will, I see no harm in it.
I will not trade my luxury for 100 gold just before I declare war even though many do not consider this an exploit. Cash sums before war make war too easy.
I played MP a couple of times before deciding the players were bugged as much as the exploits.
Why is life always about this false concept called ‘winning’

 

[Pietato]

Trading 1 of something for 1gpt is a known bug.
Removing luxuries after trading them has always had issues.

How about, you NOT use bugs and exploits, and trade properly?

 

[leandrombraz]

I agree it's bugged and it's one of the main things that still need to be fixed and balanced, but you can use trade without exploiting it. I never do shenanigans to clean the AI's gold, I always sell strategic resources 20 at a time, I only sell favors in specific situations where I REALLY need gold and I use the same 20 at a time rule. I don't even consider doing things similar to the one in the OP example. I usually avoid even learning how this kind of exploit works.

Considering that you can avoid using exploits, I care a lot more about how trade is balanced. Often the AI pays waaay too much gold, mainly for favors and strategic resources. I like to sell strategic resources, since it makes sense for me to sell stuff I have, and if the AI is buying it, it means they are using the resource, but the AI overvalues it.

 

[pokiehl]

Is it really that difficult to just use the system as intended and not perform the exploit? Why is it necessary to completely block yourself from using an entire game mechanic?

 

[tedhebert]

As a few have mentioned before here, bugs will happen, and taking advantage of those bugs is your call to do or not, and IS an exploit.

We might all feel that FX should have fix this and many other annoying bugs like that a long time ago, but... I refuse to become bitter over things I have no control over. So I report the bugs, then don't exploit them.

As for trading, I mostly use it for luxuries trading, usually in a 1 for 1 basis, and I try to fix by myself peace deals to something I feel isn't game breaking. Is that perfect ? absolutely not. But I'd much rather do it my
way than spend my time griping and whining about how bugged the game is. And you know what ? I enjoy the game immensely !

Your way probably works, mind you. Totally banning trades. you also avoid exploiting. But that is not how the game was intended to be.

Anyways, My 2 cents.

 

[bbbt]

Is it really that difficult to just use the system as intended and not perform the exploit? Why is it necessary to completely block yourself from using an entire game mechanic?

I think the one gold for one favor is how the system is intended. It's that it presumably makes deity too easy because you can get a lot of gold for something pretty worthless (favor).

But barring a much improved AI for resource management and trading, any trading is going to generally be in the player's favor. The player is going to be much better at procuring some they can use more advantageously in a trade.

It's why I wish they would switch more to a 'common market' style of trading like the Endless games have. You try and offload too much, the price drops dramatically. And stops having to trade with a bunch of AIs individually.

I'd find the game a lot harder if i didn't trade mainly because that's how I get a lot of luxuries to keep my amenities up.

 

[_hero_]

So I put "exploits" into 3 categories.

-First is a programming error. This is something that is clearly not working as intended by the devs. The pantheon exploit is a prime example of this. I refuse to ever intentionally use this kind of exploit in a game.
-Second is bad game design. Sometimes game devs don't realize that something they put into the game is just ridiculously imbalanced until the player base tells them. Repeatedly. I consider chopping in the vanilla version of this game to fall into this category. When I see examples of this in games, I will play around with them but I find myself going away from using it as these things usually make the game unchallenging and repetative.
-Thirdly is the grey area. Was it bad design or is it a programming error? This trading imbalance falls into this category for me. I think the devs have intentionally put coding into the game that makes the AI value trades in ways that seem unusual to the player for the very reason that players were taking advantage of how the AI valued things when it seemed more logical. Likewise, I don't think the intention is to be able to create "infinite" gold out of nothing. In this case, it is entirely reasonable to use the system logically while not using it exploitatively. In this example, that means only buying favor if you actually want more favor and not to use it as a twisted form of market arbitrage. Likewise, selling favor you don't need is a perfectly valid strategy and makes sense in the context of the game. There's a long history in the real world of nations buying favors from other nations.

