Soren - new tech trading system has ruined the game!

Originally posted by Salvor
Reichsmarshal,

If you're only making 345 gold/turn, nobody will believe you can afford to pay 1000/turn, and will automatically reject your proposal. Now if you had offered something you could actually afford, like 300/turn, the results might have been different. I've made gpt deals many times to buy techs. But as long as you can't afford to meet your end of the bargain, the AI will refuse to do business with you as if you were some kind of mutant with two colons.
Click to expand...

I did try with 300 gold per turn (that would be a great deal for the Persians!). Still was "they would never accept such a deal."

Even if I offer 300 gold per turn with 1000 gold they reject it. Did either patch fix it?
 
I can tell you that traiding happens for ridiculous prices among the AI, but not to me. WE are now in middle ages. They discover a tech, and on one turn none has it. Next turn they all do. I bid for it: 860 gold. 1160 gold. plus map. Germany has something like 300 gold in treasure, the rest have 0. How can they buy whey then have 0????????? That is 0 before the trade and 0 after. All researched and got it at once? I cant be sure of their beaker spending now, but in the early game, ancient, when they only had 6 cities or so, with 3 or 4 pop each... it doesnt take a rocket scientist to see that they cannot research that fast. I need to look at some of the saved games from this period. I have not counted my own beakers, but I was not able to change to less than 40 turns until I started on REpublic. I gave up, put my science at 10%, saved about 3000 gold by the end of Ancient, and bought techs. Plus the GL. Halfway through the middle age, they all ---ALL -- caught and passed me up in tech. when the GL expired. and civs with 0 gold are still buying techs, while they sell to me at no less than 300, unless I wait. Egypt did offer me one for 100--after 2500 years of her hovering around 0.
 
There has been a lot of DRASTIC changes in the play balance throughout the entire patch cycle... it's almost like they didn't adequately playtest the game before it was released. :rolleyes: Remember how long it was before the Air Sup. bug was fixed?

This kind of sullies Sid's name, if you ask me... Brian Reynolds was the chief mind behind Civ2 and Alpha Centauri anyway, and they're _vastly_ superior games IMHO. They're much more open-ended and replayable compared to the lock-step conformity imposed on us in Civ3.

Incidentally, it seems that Firaxis' blind rage towards any 'exploitative' strategy in the game is what's screwing it up even more than any lack of testing. Ok, so now we can't replant forests for resources, we can't trade techs to the computer, etc. etc.

How do you want us to play the game, Firaxis? You should just come right out and tell us.

This game is a bust... in 2 years this game will be an unpleasant footnote in the book of Civ-style games. By the time this game is adequately patched, we'll (hopefully) be able to give our money to a dev house that uses beta testers and actually plays the game before it's released, and relishes the idea of building rapport with the community
 
I got mightily curious, so did some numbers. Went back to saved games and looked.
In 1130 russia had 0 gold, no lux for sale, no resources. She lacked Education, Printing Press and Gunpowder. 1140. she only lacks gunpowder ??? How??? She offered to trade territory map for Printing Press. Hardly seems like a fair trade.
So I looked with the embassy spy. 60% science, net 73 beakers per turn. Libraries in almost every city, 22 in all. Not much left after maintenance. If any. She said when I asked her for 1 gold per turn (Polite: "I cannot accept your offer, Elizabeth.")
Then I looked at Germany. Since she is getting advances about 30% faster than I am. I am No 1 in pop, 8th place in score. 12 cities while Germany has 24, most small.
So, she has 40% to science. Library in almost every city (18), university in 9 ( I am just completing university in London, with 18 shields per turn) I have a total of 185 beakers per turn production.
Germany has actual commerce production of 288, but with the university and library and mktplace gains, total 329, less 56 corruption -- net 329. Science 165 total--thats not 40% folks.
By the book library increases beakers by 50%. Not happening.
Saltsburg: 16 commerce by count. 18 by the city screen. library, no university. corruption 4, Science 7.
University increases beakers by another 50% either 75% or 100% however they meant that. Not happening.
Neurenburg: 22 by count, 30 commerce by the screen. Corruption 2, science 16. That is more than 40% any way you calculate it.

Bottom line: On Regency. equal Right?
I produce 185 beakers perturn, Germany at 40 % produces 165, and she gets research in about 75% of my time. And offers to sell it to me for 360 gold, after she has already sold it to every other AI, most of whom have 0 gold.

Whats wrong with this picture?:mad:
 
Wouldn't the obvious thing to do here be to make the AI value it's techs the same way the human player would? I'm not going to trade technology to a potential enemy (and everyone is a potential enemy) which might give them the ability to match my military or industrial capabilities. Shouldn't the AI think the same way? Instead there seems to be this secret worldwide alliance against the human player, in order to keep up or keep the edge, so no civ will be behind. The AI Civs should guard their tech advantages from the human player and each other with the same zeal I do, for the same reasons, it gives them an advantage over their opponenents. Right now, that's not happening.
 
Originally posted by NY Hoya
I think it's pretty obvious to most people that there is a problem with AI tech trading post patch. The game is less fun, period.

