Is this gamey?

[Gryphin]

Geo said it first, (and better) but since I prepared it:

Seems like it comes down to
Intent
Execution
If the recieving player keeps and uses the resources then it seems fair. Yes they can using the Trade Resources create a ship every two to four turns. If this were a specialty ship such as a warp opener / star buster / mine sweeper / cloked spy ship etc… it could have a impact on the game.
Perhaps the two sides need to reach an agreement on what the recieving player can and cannot do.
Some items for consideration are:
Intel
Research
Specialty Ships

[Stone Mill]

As pointed out earlier, the benefits of this move may be overestimated. The bonus produced by the arrangement is a drop in the ocean, and the empire giving the planet has foregone a chunk of resources.

It may be frustrating for you, but it is not gamey. I have seen this move many times, and mostly, I think that it is to keep a player in the game so they can continue to have some kind of impact for a bit.

For all intent and puropse, they aren't able to really do much with one planet, so it does not bother me at all. Their expansion will be at the cost of their allies. There is only so much space in the quadrant, and you have made progress in a forward direction.

[DavidG]

Originally posted by Stone Mill:
As pointed out earlier, the benefits of this move may be overestimated. The bonus produced by the arrangement is a drop in the ocean, and the empire giving the planet has foregone a chunk of resources.

Actually I think it is likely the player with one planet is generating as much as 50% of the resources of my 3rd place empire due to treaties.

[Slynky]

Originally posted by Stone Mill:
As pointed out earlier, the benefits of this move may be overestimated. The bonus produced by the arrangement is a drop in the ocean, and the empire giving the planet has foregone a chunk of resources.

It may be frustrating for you, but it is not gamey. I have seen this move many times, and mostly, I think that it is to keep a player in the game so they can continue to have some kind of impact for a bit.

For all intent and puropse, they aren't able to really do much with one planet, so it does not bother me at all. Their expansion will be at the cost of their allies. There is only so much space in the quadrant, and you have made progress in a forward direction.

Without knowing all the details, it's not necessarily a drop in the bucket. IF the "little player" is allied to 2 other empires who each have 200,000 in research and 400,000 in resource generation, the treaty will generate (varies according to empire settings) a chunk of research (to be put to use on SOMETHING) and a LOT more resources that could be gifted back to each empire than the gifted planet could EVER pruduce (assuming it was just a 1, 2, or 3-fac planet and not some huge breathable).

[Master Belisarius]

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
Its not a surrender... Its the opposite, really. The big empire gifts a planet to the almost-dead empire in order to keep his trading partner alive.
The little guy gets the trade income from the big guy to rebuild a fleet and help out the war effort.

Its like a Terrorist Shell Game.
"This is his Last hideout! We'll bomb it to glass!"
"Oops, he's left and is hiding out in yet another neighbouring country's land"
"Now THIS is his Last hideout! We'll really bomb it to glass and then bomb it some more..."
etc.

Sounds pretty annoying for the person playing the US But would make an entertaining story.

It was just an example, of things that I want to clear before join a game (really make me angry when one empire surrender to their ally).
If I don't asked about questions like this, then, my opinion is that will be forced to accept anything...
For things like this, was discussed before, if would be good to have some standard "house rules" to play in PBW or not...

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by DavidG:
Actually I think it is likely the player with one planet is generating as much as 50% of the resources of my 3rd place empire due to treaties.

Originally posted by Slynky:
Without knowing all the details, it's not necessarily a drop in the bucket. IF the "little player" is allied to 2 other empires who each have 200,000 in research and 400,000 in resource generation, the treaty will generate (varies according to empire settings) a chunk of research (to be put to use on SOMETHING) and a LOT more resources that could be gifted back to each empire than the gifted planet could EVER pruduce (assuming it was just a 1, 2, or 3-fac planet and not some huge breathable).

Well, points taken. But still I think the idea of gaminess should reflect the intention behind the planet gift and not the act of the gift itself. If the one planet empire living on the trade and generosity of his allies is going to remain an active participant in the game, and attempt to rebuild his empire, build a military, and be some kind of a factor I don't have an issue with it. If he is just acting as an offshore account creating wealth and or producing ships for the allies then it's what I would consider gamey or even outright cheating depending on the severity.

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

[spoon]

Originally posted by geoschmo:
[I have no trouble whatsoever with players helping each other out in games. But when one is doing so to the absolute exclusion of his own empire and getting nothing in return, as in this case of gifting away all his trade income instead of using it to rebuild his empire, then that isn't gamey. It's cheating.

If team victories are allowed in that game, then you could argue that the empire is indeed getting something in return.

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.