Tyrants of Terra

[Troymk1]

I'm veering towards barbs, No tech brokering, terra.

I'm thinking no random events. (the barbarian uprising is too massive too early)

I'm thinking cities can flip back after conquest. (So you'll need to get those theatres etc up)

There are still some bugs with 3.13...lets see how that goes.

 

[oyzar]

no random events is silly just cause of the barbarian uprising. It is one of the major things about bts.

And i want no tech trading not because i don't know how to trade(rather the oposite). As mentioned it is because it creates the need for allies which makes the game somewhat unbalanced and more important unfun for most ppl...

 

[whiplash_CDC]

In SP I have gotten a barbarian uprising with 4 archers perched on the border of my only city guarded by a single warrior. If it happens early you are totally screwed.

There are good arguments on both sides regarding tech trading. It provides an extra dimension to the game; but will screw the guy who starts in an isolated location.

Consider permanent alliances with randomly chosen teams of two.

 

[Hoplosternum]

No one is going to be that isolated on a Terra map surely?

I am not experienced enough at MP to know if Tech trading will create tech trading alliance blocks and if this will be a bad thing. Won't there be warmongering alliance blocks anyway? You are not going to have much fun if you lack the early war resources (Bronze etc.) on a MP Terra map.

 

[whiplash_CDC]

Dunno, I never played a Terra Map.

 

[classical_hero]

In SP I have gotten a barbarian uprising with 4 archers perched on the border of my only city guarded by a single warrior. If it happens early you are totally screwed.

There are good arguments on both sides regarding tech trading. It provides an extra dimension to the game; but will screw the guy who starts in an isolated location.

Consider permanent alliances with randomly chosen teams of two.

We had a barbarian uprising in the Intersite Pitboss and for some reason we had 6 Horse archers outside of one of our cities but they did not attack us for some strange reason.

 

[Troymk1]

And there was one in Chaos & Civility when most people still had warriors.

If the event could be made to challenge the strength of the Civ it spawns next to, without being so overbearing in 3700 BC then I'd be happy with it. No other event is so game changing.

 

[burlicconi]

no random events is silly just cause of the barbarian uprising. It is one of the major things about bts.

And i want no tech trading not because i don't know how to trade(rather the opposite). As mentioned it is because it creates the need for allies which makes the game somewhat unbalanced and more important unfun for most ppl...

Agree...
Random events are matter of luck and can gives different bonuses, which can make the game more interesting. But, with tech trading, two or more civs can make deal with tech trading that even much better player than they are can not follow... It's OK if someone make defensive pacts, it IS matter of diplomacy and trust, but make tech power only because you have enough time to contact every single civ and arrange trades are bad idea, because this is just a game

 

[Troymk1]

burliconni,

We'll be using the civstats site. So you'll be able to contact each player.

Although I tend not to like tech trading....I also think its a valid part of the game. Will think some more on it!

 

[oyzar]

Well I just got to say from my limited expirience tech trading have been very bad for the game. One game I abuse it to the limit and is hence about 4-5 techs ahead of most other ppl by the time i reach liberalism first(oob's 3rd) in another one i tried to join late but because i then didn't have any contacts built up correctly from the start i was basically screwed. Admitedly i did give over that position after only playing a couple turns(the illiad). If you know what you are doing tech trading makes the tech speed so stupid for the civs that know what they are doing. It also makes forming alliances a requirement and if you manage to find someone with non-conflicting goals it is very easy to run away. No tech brokering only mean you need a tighter cooperation to get things to work. And civstats does somewhat make it easier to contact people but you still get great return for talking to people in real time which requires quite allot of activity to play optimally. OF course negotiations about land etc is still good even without tech trading but at least it is somewhat limited. Another option that might be possible is of course always war to stop all kind of deals. As long as none convert to AI it shouldn't really be a problem though it might make for a hostile environment. Of course the nearby hostilities(which will be there no matter what settings are, cause of the nature of humans vs ai) makes barbs somewhat unnecessary and very anoying/unbalancing.

 

[burlicconi]

burliconni,

We'll be using the civstats site. So you'll be able to contact each player.

I know, but i was talking about real time- if you have enough real time hours you can contact every single civ and than make your plans turns ahead. Oyzar pretty well explained what could happen, so I have nothing more to add...

 

[oyzar]

The fact that you probably should plan at least 10 turns ahead at all times doesn't change the fact that trading makes preplaning so much powerful. With proper preplaning you get math + monarchy + all the religious techs + fishing/sailing/col/metalcasting/IW all when you get alphabet without having to lift a finger.

Of course this is only doable on a largish pangea/terra style map, however it is that kind of map we are talking about. Having liberalism before people rexing are able to settle all the land feels kinda weird.

 

[whiplash_CDC]

Allow me to make the suggestion again

Start right off with teams of two in permanent alliances. Everybody has a tech trading partner right from the start regardless of location. Nobody gets left in the dust.

 

[Troymk1]

Whip.

Team games are fun. But the team that co-ops better on moves and tech wins



I want a terra game with lots of diplomacy.....I'll probably assign map size once we know how many wish to play.

If my last game is anything to go on,,we had 10 to start 3 drop outs and 2 conquered within first month.

If I disable permanent Alliances it may make people think twice before trading ?? (ie only one can win so be careful)

 

[oyzar]

If you disable permanent alliances it will only make it harder to get good alliances which means that it is more likely that someone speed ahead... Because it still works just as fine once you have an alliance but everyone else can't do the same... Check out oob's 3rd game. That is terra(though huge).

 

[Sonnybonds]

I like tech trading because of the diplomacy game.
but i think it should be turned off because people will probalby abuse it.

and no teamgame from the start plz. Its much more fun creating teams in game.

 

[Aybraus]

Ignore this post. Sorry.

 

[Troymk1]

I have been looking at maps in Worldbuilder. Will be Small terra (8 players)

Enough room for everyone to start a good civ, then either expand by war or to the new world.

Goody huts and tech trading on. No random events.

 

[oyzar]

Expanding to the new world is fairly slow.. something tells me small terra will be very crowded and might just be over before anyone gets anywhere near the new world... No random evens is wierd and tech trading on is silly...

that said i'll still play, just saying no tech trading is going to make the game less fun for some people most likely.

 

[Troymk1]

Oyzar.

As I've said I've checked the maps. Looks good as far as room (and I mean the old world). Terra maps are bigger than other maps at the same size rating.

I've already stated why we're not having random events. (Broken Barbarian uprisings right now)

As to Tech trading, more people seem to prefer it.

Now if you like a certain way of playing you too could run a game?

I'll give more details when I'm back from Europe guys.