![]() |
Re: Is this gamey?
Quote:
Quote:
However it is an interesting point to consider. Perhaps we should seek a change in the next patch to rectify this. I am thinking a good solution would be an artificial cap on trade income. Maybe make it a percentage of your own empires income. I suggest 100% by default. So what you would get is you cannot receive more then 100% of your own empire income in trade with another empire regardless of their size and the current percentage of trade. So you could still in effect double your economy through trade with one empire, or quadrouple it with four allies etc. But you couldn't make an obscene amount of resources off you huge allies and be producing nothing of your own. This percentage could be put in settings.txt so people could change it for mods if they want, up or down. Geoschmo |
Re: Is this gamey?
Quote:
And I think calling it cheating is going a little too far in any case. That said, your suggestion on how to prevent it from happening (trade amount cannot surpass what you generate yourself) seems like a great idea. |
Re: Is this gamey?
Quote:
Geoschmo |
Re: Is this gamey?
This whole "gifting resources back thing" seems like a really difficult thing to do. Gifted resources come from your storage, IIRC. So that one planet must designate a significant portion of it's precious space to storage.
And so what if they get a research bonus? It will not compare with an empire's research. Their progress will be quite slow. As for incoming resources, what good are they when you only have one yard? Besides, if it is an intel game, you can just crucify them with Communications mimic and other attacks. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: Is this gamey?
Quote:
|
Re: Is this gamey?
Quote:
|
Re: Is this gamey?
The incredible amount of trade income available to a single planet empire is the only thing makes this gamey.
I don't think it is gamey to make a gift and expect gifts back. That is simply the easiest way to execute a long term trade agreement. I sell you one planet and you pay me back with interest over 30 turns. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif |
Re: Is this gamey?
It's pretty telling that no one has yet mentioned the "subjugation" or "protectorate" treaty type features in this discussion.
Seems like those are interesting features which are underdeveloped to the point that no one ever considers using them, but instead use Surrender or the sort of procedure described here. If the features were better developed and enforced in the game mechanics, it could change a common and somewhat questionable situation into a more interesting one. A trade limit feature is a good idea. Gifting should have some more game program support for limits, too. PvK |
Re: Is this gamey?
Quote:
|
Re: Is this gamey?
Quote:
MB is right these things should be in the games rules from the start. The problem is of course you don't figure out what these things are untill they happen once.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yeah, everytime I hear one of these questions it seems someone says it should have been clearly stated in the game. Sheeesh! If we had to start setting up games with boilerplate conditions all the time, the next excuse would be, "Well,there was just so much 'small print', I didn't feel like reading all of it." Personally speaking, it's one thing for someone to work within the rules and do something "gamey" (I don't care for it much but, hey, at least the rules and game permit it) but it's an entirely different thing when someone discovers a flaw in the game and uses it. [ July 25, 2003, 12:23: Message edited by: Slynky ] |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.