Request for explanation, please

[Possum]

In the long sticky thread above, about the Race to SE5, Tournament of Champions, there was an exchange that was partially edited out.

Slynky said

I would have preferred it that way as well, Roanon, but considering there was no way to stop it with a game setting, it was something that a person had to do because who wants to be the only one NOT doing it, eh?

The controversy seemed to center around something to do with trades.

Can someone please explain to me, before I go back to playing on PBW, what this issue is about, please?

Not the personalities, not necessarily this specific incident, but the issue behind it. What pernicious practice is taking place, that can't be prevented with a game setting?

[Fyron]

This has nothing to do with normal PBW at all. It was entirely about that tournament. There is no pernicious practice going on in PBW in general. The entire issue revolved around a very specific set of rules for that tournament.

[spoon]

I think it was about trading colony tech and population with other players. It's one of those things that is so important to do in a competitive game, that if you don't do it, and everyone else does, you will likely lose. Viewed as cheeseball by some, and standard operating procedures by others.

I tend to play in games with Trading prohibited entirely, in part because this aspect introduces a big luck factor (ie, starting next to willing empires that have different colony tech than you is a huge bonus).

Mods have addressed this in a couple of ways: Make colony types a Racial Trait (so it can't be traded) or reduce the research cost of the colony tech (so it isn't such a big deal if they are traded). (though this doesn't address the pop-trading at all).

And you can always play with the Colonize Homeworld Planet Types Only setting.

[Roanon]

Yes, this was about tech trading - in general, not only colony tech. Slynky confirmed my preference for a game with NO tech trading. But as there is no in-game way to stop it entirely (even with trading disabled you can circumvent it) Tesco had enabled it and allowed it completely and we had to accept it. And to practice it, even if we dislike it, because being the only one NOT doing tech trading is not an option. The game practically revolves around tech trading if it is permitted, and all other things like strategy and empire buildup are not really important any more.

I still prefer trading disabled and a house rule of no tech trading, thinking this community is mature enough to follow rules even if they are not strictly enforceable via game settings.

[Possum]

Umm, how does one circumvent the "No Trading" option?

Via Gifts?

At least in the Version of SE4 Classic I Last played on PBW, trades didnt work anyhow, you never got the stuff, so it had to be done via Gifts...

[spoon]

Via the "let me leave this unshielded ship in the same sector as your ship with Boarding Parties" strategy. Or the ever popular, "Oops, did I forget to defend against Intel this turn?" technique.

But as Roanon said, for the most part, this is a good community with little cheating... House rules are almost always good enough for me.

[Fyron]

Possum said:
Umm, how does one circumvent the "No Trading" option?

Via Gifts?

At least in the Version of SE4 Classic I Last played on PBW, trades didnt work anyhow, you never got the stuff, so it had to be done via Gifts...

If you do all political Messages at the end of the turn, after everything else, there is no problem with trades in 1.49. There may have been with earlier pre-gold Versions though. I am in a PBW game using 1.49 that is still going on, and I make trades with my ally nearly every turn, and I know he makes trades with many people (merchant empire and alL).

[Captain Kwok]

That particular situation had to do with a player feeling cheated by his ally after they were supposed to make some sort of trade, and like Fyron said, had nothing to do with the general PBW climate.