http://www.masteroforion2.com/4381/tsl.htm
Rule says:
...
A. There is no official League game setup...
...
4. Repulsive: Must ALL players pick the Repulsive option or not?
5. Trading: If players are not all repulsive, is technology trading allowed or not?
...
Whats the default ?
I have heard meanings where techtrading isn´t allowed as default.
I think we should push techtrading to allowed, cos Repulsive Pick is too cheap.
Look also on this thread. viewtopic.php?t=112
StarLeague Rule TECHTRADING
The old Star League, back in the days of TEN, first banned tech trading, if I understand correctly. I wasn't around the MOO2 world then so I am only going by second-hand information.
What I was told was that tech trading was banned because sometimes a powerful player would turn a less powerful player into their own personal little "tech factory" through constant threats: as long as you're a good little empire and research the techs I want, I'll let you live.
While I would personally respond in a non-flattering way to such a player (ie either attack and slow them down enough that it drains them and hurts them against everyone else, or build 50 spies and declare war, followed in either case by dropping out of the game), and perhaps it would hatch a personal MOO2 vendetta against said player in future games, there are some people who would cave in, just to stay in the game, perhaps because they are new and struggling to learn.
My understanding is that this happened at times. Hence the "no tech trading" rule was created to cut down on what many would consider an abusive play style.
Maybe Cybersaber can shed some more light on it.
Having said all that, I'd vote "yes", just to give it a try to see how it goes.
-Gusset
What I was told was that tech trading was banned because sometimes a powerful player would turn a less powerful player into their own personal little "tech factory" through constant threats: as long as you're a good little empire and research the techs I want, I'll let you live.
While I would personally respond in a non-flattering way to such a player (ie either attack and slow them down enough that it drains them and hurts them against everyone else, or build 50 spies and declare war, followed in either case by dropping out of the game), and perhaps it would hatch a personal MOO2 vendetta against said player in future games, there are some people who would cave in, just to stay in the game, perhaps because they are new and struggling to learn.
My understanding is that this happened at times. Hence the "no tech trading" rule was created to cut down on what many would consider an abusive play style.
Maybe Cybersaber can shed some more light on it.
Having said all that, I'd vote "yes", just to give it a try to see how it goes.
-Gusset
- StepNRazor
- Posts:70
- Joined:Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:42 pm
- Location:Tualatin, OR . U.S.
- Contact:
Someone being made a stronger players tech bitch is one of the problems.
Given a rep bann game and tech trade is not banneded, 2 players could get alot further along than another two, or 1 player could get even more say 3 treaties and traxes going on. Assume he has wh's to others and is orcestrating technologies to pit other's agains each other. Him as being the broker of techs and treaties is the golden goose the other 3 dont want to kill. but eventualy this broker has manipulated the techs and pounces one of the players he neglected to give some weapons techs to.
So there are the tech bullies the tech brokers and sometimes there are tech arguments these lead to ill feeling between some players, I can think of one example that was prolly the last game IoMega played delt with tech a bully.
Noreport will curb some of the above mentioned problems, I would like to see some game play to try to bring some of the problems to light without the participants becomeing hostile with each other sort of a fact finding game mision to discoverr solutions to old sore spots.
Given a rep bann game and tech trade is not banneded, 2 players could get alot further along than another two, or 1 player could get even more say 3 treaties and traxes going on. Assume he has wh's to others and is orcestrating technologies to pit other's agains each other. Him as being the broker of techs and treaties is the golden goose the other 3 dont want to kill. but eventualy this broker has manipulated the techs and pounces one of the players he neglected to give some weapons techs to.
So there are the tech bullies the tech brokers and sometimes there are tech arguments these lead to ill feeling between some players, I can think of one example that was prolly the last game IoMega played delt with tech a bully.
Noreport will curb some of the above mentioned problems, I would like to see some game play to try to bring some of the problems to light without the participants becomeing hostile with each other sort of a fact finding game mision to discoverr solutions to old sore spots.
This seems to be one of the main problems. There is the potential to exploit new players. But banning tech trade seems to me an absolutely boring solution. There MUST be some better solution....there are some people who would cave in, just to stay in the game, perhaps because they are new and struggling to learn.
OK, a bit brainstorming:
a) For Example, only the "new player" (by some definition) is allowed to initiate the audience when the other player is a veteran. (No restriction in vet-vet diplomacy.)
b) LB can implement a lot of things. What about a fixed number of demands in MP? Also in SP you can't demand forever. (Depends on diplomacy roll influenced by techs, leaders and racepicks. We could try something similar.)
c) Techexchange: To avoid this demand restriction some players could have the idea to exchange some high tech with junk. So the RP difference of the both techs should be limited somehow.
