Any chance on a "No Tech Brokering" Option?

I like the idea, and it never hurts to give a game more options. I just don't think it's a big enough issue to really get the devs attention.

When I sell or trade a tech to a race, I go through all other races and pimp that same tech off to them. I might as well make cash off it since everyone's going to have it sooner or later now.

The problem is this: the worth of a tech is (or, ought to be) based partially on what you can do with it. Like selling it to others.

A tech that you can't sell to others isn't worth as much as one you can.

Personally, I don't think that this shouldn't be an option; it should be a trading possibility. That is, you can trade individual techs with the understanding that they can't trade them to anyone else. That way, the AI can factor it into its idea for how much the tech is worth.

I will 2nd, 3rd and 4th this.... along with a no unique tech trading option too.

This was the absolute best thing they ever did for CIV4, which had a similar problem with AI's trading everything under the sun behind closed doors. This one little change prevents the AI from trading away every tech it gets. It was refreshing to see some diversity instead of the same AI with a different name.

It doesn't diminish returns on your techs, it increases them because you are the only one to be able to trade techs you research. It also helps in that you know you can trade a tech to a trusted ally and it will stay with him. As it stands now, you can't give away your latest tech at all, even if it would really help because he'll just trade it away.

It actually makes the tech game more interesting, and it fits like a glove in the diplomacy side of things by allowing you to strengthen your allies, or your "buffers".

T

If this goes into effect... everyone might as well tick the disable tech trading box and be done with it once and for all.

How much value one puts to any techs is more about IF it can remain theirs and for how long. Eventually, the linear research pathways lead to a playfield leveling which advantages or consequences have A balancing effect. If AIs can't trade these, what would they do instead? Exclusively weak or keeping pace with everyone else to BE a challenge? Back stabbers or continual situations (and opportunities) to handle?

You don't want everyone to have your precious new techs distributed within a few turns by someone? Just, keep it. And... wait.

The *No Brokering* option would only do one thing - limit the entire span of any gaps occuring during any given game between the Human Player and its opponents; indirectly, it simply would delay the inevitable - common knowledge.

I've been and most probably always will be against such stuff for more reasons than i could spell out but i'll give one last fact to sustain my objection; research slider(s) & Ability percentages... as they both can provide a HUGE decisive edge while the No_Brokering concept nullifies it - in great lengths.

Zyx, I have no idea what you are trying to say. What exactly would the problem be with a "No Brokering" option?

Quoted For Truth. This is basically my entire midgame strategy - trade increasing numbers of garbage techs for high-end techs, then sell the least powerful high-end techs to everyone else for massive profit, use profit to fuel war machine, then unstoppable galactic conquest.

But I do like the idea in theory... I'm sometimes worried that if I do one race a favor like, they're losing a war and I give them Uber Death Bombs, I'm afraid they're going to just trade it in return for a peace treaty, not fight the proxy war I was hoping for.

The problem is that it would not be functionally different from standard tech trading to the AI. One researches, whores it to all the others, and the others can immediately build on that research. The only real difference is that it lets the human player control where their tech goes, making it a massive exploitive advantage to the player.

There would be some slight advantage to this in TA to preserve the "uniqueness" of each civ (temporarily), but it would eventually devolve into the same exploitive advantage for the human player. The only important consideration for adding this sort of feature is whether the AI can handle the new mechanics as well as a human. See the official stance on tactical combat for further arguments.

This concept has been brought up and argued several times. To my knowledge, Stardock has never given it an official response. By now I consider it a dead horse topic.

Ah, okay. That was much more clear Willy.

I disagree, however. Massive exploitative advantage? I understand that you can bolster one race with lots of advanced techs, but you can already do that with BCs and ships. And unlike BCs and warships, tech never gets used up. If you end up facing that same civilization later in the game, you've made it more difficult for yourself.

At any rate, I don't see it being any more exploitative than the current tech-trading scheme.



The AI can't handle any mechanics as well as a human. It's AI. This game would essentially be Pong if they refused to implement features that the AI couldn't utilize as well as humans.


All that aside, I still don't see why people are against more options. Surely brokering would have it's share of pros and cons, and it might not be your thing. That's cool; it's just another box you can leave unticked.

I really don't see what the problem is.

I don't see what the problem is either, although I suppose another option doesn't hurt. I, for one, rather enjoy exploiting the ability to trade something I traded for. If you act quickly, you can often turn one tech no one else has into a huge leap in technology, plus a bunch of spare cash.

Not a problem, just a nice possible option in the future sometime, to add an "in between" to the "all or nothing" that is present.

