I've done most of my trading-off games in late DA and TA, and I favor the largest maps with generous but not ridiculous numbers of worlds.

In DA, the main difference for me was that the computer civs no longer appeared to have a secret research consortium, so they advanced at a more reasonable pace and had some variety amongst them. Subjectively, it seemed like they were more likely to follow different weapon paths rather than working together to race down a single tree. But it also made alliance wins almost impossible because many civs never bothered with the tech.

In TA, the variety thing is much, much larger because of the unique tech trees. I really like seeing such different infrastructures by mid-game, and lately it seems like the entire galaxy is colonized before anyone is even flirting with large hulls or high-end weapons. I even managed an alliance win recently, which suggests better research choices by the computer.

I also quite like the fact that not having a tech means you don't get the corresponding building when you conquer or flip a world. I suppose there's a corresponding strategy of trying to ensure an enemy has and uses improvement techs that you want to see on your new conquests if you play with trading on.

Hello there...
I usually play with tech trading off, for the same reason as Swicord (ie so the other races don't all trade up rapidly) but also because I didn't paricularly enjoy the trading bit.

Having said that if you are Terran or have major diplo it can help a lot.

Also agree with last post re the biggest drawback to not tech trading is not being able to form alliances.

Worth pointing out that one of the big improvements in TA is that when you are trading you can now right click on a tech and see how many research points it takes to research, and also what improvements etc the tech releases. This is a BIG help!

Cheers

So you think having it on give advantages to certian races?

Man, I will have a tough time turning it off. I love trading for techs. Must have techs. Need all techs. Especially race specific techs



Ok I get that, but doesn't somebody still have to trade it to them to get past the slow start?



Again, doesn't somebody still have to trade them these research things?

It won't be me

Do you think the A.I. is to 'generous' when trading with other A.I. races?

Yes. As GW said above, they seem to meld into one lump.

And if it isn't you trading it to them, then the AI just got something in return for giving them the techs to fill in their holes. You just lost twice in one trade.

Certain race's trees have gaps, limits or flaws. Allowing any of them to fill those in only makes them more powerful. Arguably, everyone in more powerful so it could be said everyone wins. Where things get sidetracked however is in the techs that cannot be traded. Only one race will have that tech. That or if any race holds onto one of the techs for that matter, everyone will not be equal.

"on the same level" is what trips that sentence up for me. I'll get to that soon though.

Yes, Tough is the last level of difficulty that the AI doesn't have any bonuses yet and it will use all algorithms it can.

As for "on the same level". That would be player-dependent. Some players know enough that Suicidal is what makes the AI "on the same level" as them.

As for the final question. I've played very little 'real' suicidal games. I don't think a ZYW consists of a 'real' game lol.

I'm up to Obscene right now; my only Suicidal was a ZYW, and as Loupdinour said, it doesn't count really. Although it does on your meter next to your medals. I think I might try a real suicidal on my next game.

I think Painful or Crippling were really good levels for getting a good game without having to worry about micromanagement or little mistakes. They were more comfortable.


As for tech trading (original post) I have never played with it off. I haven't really seen the AI abusing it as many players have stated. I do think the AI gives breaks to other AI races. I think too that trading has been changed a few times to stop the human player from abusing the AI; even though there are still ways to do this. The AI won't give up weapons or other very useful techs for anything short of A LOT more than they are really worth. Late game, getting techs from the AI isn't worth it. Tech trading gives a whole part of the game where you can interact with the other races as well as make some money. However I only play DA, and from what I understand about TA I think I'd turn it off there to keep the races different.

Zero Year Win
https://forums.galciv2.com/300853

Basically, you snuff out the AI before it gets it's legs (usually 13 turns into the game, no earlier for MV games or be flagged as a cheat). That said, it really doesn't matter what setting the AI is on, since it never gets up and running w/in that time.

Defiinitely give it a try LordZerggelin. Its a very different way to play, and some of the tactics can be applied to more conventional games as well.

Sentient species taste better...

I prefer tech trading off because:
- I dislike feeling like I'm facing collaborative team research by all AIs
- I don't want to have to check every AI every other turn to try to make tech deals to combat the collaborative AI research effort
- With TA, I feel like race specific techs shouldn't be freely traded (seems to defeat the purpose of race specific tech)
- Tech trading/whoring is too easily abused, particularly abusing minors - I'd go so far as to say that having tech trading on makes the game easier due to how bad you can abuse the AI with tech whoring
- I like the pace of tech better (can't trade for everything and fly thru the trees)
- There is no other option - no middle ground

The TA AI seems to roll just fine with tech trading disabled, which is great since in other games it can sometimes severely impact them.

I prefer tech trading on, since I'm firm beliver that removing game play features (like most of diplomacy in this case) is not way to play the games.

Easy to win doesn't always translate to easy to enjoy, or easy to maintain suspension of disbelief.

I prefer off myself. Though I miss seeing the other species on the intercom, I get bored of having to monitor the entire tech race. My supreme wish for gc2 though, would be a slider to allow tech trading at a certain diplomatic level... eg: close, warm etc... And to balance the potential military extortionist landslide by adding a negative relationship branch.

eg... instead of 'close' because you can devour my meagre civilization... it becomes 'toady' or 'sycophant' and you can't get tech trade because it's only a face saving relationship. Thus allowing tech trade to be a union of lesser powers scenario, which would rope in a runaway superpower and make early alliances worth preserving.

Now that sounds like a swell item for the GC3 wish list. I've managed to form a successful Underdog Alliance a couple of times, but only a couple of times and proabably mostly due to luck. Having some tools aimed in that general direction would be a good addition.

Not if said feces have great strategic value that would be reduced if other powers had similar feces. Notice that the early nuclear powers have tried zealously to keep their club small, and none of the early members helped another to join.

I had tech trading on for my last TA 1.96 game. The gremlins must be listening to me whine about the "secret research consortium" among the computer civs, because they did not do what I expected and cooperate to get well ahead of me in the early tech race. Instead, I worked my Thalan diplo problem hard and managed to score basic farms, Recruiting Centers, and some lower-level factory tech pretty early.

I haven't gotten another game well underway (being indecisive about waiting for 2.0). I'm very curious to know whether that last game was a weird moment or a fair example of what will happen given my play style. I think I should try at least a couple more tech trading games before I see what No Tech Brokering does for (to?) me.