 

[Minou]

Sure, you don't have to trade, but really they should fix some of these things like the 1GPT bug. Like Victoria, I refuse to sell a resource for lump sum the turn before I declare war. Sometimes I end up doing this "unintentionally", for example I have sold a resource to an AI I have no plans to invade, but then when they stupidly march an unescorted Settler along my borders I just have to declare! In these situations I try to compensate by not selling that same resource for 30 turns.... but I really think this whole moral dilemma could be removed if lump sum trades gave away the resource for the full 30 turns regardless of war.

One thing I really wish they would "fix" with trades is presenting the best price right away. I ask what an AI will give for 2 Horses, they offer 14g. But if I ask for 15 they say yes. Or they will pay 7 for 1 Horse virus 15 for 2 Horses so you have to sell in certain increments to get the most gold. It barely matters, but it is so boring to have to check if you care....

 

[_hero_]

One thing I really wish they would "fix" with trades is presenting the best price right away. I ask what an AI will give for 2 Horses, they offer 14g. But if I ask for 15 they say yes. Or they will pay 7 for 1 Horse virus 15 for 2 Horses so you have to sell in certain increments to get the most gold. It barely matters, but it is so boring to have to check if you care....

This is actually an interesting one. In this case, I think of it as the AI actually acting in a rational manner. No sensible person starts a negotiation off at their final offer. I personally like that the AI starts at around 90% of it's best offer and expects you to "haggle" for that last 10%.

 

[Archon_Wing]

#notalltrades

 

[Pietato]

I think the one gold for one favor is how the system is intended. It's that it presumably makes deity too easy because you can get a lot of gold for something pretty worthless (favor).

The intended value of favour is 10 for ~3gpt, or ~6gpt if the civ is going diplomatic. Trading 1 favour for 1gpt is a bug which he is exploiting (it can be done with other resources as well).

 

[Mr. Shadows]

How is this handled in the GOTM?

 

[Lily_Lancer]

How is this handled in the GOTM?

I guess in GOTM you can use it freely, as GOTM doesn't ban all forms of trade, nor does it ban trading diplo favors, and this leads to trading diplo favors being legal.

 

[SharTeel]

Here's an idea, I know it might sound crazy, but here it is: don't use the exploit and just trade normally. I know, crazy right?

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Here's an idea, I know it might sound crazy, but here it is: don't use the exploit and just trade normally. I know, crazy right?

Whenever you trade, no matter you do that intentionally or unintentionally, the bug is taking effect and affects how many gold AI may charge/offer you, you're already using exploit.

That's why I ban all sorts of tradings in my games.

 

[Pietato]

Whenever you trade, no matter you do that intentionally or unintentionally, the bug is taking effect and affects how many gold AI may charge/offer you, you're already using exploit.

That's why I ban all sorts of tradings in my games.

This is a lie.

Do not trade in lots of 1. Do no remove your luxuries after trading them.

 

[MrRadar]

What about buy open borders for 1 gold or even for nothing as a part of a larger deal trades? That's 25% tourism modifier. What about buying great works from the AI deals? Currently, you can use spies to rob AI blind, stealing obscene amounts of cash and then use that cash to buy all their art off them. Stealing art works via spies is slow and inefficient, and now, apparently, even bugged. But stealing money missions are the easiest, and then you can buy what you want and need, easily matching and theaming your museums.

Now, open borders and art trading sound like completely normal and usually practiced thing, but as implemented as it is now, they offer quite a shortcut to the CV. Can it be regarded as an exploit? I think, currently, the answer should be yes. Who in their sane mind would sell open borders for almost nothing? If AI is going for a CV, how come it sells you off their great works? And money stealing spy missions, oh boy. But like this, you may end up banning most of the game mechanics. It is really difficult to choose where to draw the line, and devs could indeed do more in their spare time to balance and patch the general game, instead of including zombies in a side project.