Actually, I think it's more surprising if one somehow manages not to turn one unique tech into a huge leap in technology and money. But don't limit yourself to a tech no one else has, even giving techs others already know to a race that doesnt is lucrative as heck. Basically, within the first year one could and should have nearly every tech known in the galaxy at that time and be fairly wealthy provided you've made contact with every race. And, one normally doesn't lose ground later. This is why even on the levels where the AI has 150-200% of the human players base economy, the human can keep from lagging in tech or even be the most advanced. I literally went from 10th in tech to 1st in tech during one turn in every game (playing with Super Diplomat). That is until I turned off tech trading. Then I got trounced for half a dozen games. In fact, this last game I started is the best I've done yet but I am still losing  

...though I think I'll be able to squeeze it out.

I think we're talking about the game levels in which the Human Player is generally behind in technology not the ones where the Human has researched their own tech bank and then decides who gets what tech they've saved in the bank.

This is my experience (masochistic)

I don't have Laser V, the Drengin do, so I say, "Hey Drengin, give me laser V and here's a few other techs and 1000 bc for it." Then I trade it one at a time to the others and easily make back my 1000 and then some, plus get a dozen other techs which I then use to make sure I get the remaining techs others know that I don't a few turns later, and some nice cash.

Without brokering if I got Laser V from the Drengin then I could not then go and trade Laser V to the other 9 civs -as I had not researched it but rather swindled the Drengin out of it - thereby actually making a massive profit AND receiving a new tech.

Tech brokering may never happen and it's fine if it doesn't, but I disagree that it would provide more of an exploitation for the human. Again, I'm talking about the higher levels, the ones where the AI generally lead in Technology, not me.

Optional, no problem.
Metaverse proofing, that's where i get off the bandwagon.

My point is that the **Gameplay Context** would turn around a full 360 degrees against those who rely on technology growth to fuel a war machine (if conquest is the aim, btw).
The AIs, in particular, would require a thorough re-conditioning of the algorithms to figure what the new priorities should become; lead by spending away or outwit by skills. Big difference, in my mind. Remember that i play as human - though.

There are simply three major precious resources to handle in this game; Shields, Hammers, Beakers. No-brokering would alter this dynamic as such...

In ONE situation with the following spendings (or strategic pattern):
*Social=25% *Military=40% *Research =35%
...general but somehow continual figures, so to speak.

Now, comes No-Brokering in this specific way of playing, values MUST be approximately altered to:
*Social=20% *Military=30% * Research=50%
...to obtain the same pace or some average results as they compare to what a player has intuitively developed for a winning condition (be it anything, btw)

The entire focus has changed because no Ais in their right mind (in a sense, human also!) would keep a tech for tooo long unless they can have something worth MUCH more for it (as calculated through code or organ_brain logic, btw).

Limit this feature and you'd be playing an entirely different game.
And like i said previously -- just keep those techs and simply, do not trade any IF that's what your feeling is.

I can see ZY's point, although to me it seems more like a game or AI limitation. You would be playing a different game, and you would have to research more. That doesn't bother me too much. People seem to think you'd have no trading going on, but that's not the case at all.

I use the same strategy of trading low techs for high now. Talk about an exploit. The way that it is now I get to trade any tech I received in trade too. Not only do I get to spam my techs but theirs too...

In theory with brokering, I would still get to spam my techs. Plus I'd be able to get them out to all the other players if I want. But so would the AI. It would still bring the inevitable common knowledge but the value of the tech stays with the original discoverer.

The AI's exploit the current system as much as you do. How many times do you go to trade and find the AI has every current tech from every one else? It's not AS bad as CIV was, but it's still done. At least in GC2 there a a few backwards peoples that never seem to get it.

Tech brokering is a way to allow techs to remain valuable... instead of just a line in a trade window with ten other things everybody but the guy your trading with has.

That said there are techs I keep no matter what. They're special...

T

True, but I confess that I do not have the self-restraint.   BTW with tech brokering and thus tech trading on, my usual set-up worked like this

Mil-35
Soc-50 (soc spills into Mil when nothing is built anyway)
Tech-15

Since I could easily get wahtever tech I wanted from others, I never concentrated too much on tech. Untill of course the late game where Soc and Mil were not as vital during stretches and I would max research.

I must be misunderstanding this whole issue. I believe no tech-brokering means that you can not trade techs you got from other civs? If that is the case, then how does a human player gain an advantage through this? (No sarcasm, honest question) Since atleast for me, and I kid you not, roughly 65-70 percent of the techs I have (when tech-trade on) are from other civs. Again, untill the late game. If this is not the definition, then my posts should be disregarded.

With tech-trade off, 0% of the techs I have are from other civs. If tech-brokering was not allowed, (as AN OPTION ONLY so as not to enrage others) a middle-ground would be found, no?

