Term 3 - Nominations for Trade and Technology Leader

[GenMarshall]

These are the traditional duties and powers of all councilmembers:

Post polls and discussions to determine citizen desires for departmental policies, plans and agendas.
Cast a tie-breaking vote in the polls determining their departmental policies, plans and agendas.
Formulate departmental policies, plans and agendas based on citizen feedback.
Formulate departmental policies, plans and agendas of their own in the absence of citizen feedback (forum outage, low participation, etc).
Convey these policies, plans and agendas to the President for play in the game.
Call Legislative and Override Council Votes.
Vote in Council Votes of all types.

These are the duties of the Trade and Technology Department:

Organize trade deals.
Track the status and expiration of established deals.
Organize tech research queue.
Organize tech trades.
Organize tech espionage.



Please Accept or Decline any nominations you receive.

Yours,
The Election Office

 

[GenMarshall]

I wish to nominate Chieftess and Octavian X

 

[Strider]

I'll nominate gunning1 (if he's still here) for this poistion.

 

[Peri]

I would like to nominate Terminal Man and Tao.

 

[Chieftess]

I guess I'll accept my old post.

 

[Sarevok]

I will second both Chieftess and Octavian_X

 

[tao]

I decline and third Chieftess.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I Self-Nominate and Accept.

 

[Raven1er]

I fourth Chieftess and third Octavian_X.

 

[Octavian X]

I thank all of you for the wonderful support you've given me here, though I must respectfully decline the nomination. I wish to throw my support behind my deputy, Rik Meleet, in his run for this position.

 

[Black_Hole]

I fifth Chieftess and second Rik Meleet

 

[TerminalMan90]

I also thank you for your gracious nomination for Tech leader, Peri, but must regretfully decline. I had fun being VP and held up my office as well as I could, but I fear that March and April will be very busy months for me and I will not be accepting any positions during those two months.

I have no doubt, though, that I shall see other great leaders rise to the challenge of this position.

 

[ravensfire]

Question for all candidates:

1. How agressive do you plan to be in trading the following:
a. Technology
b. Maps

2. Assuming you have total influence over the tech tree, what are the next 5 techs you would research, and why.

3. Why should I vote for you as opposed to one of the other candidates?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Chieftess]

Originally posted by ravensfire
Question for all candidates:

1. How agressive do you plan to be in trading the following:
a. Technology
b. Maps

2. Assuming you have total influence over the tech tree, what are the next 5 techs you would research, and why.

3. Why should I vote for you as opposed to one of the other candidates?

-- Ravensfire

1. I am a very agressive trader, as shown by my example of the peace renegotiation treaty. I also look for every possibility from every civ, and I even participate in the chatroom incase new trade possibilities open up during the turn 5 save.

a. With tech trading, I have a chart that shows the valued cost of all techs, and who has what techs. This determines my trading strategy. If only one civ were to have, say, Construction (cost 20), I wouldn't go trading currency and X amount of gold plus a world map just yet. I'd wait until the continent has it (or most of it) before thinking about purchasing it. (it might be a tech cost of 20 by then, and we could get something extra - the AI doesn't go for techs like currency and writing as much).

b. I am generally cautious on world maps when there's only a few civs, and we still have territory to settle. If we could trade with all civs right now (as was the case in DG2), I'd rather trade for territory maps if at all possible. If we're pretty close to securing our section of the continent, then I'll consider trading maps. I would also trade with the 2 civs we haven't yet met, but we can see their borders. Maps will be valued higher for them.

----------------------------------------------------------------

2. Since we're almost done with Philosopy, I'll give the next 5. Construction and Polytheism, as those are the last techs we'll need. Then, it really depends on what kind of game we want. Do we want to be peaceful? If so, we'll take Republic. Do we want to conquer the continent? If so, we'll take Monarchy. Next, Fuedalism and Engineering. This is because we want to get to our UU (Musketeer), and also go towards the Cavalry track (this is what I'd do in a normal game if an early war doesn't look possible).

