What did I missed from Dom I.? -> DIPLOMACY!

Mortifer · #1 October 17th, 2003, 10:14 PM

Some items should flagged as 'can be traded', that way this abuse is no more.
Or just do not allow to trade items like exploding amulets.

I think that seeking the aid of the AI to attack another nation is ok. That is how it is supposed to work.
Just take a look at the medieval/dark ages. This happened a lot.

[ October 17, 2003, 21:14: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

Gandalf Parker · #2 October 17th, 2003, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mortifer:
Some items should flagged as 'can be traded', that way this abuse is no more.
Or just do not allow to trade items like exploding amulets.

That could grow to an extreme database. And probably just lead to more creative acts. Alot of the items would be variable also. What is a good thing for abyssia could be a bad thing for caelum.

In my earlier scales I made an item trade to be a minor-good thing while gold or gems was worth more. To be entirely safe, trading items might be worth nothing or not even allowed. Maybe take it back to only allowing for human players or having AI's automatically destroy any item they are traded.

Taqwus · #3 October 17th, 2003, 10:52 PM

Plus, whether or not an item would be useful is situation-dependent. For instance, if Man's making heavy use of longbowmen, then he probably does not want to field a Staff of Storms. Bone armor, or others with harmful area effects, can be useful... but not on a commander who's constantly surrounded by friendlies. Robes of Missile Protection are weak, weak armor if you're not going to be using archers...

Mortifer · #4 October 17th, 2003, 11:00 PM

Yeah, that is true. Hrm maybe trading items shouldn't be allowed at all?
Or just limit it? Let's say only 'common'** items should be traded, like a flaming sword, etc.

**Items what won't cause any trouble 'abusing wise'.

[ October 17, 2003, 22:00: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

Gandalf Parker · #5 October 18th, 2003, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mortifer:
Yeah, that is true. Hrm maybe trading items shouldn't be allowed at all?
Or just limit it? Let's say only 'common'** items should be traded, like a flaming sword, etc.

**Items what won't cause any trouble 'abusing wise'.

I think that would be more trouble than its worth. I dont mean to seem bragging or anything but I can almost gaurantee you that if your list infludes a couple of dozen items I will find one that I can abuse.

Just for an example.... there are some armor items that would be great for pangaea but sending them to ulm would cause ulm to downgrade his commanders. Some swords also.

Zerger · #6 October 18th, 2003, 09:03 AM

Yeah, I think that trading items is a bad idea.
Sending gold, gems, or transferring provinces is enough.
Those cannot be abused. + The devs won't have to mess around with 2000 items.

Nerfix · #7 October 18th, 2003, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:

quote:
Originally posted by Mortifer:
Yeah, that is true. Hrm maybe trading items shouldn't be allowed at all?
Or just limit it? Let's say only 'common'** items should be traded, like a flaming sword, etc.

**Items what won't cause any trouble 'abusing wise'.

I think that would be more trouble than its worth. I dont mean to seem bragging or anything but I can almost gaurantee you that if your list infludes a couple of dozen items I will find one that I can abuse.

Just for an example.... there are some armor items that would be great for pangaea but sending them to ulm would cause ulm to downgrade his commanders. Some swords also.

Perhaps there could be a nation-specific list of abusable and non-abusable items? RoLK might be abusable with Marignon, but C'tis and Ermor are a diffrent story. And do we count items that are potent(Robe of the Magi, Lifelong Protection), but Horror Mark or Curse the wearer abusable items?