Peace & Quiet (not) |
Wed, 06 February 2013 12:48 |
|
LittleEddie | | | Messages: 517
Registered: February 2011 Location: Delaware | |
|
First time Hosting.
I'm looking for 4 players for a
Small, Normal, Distant game.
Accelerated BBS Play and No Random Events are checked.
Victory conditions: Exceeds second place score by 100% and own more then 60% of all planets or the other players concede the game.
Playing conditions:
All Players must be set to Enemy in Player Relations
No Tech Trading: Tech must be earned by research or valid warfare.
No Alliances: Therefore no coordination between players
Communications between players outside of the game is not banned but it is discouraged.
Beginning schedule is 5 times a week MTWTF at a GMT time to be decided by the players or all turns are in.
Each Player gets 2 48 hour game pauses that they can use if needed.
We will slow down when 3 players wish too and can decide on a new schedule.
Allowed Exploitable Bugs/Features
Chaff.
Split Fleet Dodge.
Repair after gating.
I will be needing password protected race files.
Edit: Host is not playing.
Edit-2:I didn't want to but I think some race restrictions would be needed so..
Players wishing to play the JoaT or CA PRTs must leave at least 180 points in the race wizard and JoaT could not take NAS. HE -f are banned !!
Little Eddie
[Updated on: Wed, 06 February 2013 18:45] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Tue, 12 February 2013 06:15 |
|
leonidas | | Petty Officer 3rd Class | Messages: 44
Registered: February 2013 | |
|
Please count me in too.
LittleEddie wrote on Wed, 06 February 2013 12:48No Alliances: Therefore no coordination between players
Intent seems clear to me.
leonidas.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Tue, 12 February 2013 19:35 |
|
|
leonidas wrote on Tue, 12 February 2013 12:15LittleEddie wrote on Wed, 06 February 2013 12:48No Alliances: Therefore no coordination between players
Intent seems clear to me.
leonidas.
Same here.
And I would like to join... the Stars-less time was much too long. Only hosting is just not the same.
Why only 4 players?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Tue, 12 February 2013 19:53 |
|
|
LittleEddie wrote on Wed, 06 February 2013 18:48We will slow down when 3 players wish too and can decide on a new schedule.
I must admit I'd be quite dependent on slowing down a bit after around 2430. If the other 3 players have in mind a rather fast game of 5 gens/week for most of the game or much longer than 2430... I'd cry myself into a dreamless sleep but it would be better not to take part then.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Wed, 13 February 2013 02:15 |
|
|
I can handle 5 gens a week, but M/W/F looks equally good for me. If Altruist fears not being able to keep up, why not have somewhat more forgiving schedule to begin with, and stick to it for the most part of the game? Saves our host a hassle as well, I guess.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Wed, 13 February 2013 04:51 |
|
leonidas | | Petty Officer 3rd Class | Messages: 44
Registered: February 2013 | |
|
loucipher wrote on Wed, 13 February 2013 02:15I can handle 5 gens a week, but M/W/F looks equally good for me. If Altruist fears not being able to keep up, why not have somewhat more forgiving schedule to begin with, and stick to it for the most part of the game? Saves our host a hassle as well, I guess.
I think 5 turns per week with a switch to M/W/F at around 2430 when the action is most likely to pick up strikes a nice balance. I'd quite happily commit to such an arrangement.
leonidas.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Wed, 13 February 2013 05:02 |
|
leonidas | | Petty Officer 3rd Class | Messages: 44
Registered: February 2013 | |
|
LittleEddie wrote on Tue, 12 February 2013 08:22Q1. Battle Orders must be set to "Attack Who: Everyone"?
My understanding of this is that you couldn't sneak through a minefield with a cloaked sweeper/warship. I don't know if this will be a tactic I'll need, but I'd like to have the option.
If that isn't this case, I have no problem with this requirement.
leonidas.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Wed, 13 February 2013 05:58 |
|
|
I'd say this "Battle Orders set to Attack Everyone" is not necessary - as long as all players are set to enemies from the get go.
Alternatively, modifying battle plans to attack specific players only can be banned.
A fleet that attacks "Nobody" can sneak thru minefields then. The battle would occur anyway unless both players set "Attack: Nobody" (in which case they simply avoid battle - which is imaginable, if a bit unlikely).
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Wed, 13 February 2013 17:53 |
|
|
leonidas wrote on Wed, 13 February 2013 10:51loucipher wrote on Wed, 13 February 2013 02:15I can handle 5 gens a week, but M/W/F looks equally good for me. If Altruist fears not being able to keep up, why not have somewhat more forgiving schedule to begin with, and stick to it for the most part of the game? Saves our host a hassle as well, I guess.
I think 5 turns per week with a switch to M/W/F at around 2430 when the action is most likely to pick up strikes a nice balance. I'd quite happily commit to such an arrangement.
leonidas.
5 turns a week until 2430 is absolutely fine with me.
Looks like we have a game then.
Race files to LittleEddie, I guess, and what do you prefer: email or pm? A deadline?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: Peace & Quiet (not) |
Thu, 14 February 2013 17:38 |
|
|
LittleEddie wrote on Wed, 06 February 2013 18:48Small, Normal, Distant game.
For the crowded Fledgling Admiral games (small/packed/upto 9 players) I normally use the "distant" setting but I've just remembered that several players/hosts reported that they think to get better/fairer HW-placements for duels with the "farther" setting.
With 4 players in a small universe we are somehow inbetween games of 9 and 2 players.
Perhaps something to keep in mind in case that the universe creation results in too weird HW-placements: to try it instead then with slightly changed settings from distant to farther.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|