I agree, there is the problem of early meeting and they decide that one of them research hv armor and similar deals. I don't like this either. I think LB could help here. For example following restriction. Techexchange is only possible when Research (and/or Trade treaty) exceeds some RP-value. Or you need a stable research treaty for 25 turns or so before any techexchange is possible. Well, it works often similar in SP-games. And 25 turns without an important econ tech should hurt a lot at start.Given a rep bann game and tech trade is not banneded, 2 players could get alot further along than another two,...
- StepNRazor
- Posts:70
- Joined:Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:42 pm
- Location:Tualatin, OR . U.S.
- Contact:
how about no tech bellow 400 rp can be traded?
Then 2 players shouldne't have an adavantage over another 2 because of wh or early contact. So no hvy armor dauntless fusion drive duets c1 ect like that could be traded. I think this will work even if post warp contact should be soon in 4way lrg, a 4way huge post warp might need some redefineing.
I think game testing of rep bann games is needed
So in your next games propose ban rep and make requests for some type of tech tradeing to test post results.
Then 2 players shouldne't have an adavantage over another 2 because of wh or early contact. So no hvy armor dauntless fusion drive duets c1 ect like that could be traded. I think this will work even if post warp contact should be soon in 4way lrg, a 4way huge post warp might need some redefineing.
I think game testing of rep bann games is needed
So in your next games propose ban rep and make requests for some type of tech tradeing to test post results.
- StepNRazor
- Posts:70
- Joined:Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:42 pm
- Location:Tualatin, OR . U.S.
- Contact:
- StepNRazor
- Posts:70
- Joined:Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:42 pm
- Location:Tualatin, OR . U.S.
- Contact:
I think No report need a change so people dont look at your tech like a shoping list.
Player A want to trade tech with Player B, player B will see the tech player A has to trade, but Players C and D wont know what techs Player A has unless they make a trade.
this keeps players players C and D from knowing weakness and strengths of player A untill battles or trades.
Player A want to trade tech with Player B, player B will see the tech player A has to trade, but Players C and D wont know what techs Player A has unless they make a trade.
this keeps players players C and D from knowing weakness and strengths of player A untill battles or trades.
Cab and Alex had a rep ban game with noreport. They told me that it was bugged.
(It was intended by LB to grey out "demand tech and tech exchange" when you use noreport, but this didnt work...mebbe Alex and Cab can add details here.)
Actually I was never happy that this "techexchange ban" was connected to the noreport switch. You cant use noreport in 2v2 then.
(It was intended by LB to grey out "demand tech and tech exchange" when you use noreport, but this didnt work...mebbe Alex and Cab can add details here.)
Actually I was never happy that this "techexchange ban" was connected to the noreport switch. You cant use noreport in 2v2 then.
I agree. Instead of shopping list...the list of his own techs should be displayed. (Like offer tech list.) Player B can answer with an offer and Player A can accept or reject the answer of Player B. Dunno if this is possible.I think No report need a change so people dont look at your tech like a shoping list.
I made an audience with cab and was able to see demand tech or exchange tech. I happend only online not on hotseat iirc.Cab and Alex had a rep ban game with noreport. They told me that it was bugged.
SAVE : http://moo2.de.vu/noreport_bug.GAM
- Lord Brazen
- Site Admin
- Posts:162
- Joined:Mon Jul 18, 2005 10:16 pm
- Location:Toronto, Canada
- Contact:
I must speak in favor of tech trading. Its just another element of the game to complicate things . While I think we all agree it could be manipulated, so can other elements of the game which are inherently prone to abuse.
I agree that the only way to make techtrading mainstream is by eliminating (or limiting) players ability to abuse it. I would be concerned that any new rule would just add to the learning curve of the newer players. Therefore, it seems that a built-in solution would be preferred.
All of the veterans I have played with have not taken advantage of me as a newer player. That anyone would feel the need to gang up, exploit, or win the game by tech brokering is beyond me. These players can't honestly believe they earned their victory. But I know it happens just the same. However, any new player who comes to Kali that naive(ie giving up core tech, caving to threats), IMHO isn't ready for online play.
I like alot of the ideas put forth above. . .but think that further discussion would be appropriate. Unfortunately, compromise is going to be needed, so everyone will need to be open minded.
I agree that the only way to make techtrading mainstream is by eliminating (or limiting) players ability to abuse it. I would be concerned that any new rule would just add to the learning curve of the newer players. Therefore, it seems that a built-in solution would be preferred.
All of the veterans I have played with have not taken advantage of me as a newer player. That anyone would feel the need to gang up, exploit, or win the game by tech brokering is beyond me. These players can't honestly believe they earned their victory. But I know it happens just the same. However, any new player who comes to Kali that naive(ie giving up core tech, caving to threats), IMHO isn't ready for online play.
I like alot of the ideas put forth above. . .but think that further discussion would be appropriate. Unfortunately, compromise is going to be needed, so everyone will need to be open minded.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests