jonbaer Posted February 26, 2017 Report Share Posted February 26, 2017 Has there been any discussion to make "tributes" a bit more realistic in terms of how they are given out? I was thinking it would seem to make better sense if they had to be delivered to a Civic Centre instead of instantly. I would imagine you could select a Trader to deliver them - would that add anything to the game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feneur Posted February 26, 2017 Report Share Posted February 26, 2017 What do you think it would add to the game? As I see it it does have the good effect of being possible to intercept by the other players, which would add one more thing one could do to affect the outcome of the game. I do think it does at the very least have some things which would have to be thought through before adding though. Using a trader would mean that you would not only be losing resources because you are giving them to someone, you would also lose the ability to use the trader to gain more resources during the time it's used to deliver the tribute. I think that would mean people are less likely to tribute resources, and if it's not used/rarely used I think that's an argument against it. Especially since it's something that can make e.g. a situation where one player is focused on by the enemies more fair/balanced as the allies can easily help by tributing resources, but if you would have to send traders through a battle-field to help out it would be a lot harder to do. It also means that it's harder for a player who is just about to be defeated to send any remaining resources to their team mates, but I guess that could be seen as a good thing if you want matches to be over sooner/give bigger benefits to the winning team. When giving tribute to an enemy it would give the added risk of someone else intercepting it etc, but I think it would add more angry players than benefits ("did you really send a tribute? you might be saying that you did, and that someone else destroyed it, but how would I know?" etc). Maybe it can be seen as an added dimension, but to me it seems like a lot of hassle, for a small added benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonbaer Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 "If you would have to send traders through a battle-field to help out it would be a lot harder to do" That is a part which seems more ideal in that there should be a better strategy on when it is that you send a tribute since all game situations would not be ideal. Part of this logistic is what would make war/conflict more realistic/strategic. It just feels to me that it's the only part of the game that is not "in the game" - an ally not getting the resources it needs and being conquered is part of the game but I can see how you say this would alienate novice. Another element is that in trying to anticipate this risk and possible changing game strategies, for example when a message is received "Player A (ally) has obtained 1000 metal from Player B (enemy)" - whether it is a successful tribute or unsuccessful (stolen along the way, piracy, etc)" - the way it is setup now feel almost like a bank wire (lol - sorry bad analogy) and from AI viewpoint not programmable. Another idea I thought of was also having CivCenter/StoreHouses/Farmsteads/Docks as holdings (banks) for resources indefinitely that a trader could travel between but I realize coding these counters would be alot of work. Something more complex outside of loot. I don't mean this to sound as "what can we do to make giving tributes" more difficult, just that maybe there is a more realistic gaming way to hand them out which has an effect on gameplay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Tribute is kinda weird. You're right, it's some kind of meta thing -- wire transfer isn't a bad analogy. But functionally, it's more a feature to promote teamwork, so that's why it's there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Quote Another element is that in trying to anticipate this risk and possible changing game strategies, for example when a message is received "Player A (ally) has obtained 1000 metal from Player B (enemy)" - whether it is a successful tribute or unsuccessful (stolen along the way, piracy, etc)" - the way it is setup now feel almost like a bank wire (lol - sorry bad analogy) and from AI viewpoint not programmable. How? the banks in the antiquity were the Temples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonbaer Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 I feel like it might have been covered before ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banker_(ancient) ... I don't think "bank" would be the right thing (ie, not a structure per se), just keeping the resource collect inside the game itself somewhere. Another idea I thought of along somewhat similar lines is the ability to drop treasure as tribute. This way you could set the amount but the ally would still need to come by and pick it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.