I know now that I play with no-tech trading, everyone has extremely unique tech levels.   Research is so much harder for me to keep up with that I really do think HARD about every tech that I research. I currently have maxed out my Beam Techs, but seriously have not even researched Mass OR Missle Theory.    I do have good defenses for both however since several other races have specialized in those.   My shields are very weak, but the two races using beams are far from me. With this setup I have never dropped research spending to below 40%; except in very rare occurences for a max of 2 turns or so. In fact, Research for me is genrerally over 50%

Finally, it is difficult to determine the mood/attitude one uses to post on the internet so FTR I am not upset, frustrated or even in the slightest displeased with the current set-up and hopefully my posts reflect that. I just find this discussion very interesting! --but not implementing a "no-brokering option" would not stop me from paying double what I've paid in the past for the next chapter in this amazing game.

mdsorom... It would definitely change your game.

Normally I run 40-20-40 at the beginning, adjusting as I go when trying to complete a galactic treasure or something. I also tend to specialize worlds and use the focus options alot. I tend to research what I want to, and trade for the odd techs to fill in holes. I also like to swap with a friend who's Missiles if I am Beams etc.

You are correct about trading away techs you get. If you don't do the research, you don't get to trade it. It really makes for some interesting tech times. All I can compare it to is CIV4, which in reality is not a real comparison. In that game, it was a bit more challenging, but I was still able to accomplish the same goals as i did when it wasn't there, and I feel it would be doable in GC2 as well.

The biggest difference will be noticed by either the player who begs/ borrows/ steals/ trades tech and doesn't research a thing and the real dim bulb AI races that seem to have tech issues already... A total change in game play. But for the person who is fairly proficient at climbing the tech ladder it's just a matter of adjusting the trade strategy a little.

All I can say about mood is I'm sick as a dog... Good thing these posts aren't contagious...

T

Hope you feel better soon ant.

I certainly specialize my worlds too, but with techtrade one, the only research worlds I ever needed were the ones with the uber-tiles. Certainly those worlds I concentrated on research, but maybe ~ 1 out 6 worlds were for tech for me. As I never needed to do more in the tech aspect of it since I had the AIs research for me and used my uber-diplomacy skills to acquire the techs.

With my spending setup, I could beat masochistic.

I probably could have got a little more tech from myself by going 40-20-40 early, but it was never a need for me anyway. You might be playing on suicidal or obscene and perhaps things change there. Towards the end, I would put more towards research.

I went from playing on Masochistic with Techtrade on, to just now being able to hang on crippling with it off. And, I don't do the metaverse thing, so perhaps there's points or something for score that you might be going for that I did not?

Ahhhh... say again?

What this means is that you *already* use the pseudo tech-no-brokering power to your advantage. As for the AIs, unless driven by an appropriate algorithm - they couldn't or wouldn't use this important tactical edge.
Thus, the continual loop (only stopped by tech-victory) to advanced science that everyone MUST go for - no matter what.
Can't really turn an apple to lemon - so to speak. But once you found the cherry pie - gosh, you might as well eat it or share it on an empty stomach!

Up until Colony rush is over, i stick mine at 60% with the occasional slight drop 55% to stay econo-afloat.

BUT, this is where things get weird; i fully level the technology playfield as much as i can until i'm either forced to fight a timely war or must decide on the Ethical edgy stuff.

My opponents are always not very far behind & if they start representing a threat, i switch gears. The BCs or other techs i get in all those deals are mine to exploit.

The real challenge comes in right after the 70%(+/-5) Influence ratio is near; exactly when, all the techs i gave away are just starting to be represented into a number of other important assets (planets fully developped being just one).

I simply distribute knowledge for cash until some key-moments flips me off to conquest. Lag too much in the techno race, you loose. Guarantee.

No-Brokering your way to victory applies to the same kind of reasoning. Only the conditions change.

And, this is also why i do NOT trade Xeno-Entertainment (just one example of many others) to anybody until i'm absolutely sure everyone else will pay extremely good money for it, btw.

I like this as an option. I'll look into it.

Woot  

That would be sweet. Can you please fix auto attack too while your there?

May the bees bow at the next sight of your hand, and may their honey be doubly sweet...

T

I would also love this option.

I turned tech trading off because I couldn't resist useing it to exploit the AI. No longer do I spend 90% of my time in the diplomacy window! The AI has no sense of balance of power when it comes to techs. Sure they will hold out slightly for some techs like medium ship building or race specific techs.

The value of a tech should be based on what percentage of races have it. So if I try to trade a tech to the 9th race, when 8 others already have it, that tech should be nearly worthless in trade. If I am the only one who has it, then it should be worth a fortune in trade.

In any case, until something is done about tech trading, I am just going to leave it off.