Wfyabta

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Might be correct, but I do not undestand how member of MY team might not like his team. I am refering to the case when Toky was one of my vassals, but was refusing to trade with me when having firendly status with me.

I don't understand it either (yet), because I was looking specifically into tech whoring, and not other kinds of trade blocks.

But guessing (meaning that I'm drawing on my memory of looking at the code, rather than actually checking these conclusions - so take with a wife of salt)...

(1) ALL tech trades are team to team trades, so the attitude checks are team checks (I'll reference the appropriate function when I update the article).

(2) Vassals are not teammates.

By (2), you actually have to trade to Toku for the tech, which means (1) that you need the team attitude check, which means that Toku's opinion of your other vassal matters, and since he doesn't like your vassal enough, he doesn't like your entire team enough.


I agree that invisible modifiers in relationships suck, though I'm not sure this one really counts; after all, you can find out Toku's attitude by looking at the diplo screen. Compare this with the "aggressive AI" modifier, which doesn't show up in the UI (except from the label on the settings screen).

Should your trade partner's attitude toward your vassal be relevant in dealing with you? That vassals impact team attitude is clearly not a bug. Using team attitude for tech trades was a deliberate design choice (and I think the correct one, given that allies share techs). I suppose it is possible that they lost track of the fact that the same attitude which is used for declaring wars and such is also used for trading (which would be a bug); but at this level it looks to me more like a design choice.

I'm deliberately avoiding making any comment on whether it was the right choice. I recently read elsewhere a suggestion that Marathon speed was tacked on, with less testing and balancing than the other speeds. It's possible that the vassal feature was also rushed in.

 

[skallben]

Hmm.
What about WDWTSTATTJY?

 

[50_dollar_bag]

Thanks for the clarification.

So basically I could have requested my two vassals Monty and Washington switch to Theocracy (Izzy's favourite civic) and along with the shared religion she might have traded with me.

I guess it's kind of ironic because I vassalized Izzy in that game and left her with all the horsehockey northern cities. One thing I failed to notice was whether her attitude towards tech trading changed once she became my vassal, does her relationship with my other vassals matter then?

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

I guess it's kind of ironic because I vassalized Izzy in that game and left her with all the horsehockey northern cities. One thing I failed to notice was whether her attitude towards tech trading changed once she became my vassal, does her relationship with my other vassals matter then?

My understanding is that it does, in precisely the same way. What changes is the willingness of your other vassals to continue trading with you (as their attitude toward Isabella now matters).

 

[skallben]

Hmm.
What about WDWTSTATTJY?

Quoting myself, harhar. I was in a hurry when I typed this.
Problem for me isnt WFYABTA.
It's:
"We Dont Want To Start Trading Away This Technologgy Just Yet."

Any ideas on this?

 

[shyuhe]

"We Dont Want To Start Trading Away This Technologgy Just Yet."

that's when not enough other civs know the tech for the civ in question to be willing to trade it out. The AI likes to keep a semi-monopoly if possible on techs. It's a totally different problem from WFYABTA.

 

[DaviddesJ]

that's when not enough other civs know the tech for the civ in question to be willing to trade it out.

Or also when the civ is building the wonder enabled by a technology and doesn't want to help others build it? Or am I imagining that?

 

[cabert]

Or also when the civ is building the wonder enabled by a technology and doesn't want to help others build it? Or am I imagining that?

It's the same quote?
I can't remember right now, but certainly this happens too.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Or also when the civ is building the wonder enabled by a technology and doesn't want to help others build it? Or am I imagining that?

I believe (after casual inspection) that you'll get "We Have Our Reasons" (DENIAL_MYSTERY) when the civ is trying to win the race to a world unit, world wonder, or world project. However, the DENIAL_TECH_MONOPOLY test comes earlier in the routine, so you will see "We don't want to start..." when both conditions are true.

For those who wish to verify for themselves, this is still in CvTeamAI::AI_TechTrade.

 

[DaviddesJ]

I believe (after casual inspection) that you'll get "We Have Our Reasons" (DENIAL_MYSTERY) when the civ is trying to win the race to a world unit, world wonder, or world project. However, the DENIAL_TECH_MONOPOLY test comes earlier in the routine, so you will see "We don't want to start..." when both conditions are true.

OK, that makes sense and probably explains what I've seen.

 

[Immaculate]

So, to apply this lesson to a practical application, please verify that i understand this correctly.

Lets say i am playing a game with multiple continents. If i want to avoid getting WFYABTA counters with Civs on the other continent(s), i am best served by doing all my local trading (with civs that the other continent has not met) prior to me making contact with civs on the other continent?

Does this mean it may actually be worth avoiding contact with civs on another continent until after you have 'milked' all your local contacts of their technologies?

Thanks for any replies.
I.

 

[cabert]

So, to apply this lesson to a practical application, please verify that i understand this correctly.

Lets say i am playing a game with multiple continents. If i want to avoid getting WFYABTA counters with Civs on the other continent(s), i am best served by doing all my local trading (with civs that the other continent has not met) prior to me making contact with civs on the other continent?

Does this mean it may actually be worth avoiding contact with civs on another continent until after you have 'milked' all your local contacts of their technologies?

If I understand well (I hope I do), it's not important that you don't know the others. It's important that the AIs you trade with don't know each other.

 

[Immaculate]

So, getting back to the practical application.
If i can get out there with caravels early and start trading with the other continent, provided the other continent's civs havn't met the civs on my continent (or a third continent) i am not really contributing to WFYABTA by trading with the civs on my original continent?
That means it pays to get out early then (for more then just the circumnavigational bonus).

I.

 

[cabert]

So, getting back to the practical application.
If i can get out there with caravels early and start trading with the other continent, provided the other continent's civs havn't met the civs on my continent (or a third continent) i am not really contributing to WFYABTA by trading with the civs on my original continent?
That means it pays to get out early then (for more then just the circumnavigational bonus).

I.

Right.
You have 2 different packs of tradings possible .

 

[DaviddesJ]

If I understand well (I hope I do), it's not important that you don't know the others. It's important that the AIs you trade with don't know each other.

Well, this directly contradicts the original article:

For each tech that you receive in trade, every leader that has met you increments its "you received a tech from someone else" counter by one.

Do you have some reason to believe that's not true?

 

[InFlux5]

Thanks so much for this. How often does someone discover a totally crucial game mechanic that we didn't know about before?

 

[rustydusty10]

Right.
You have 2 different packs of tradings possible .

When you meet a new civ and you trade with them right away, why do you face "you have traded with our worse enemy" immediately from a civ who you meet a couple turns later?

Another question is...how does the AI know your tech deals with other AI's? We don't know theirs, we can just assume.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Another question is...how does the AI know your tech deals with other AI's?

Quantum tunneling.

 

[cabert]

Well, this directly contradicts the original article:



Do you have some reason to believe that's not true?

no, it just seemed logical, and I didnt understand it right obviously.

 

[LowtherCastle]

no, it just seemed logical, and I didnt understand it right obviously.

Sorry, you lost me on that last response. You didn't understand it, it meaning Immaculate's scenario or the contradiction DaviddesJ is talking about?

In other words, when you have met all the civs, can they be separated into 2 blocks or not?