----------------------------------------------------------------

3. I have held the Trade office before in previous demogames many times, and I'm also an agressive trader. I also keep track of the costs of techs, and resources, and can determine who is trading resources to whom. (This is done by a count of resources, and seeing the active trade deals. This works great during negotiations if you want an AI civ to break some treaties with another AI civ. Say there's a lone trade route (1 road) connecting Babylon and Germany. If they are trading a luxury, then that trade route is broken, and one of the civs will take a rep hit. That means, the other AIs are more likely to gang up on them, than us. Agressive trading also lowers the AI's economy so they can't research or trade as much, slowing down the tech pace a bit. (i.e., selling a tech for massive amounts of gpt)

 

[Rik Meleet]

Originally posted by ravensfire
Question for all candidates:

1. How agressive do you plan to be in trading the following:
a. Technology
b. Maps

2. Assuming you have total influence over the tech tree, what are the next 5 techs you would research, and why.

3. Why should I vote for you as opposed to one of the other candidates?

-- Ravensfire

1a) I am not an aggressive trader; I am a balanced trader. Meaning, I won't go through with trades if it will hurt us in other ways, I see trading as a path that has to support the nation, not the nation support the trades. I wouldn't go into debt to get that last tech, if there wasn't an immediate way to get out of debt by re-trading. I will look long and hard and make sure we'll get the best possible deals. I balance the gains and cost. I even look at future trades; I don't limit myself to current possibilities.

1b) Maps are often overprised. Same holds true for contacts. This means that selling our maps and contacts will gain us a lot of gold, if done properly. Especially contacts are a "once in a lifetime" trade which have to be used for the maximum result. It shouldn't be squandered "just for the sake of it". But it also needs timing; there is no more contact-selling when the civs have met or someone else sells it. Map-purchase I go easy on. I tend to buy the first maps only as an addition to a deal; thus reducing the cost. Map-sales have to be postponed as long as possible, but when we do want to sell it, sell it to the entire world. After that you can sell it again every turn, although I find that boring.

2) The save I am looking at is 250 BC. Construction and Polytheism are to be gained in trade by Russia and Egypt. My 5 techs to research are: 1 - Republic. We need that government for better production, food and commerce and perhaps even more important: cashrushing. 2,3,4 and 5 - Feud, Engineering, Invention & Gunpowder. We are the nation with the most free land around and thus under threat by more crammed civs, Babylon for instance. It is not unlikely war will be declared upon us. We need our musketeers either as a deterrent or as a defender or even attacker. I have contemplated Chivalry, but since India needs it for war-elephants they will go for it, resulting in us trading for it. Depending on the state of the world then; peace -> Theology, Education (killing Germany's Great Lib) and Banking. War -> Straight to Military tradition. We have horses and sufficient deserts to have some Saltpeter.

3) That is a hard one. Chieftess is an excellent choice, with proper trading skills. She also knows the cost of techs fully. But she doesn't seem to realise that aggressive trading can be more a burden than a blessing. It's no use buying an expensive tech from Civ A, only to discover the next turn Civs B and C have it as well, reducing the cost. If we buy a tech, we automatically make it cheaper for the next guy on the block. Trading also includes checking very often the time-frames of when the other civs discover and have discovered the previous techs and how they got hold of it. Anticipating what will be researched next by the AI (for instance India will go for Chivary) must be taken ito account as well. And you have to be careful in getting or paying gpt-deals. If you pay too many or too big gpt-deals; you encourage that Civ to increase it's research. If you get too many or too big gpt-deals, you are in risk of a war-declaration. It's the balance that counts.

 

[Chieftess]

To counter - I also analyze every possible trade, and present all possibilities in the forum. From balanced to most agressive, and let the citizentry decide. If we're behind in techs, then it may take a drastic trade to pull out ahead.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Chieftess
To counter - I also analyze every possible trade, and present all possibilities in the forum. From balanced to most agressive, and let the citizentry decide. If we're behind in techs, then it may take a drastic trade to pull out ahead.

IMHO, you also asked me months ago as your deputy (First DG) to mark the location of all the resource's & lux's on the map .