Open Borders

[the6the]

Huh.. OK I'll use the latest patch and try to recreate on my rig also.
Yeah Cards are always funny. But isn't that the intent of "Open Borders?" To be able to enter their space in order to "see" their colonies, in order to trade with them? Coz you can't trade with a colony you haven't visited, right?
Do I remember correctly that in BOTF, all the Civ's colonies were revealed once the Friendship agreement was signed? I believe this was the purpose of that.. So that you didn't have to go into one another's space and physically visit all the colonies in order to open TRs.
Maybe that's an option worth discussing.. provided, of course it isn't too difficult to implement..

[Iceman]

But isn't that the intent of "Open Borders?" To be able to enter their space in order to "see" their colonies, in order to trade with them? Coz you can't trade with a colony you haven't visited, right?

Correct, only with colonies that are explored.
Entering their space is one thing, but parking your fleets (and your scouts, of all ships) on their colonies is another. Kind of feels like spying?
We're talking Friendly civs, not Affiliated+ civs (with an "exclusivity" agreement). Should I give them access to all of my empire (info-wise) if they can also become Friendly with any other empire, and hence give them all that information?

Do I remember correctly that in BOTF, all the Civ's colonies were revealed once the Friendship agreement was signed? I believe this was the purpose of that.. So that you didn't have to go into one another's space and physically visit all the colonies in order to open TRs.
Maybe that's an option worth discussing.. provided, of course it isn't too difficult to implement..

Oh, it's super easy to implement, a single line of code - given that it's already coded for memberships/affiliations/alliances.

Discussing it would be ok, of course. I guess I started it, above.

BTW, there are plans to change the way information about colonies is displayed/stored. Sometime in the future, you won't have updated information about all explored colonies every turn; that information will only be updated if/when you have a presence in the colony - fleets in orbit, an envoy or operative, a TR, etc.

[the6the]

Just to clarify, I'm not talking about the entire map data CivB has, just the boundaries of its empire (its colonies)

In this scenario, signing a friendship with CivC wouldn't automatically give CivC the colony info of CivB, would it? If it would, then I see your point. But if it wouldn't, then I see little reason not to reveal the colony data when signing such an agreement.
It seems to me that the map data of one's colonies is less valuable than the potential trade augmentation for both sides.

As it stands now, map data can be shared with other major Civs with no agreement signed whatsoever. So there's always the danger of any civ giving their whole map data (including whatever that civ has been able to scout out of your civ's territory) to another without your knowledge or permission, as a bargaining chip in diplomacy.

What about if, when you share your map data with civB. you get a regard/trust penalty toward every major civ you've encountered up until then, except with civB? Maybe then civ's will think twice about sharing their entire map data with others.
And what If that regard penalty could be amplified depending on whether you ever had a friendship agreement with them..
You could still have multiple civs as friends, since the map data they each acquire would only be that of your own territories colonies, and not your entire map data. A problem would occur with the rest of your friends, though, when you sign an alliance with another civ.. which only makes sense.

Am I making any sense?

Perhaps we should wait for these new plans to be implemented first (which sound brilliant BTW!), and then perhaps revisit this topic. Old map data might then be less valuable than it is right now.

[Iceman]

Just letting you know that I haven't forgotten about this, just waiting for more feedback from other players.

Perhaps we should wait for these new plans to be implemented first (which sound brilliant BTW!), and then perhaps revisit this topic. Old map data might then be less valuable than it is right now.

They might take a while to implement.

[Iceman]

Do I remember correctly that in BOTF, all the Civ's colonies were revealed once the Friendship agreement was signed? I believe this was the purpose of that.. So that you didn't have to go into one another's space and physically visit all the colonies in order to open TRs.
Maybe that's an option worth discussing.. provided, of course it isn't too difficult to implement..

Just to clarify, I'm not talking about the entire map data CivB has, just the boundaries of its empire (its colonies)

Done.

What about if, when you share your map data with civB. you get a regard/trust penalty toward every major civ you've encountered up until then, except with civB? Maybe then civ's will think twice about sharing their entire map data with others.
And what If that regard penalty could be amplified depending on whether you ever had a friendship agreement with them..
You could still have multiple civs as friends, since the map data they each acquire would only be that of your own territories colonies, and not your entire map data. A problem would occur with the rest of your friends, though, when you sign an alliance with another civ.. which only makes sense.

That's an interesting idea.

[Iceman]

I'm thinking of disabling the ability of *minor* civs offering Open Borders to empires, leaving control of disclosing map info in the hands of empires only (though they can reject OBs offered by minor civs ofc; but there will be an unavailability period).
What do you think
Is it interesting enough to have minor civs offer you treaties?
(they do not create TRs)

What about if, when you share your map data with civB. you get a regard/trust penalty toward every major civ you've encountered up until then, except with civB? Maybe then civ's will think twice about sharing their entire map data with others.
And what If that regard penalty could be amplified depending on whether you ever had a friendship agreement with them..
You could still have multiple civs as friends, since the map data they each acquire would only be that of your own territories colonies, and not your entire map data. A problem would occur with the rest of your friends, though, when you sign an alliance with another civ.. which only makes sense.

While thinking about this, a couple of questions came up.
- the penalty should only apply to civs that have been affected by this (had some sectors of theirs shared)
- your allies shouldn't probably be affected as hard as non-allies (and should allies here be Affiliated+ or Def/Allied )
- the magnitude of the penalty should probably be proportional to the number of (*) revealed

(*) should it be:
- any sector
- any system
- any habitable system
- colonies only

and should it be a weighed system, like colonies with more (max?) population should produce a larger penalty than smaller colonies (and empty sectors etc)

[the6the]

I kinda like the minors offering treaties. It's also a good way of getting better relations. But I see your point. They don't create TR's? Hm. Then it doesn't really matter I guess.
Yes, the penalties should apply only to those affected.
Agree that allies shouldn't be very affected. Def/Allied makes more sense in my book. But it might be worth testing affiliated+ if the effect is too strong.
Yes, proportional. I think "any habitable system", but would also include WHs and demon planet systems if possible. The other empty sectors shouldn't matter.
Oh yes! The better (more valuable) the system, the more the penalty! That would be awesome B)

[Iceman]

I kinda like the minors offering treaties. It's also a good way of getting better relations.

Yes, it's a nice touch I think.

As a side note, for the bonus to Trust that both civs get by having an active OB (or any other treaty), it's irrelevant who made the proposal - the empire or the minor civ. One of them will make the proposal at some point, so there's no impact on getting better relations really.

In what concerns the bonus to Trust (which I'm considering changing to Regard) for having Trade Routes with the other civ (which compounds with the one mentioned above), I asked SCT about TR output calculation, in order to check if it's really all that useful to have minor civs initiate TRs. The extra credits shouldn't be of much use to them, and the diplo bonus (whether Trust or Regard), if it only applies one-way, I'm not sure an increase in the way the empire sees the minor civ will have much of an impact (contrary to the reverse, the way the minor civ sees the empire, which is much more important).
If it applies both ways though, yes, it will have an impact. But in that case, it will be kind of a duplication of the effect - assuming that both civs (empire and minor civ) will start a TR of their own to the other civ; each one will get this bonus for each of those TRs. I'm not sure if that's not going to be excessive - and that's why I made the bonus one-way in the current patch.
Is this too confusing??

But I see your point. They don't create TR's? Hm. Then it doesn't really matter I guess.

It's easy enough to change that. See above for the rationale.