| Re: New Game - (Advanced) - "Enemies" |
Wed, 22 February 2006 00:57   |
|
 Sr.Seven |
 | Petty Officer 1st Class |
Messages: 67
Registered: January 2006 | |
|
Speaking for myself, I hate alliance victories. It is not that this is "wrong" in some moral sense, but rather it is anti-climactic when the no 1 and no 2 economies declare "we are allies" and then "we win as none dare oppose both of us". If you are the no 3 or no 4 economy and were looking to move up when the inevitable conflict between nos 1 and 2 occurred, you feel just a bit cheated. . .
Part of the problem is that the existing ranking system treats all members of a victorious alliance equally as winners, and so encourages alliance behavior. Part of the problem is that when games start to run long, players start to drop, and given some of the gen schedules (some generating less than 5 times per week) games can last a long LONG time.
Personally, I find small/dense to be a bit cramped, though it could lead to a quick resolution (pre 2490, though with the proposed gen schedule, the game is likely to last 6 mos.) The size makes 1WW hab settings _almost_ playable though. . .
Your rules do cut out some of the subtleties including especially cloaked tactics. . .
I like what you are trying to do with this, but wonder if perhaps there isn’t a better way?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