What do people think Firaxis can do to solve the problem though? I don't want a return to 1.16 because the AI trading during my turn was just too frustrating. 1.07 was too easy to exploit with the tech broker strategy. I think what soren should implement in the AI trading rules are the same rules we as players apply when thinking about trading a tech to other civs.

For example, I will never trade an important military tech to another AI civ, i.e., Military Tradition. Make it so the AI is also reluctant to trade these techs, and, in the event they do trade them, they should require full value for the tech.

Also, I usually won't trade a tech to the AI if it allows an important wonder like Sun Tzu's, Hoover Dam, etc. Again, require full value for these techs as well.p
Click to expand...

I think the problem in implementing any of this is due to the versatility the AI has to have in regards to technologies. While it seems fairly obvious to us which are the important techs, the computer has to go by the variables stored in the game and relating to that particular tech.

Notably, beaker cost is being used by the AI to measure the worth of a tech, but like you mentioned, techs that give units should maintain their value. Much the same way the US isn't giving F-117's, F-22's or B-2's to every nation on earth, neither would a civilization give away its most advanced unit unless it was given to a close ally.

Of course, the hard part is figuring out how the game would evaluate the worth of a unit. One way would be to have the civilization be stubborn about trading a tech for it's most advanced offensive/defensive unit. (based on A/D respectively, and the appropiate AI flags for these units). Making it so civs will refuse to trade the latest unit technology seems to me fairly realistic. I'd never give another civ a tech that would put them on equal footing in terms of war unless we were in an MPP and had excellent relations.

It would be rather easy to code a certain preference for good techs, like the ones you mentioned, but as we add/edit techs out, such a methodology would prove crippling to the AI. So if we're going to suggest Firaxis change something, we should keep in mind that these implementations should work when editing/changing the tech tree.

I like the idea of selling a tech to one civ with the understanding that the civ cannot re-sell the tech to others for a certain time period. Oftentimes, in war, I would be willing to sell/give an ally a military tech to help them against a common foe, but I won't do it because all other civs automatically end up with it, including the civ we are fighting.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with you there, it's insane the propagation the AI does with techs, even one city civs stay caught up in the tech race, which seems rather ludicrous. It would have been better if the depreciation of a technology was exponential/logarithmic instead of linear. Decreasing initially, but then leveling off as it approached a certain limit. That way techs would always retain a certain price of admission if you will, below which they should not be traded.

But you know, now that you mention it, it would be pretty awesome if the game had a technology pact of sorts, where you agree to share a technology with a civilization at a reduced cost but that civilization cannot trade it for a set number of turns say the standard 20 or 10 turns (or an number that can be modified at the time to alter cost of the agreement), or face the penalties of breaking a treaty.

Oh vell, probably too late to add that in. But it might have been a neat idea =) Maybe (that's a really big huge maybe) in some incarnation of the editor we'll be able to edit trade thingies.
 
Originally posted by Maleficence

But you know, now that you mention it, it would be pretty awesome if the game had a technology pact of sorts, where you agree to share a technology with a civilization at a reduced cost but that civilization cannot trade it for a set number of turns say the standard 20 or 10 turns (or an number that can be modified at the time to alter cost of the agreement), or face the penalties of breaking a treaty.
Click to expand...

This is a fantastic idea, one that would eliminate many of the problems we are experiencing.
As a new timer, I was just hitting the Regent level when I applied the patch. Troop movement aside, I had much more fun playing the 1.16 version.
So much so, in fact, that I am hedging more and more to reinstalling it. As in every game you play, it is all about the 'fun factor'. If it is not there, something is wrong.

Not being able to 'j' key those troops will be murder, but I fear that if I do not switch back over, the game will be shelved.
Mind you, I am entirely new to the whole Civ experience. Being 32, I feel as though I must have been living in a cave to have missed it up to this point. Two weeks into the new patch, I have lost alot of the excitement.
I will not even say why, as it is mapped perfectly in the intelligent posts of this thread. Great job, guys.

So, back to 1.16 for now.
 
did a test: played 1.16 the fun way: honestly (well, mostly, heh, still some blitzing after ROP and such), no excessive pop-rush, no excessive tech broker, no idiotic landgrabbing just to gain "power". I almost always won decisively on Monarch, often on Emperor.

Then I tried the same with 1.17 - and lost about 50% on Regent!

On the other hand I can play in a way that makes me win every game on Deity, even with reduced poprush - it`s just the same exploiting over and over and over....


IMHO, 1.17 simply made the balanced, fun, reasonably complex playing style almost impossible - it narrowed tactics down to a constant repetition!

Sorry Firaxis, but this patch was a step forward + 2 steps back!
 
less trade more war ,if u can't join them,beat them:slay:
BTW any info about 1.18+ release ?
and also:how can i add a pic next to my name ?:arrow:
 
Originally posted by Rustus Maximus
Wouldn't the obvious thing to do here be to make the AI value it's techs the same way the human player would? I'm not going to trade technology to a potential enemy (and everyone is a potential enemy) which might give them the ability to match my military or industrial capabilities.
Click to expand...

Yes, it should within the limits of current AI capability. So if I were your rival, I would give techs to your neighbors, especially the weak Civs, especially the military techs.

I love giving gunpowder to Civs not neighboring me. In my latest game, I gave defensive technologies, including gunpowder and replaceable parts to everyone on the western continent. This is the result. I control the eastern continent and the west is deeply divided and economically weak due to constant and ineffective warfare.

America1585ad.jpg
 
Originally posted by Zachriel


I love giving gunpowder to Civs not neighboring me. In my latest game, I gave defensive technologies, including gunpowder and replaceable parts to everyone on the western continent. This is the result. I control the eastern continent and the west is deeply divided and economically weak due to constant and ineffective warfare.
Click to expand...

Zachriel, you`re one bad-ass dude! :D

I love doing the same with the Infantry path when I`m dead sure that I don`t want to invade. I just make sure I can cut them from their rubber if I have to. Then I try to get a major war started, break my alliance (f*** reputation when I`m close to having a serious tech lead and the spaceship victory is mine as long as they fight) to get peace - and watch them duke it out! Often I can even sell Rubber at horrenduos price! It`s really fun to see them all make the slow and painfull transition to Commie....... :D
 
Originally posted by Dr. Boon's Ghost:

So much so, in fact, that I am hedging more and more to reinstalling it. As in every game you play, it is all about the 'fun factor'. If
Click to expand...

DBG, I reinstalled Civ3 last night because I never could take advantage of my UU (Legionaire).

I simply trashed it and reinstalled, it seems to have worked.
 
Originally posted by Killer
I love doing the same with the Infantry path when I`m dead sure that I don`t want to invade. I just make sure I can cut them from their rubber if I have to.
Click to expand...

That's a good idea. I'll look for their rubber sources next time, in case I need to invade.
 
Instead of implementing all kinds of limititations to how often a tech can be traded, and modifying the values of techs for a future patch, why not just revert back to the old system? Though these options are a step forward for what we have currently, they still seem like a step backward from what was in place in patch 1.16.

Would it be feasible to revert back to the 1.16 tech system while leaving in place the other additions of 1.17 in an upcoming patch? I assume tech brokering was toned down purposely and this all isn't a result of a nasty bug in the new patch. Even if so, the community seems to be in agreement that the current tech system leaves something to be desired and should be fixed/changed.

As for full fledged 1.16 tech brokering, if you made the decision to do so, you still had to deal with the fact that you're bringing potential enemies one step closer to military and cultural equality. That in itself was keeping things at least mildly balanced.

The AI trading during your turn was a result of loading your game through an autosave correct? Since this was a bug fixed in 1.17 it shouldn't resurface.

Just my MHO.

No matter what they decide to do, it would be nice to know if Firaxis was listening. :)
 
Originally posted by No.Dice

No matter what they decide to do, it would be nice to know if Firaxis was listening. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah. Unfortunately, I think Firaxis pays more attention to posts on Apolyton, even though constructive, objective criticism and ideas are few and far between on that forum. I could be wrong though.:(
 
The computer enemies know a bit too much about your civilization sometimes, like they know how much you make and how good your world map is even without seeing it! That is why the know SO well when to trade them. It's rediculous that they always want a vastly superior deal for themselves even if you are way more powerful or are doing incredibly bad.
 
I must disagree on two points. One there is no tech devaluing, or not significant. Within two turns after a discovery, every AI civ has the tech, with or with out means to pay for it. 0 gold in the treasurey and 15 income is not enough. At the same time, AFTER all other civs have the tech, they still want 300 to 500 from me.
Two: I offered my map to Germany=="NO WAY. Map plus 200 gold!" I traded around to every other civ, and then came back to Gm--now they only wanted 60 gold. That map was much more current than theirs, and they must have known it. everyone else did.

Anyway. I am through complaining. We just need to find a way to use this against them,a nd then beat them at their own game.
 
A change I would like to see is to have a minimum amount of time to get a tech up and running if you obtain it in a trade. This could be adjusted if you have more or less universities or libraries than some base value. For example I think the pace of technological growth would be more realistic if you have to wait 4 turns after obtaining a tech in a trade before you are credited with having that tech and can then move on to the next advance. While you are waiting for that time to elapse, the pace of advances you are doing the research in yourself should be unchanged though. Then you could also say that if a player has at least 3 libraries, you get the traded tech in 3 turns, and if you also have at least 3 universities, you get the traded tech in 2 turns. Could we have this change Firaxis? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fergei
[C3C] Late game tech rate confusion
Replies
11
Views
224
Fergei
Fergei
The_J
The Game Design Roundtable podcast: Civ Series – Where are we now with Soren Johnson
Replies
3
Views
493
CivLuvah
CivLuvah
N
My suggestions for the new RFCDoC
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
7K
IrishDragon
I
K
Alternative campaign-The English
Replies
5
Views
491
Fergei
Fergei
Leoreth
New Map City Names Development Thread
Replies
18
Views
3K
Leoreth
Leoreth
Back
Top Bottom