Autohost's First Annual All-Round Player Competition

Present Enrollment: 8, LOOKING for 8 more


Welcome to a test of your skill as a Stars! Player.

This series of games will allow you to demonstrate your skills in:

• Race Design
  
• Micro-Management
  
• Empire Building
  
• Political Savvy
  
• General Inventiveness

This competition is intended for Intermediate/Advanced players who are willing to dedicate the next year to playing in the competition.
We are looking for 16 players.

All sign ups for the competition have to be approved, you may either PM me, or send me an email at (donjon at btl dot net) with your application. All sign ups will not be published, just a count of who has signed up.

All games will be anonymous, which means no email addresses will be published, no players will use their "standard" race names. I intend to have "fresh" interaction between the players.

All games will be set as ACCBBS, Normal Density, Normal Mins(unless otherwise indicated), Random Events.

All games will allow chaff and split fleet dodge, no other published "cheats" will be tolerated.

Race Restrictions (Round 1 and 3)
No Claim Adjusters, and no Jack of all Trades with the lesser racial trait of No Advanced Scanners.

Round Descriptions:

Round 1: Spars!

The universe for this scenario is a normal medium sized universe which has been remapped into a huge universe. Any PRT is acceptable. The game will run for 80 turns at which time the host will evaluate the standings.

The intention is to have a universe where the players will have access to minimal resources and attempt to build the best empire.

Round 2: GLD(God Loves Dice)

The universe for this scenario is a normal medium sized universe; however, the player has minimal control over his race. Before commencement each player will receive the same 16 (non HE) randomly created races of which he/she can choose one to play. He/she will have to choose one race from this set to play in the scenario. This game will run for 80 turns at which time the host will evaluate the standings.

The intention is to test the players ability to turn lead into gold and thereby rate the inventiveness of the player.

Round 3: Core!

The universe for this scenario is a normal huge sized universe remapped into a medium universe's size with maximum mineral settings. Any PRT is acceptable. This game will run for 80-90 turns depending on consensus of the players at which time the host will evaluate the standings.


The intention is to test the players abilities in micro-management, empire building, and politics.

Timing:
All games will run in succession; the first 30 turns will be set to 24 hour spacing for each game, the next 50 turns will be set to 48 hour spacing, however the last 15 turns of a round will also have the first 30 turns of the next round simultaneously. This is to ensure that the tournament can be successfully completed within a year.

Scoring:
The rankings from each round will be summed and the All-Round Player Award will go to the player with the least value.

For example:
Player 1: Round 1- Rank 1, Round 2- Rank 4, Round 3- Rank 2... Total: 7.
Player 2: Round 1- Rank 3, Round 2- Rank 2, Round 3- Rank 1... Total: 6.
Player 2 has the best overall ranking.

In the case of ties for top place, the players will duel for the honor of top place.

In Game Ranking:
The host will perform calculations very similar to the scoring calculations used within the game, with the following exceptions:

1. SpaceDocks get a point value of 1.
   
2. Ships with a rating over 3500 will be counted as Capital Class.
   

Once again, if you are interested, if you have the time to devote to the series, if you are an intermediate or better player; you may PM me, or send me an email at (donjon at btl dot net) to apply for a position in the tournament.

I hope for the tournament to commence by the end of March.

[Updated on: Thu, 11 March 2004 06:13] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

donjon wrote on Wed, 25 February 2004 15:07

All games will be anonymous, which means no email addresses will be published, no players will use their "standard" race names. I intend to have "fresh" interaction between the players.

You are not *allowed* to tell who you are also then?
Or is this just at setup? I always liked the idea of a 'no-friends-allowed' game, is this one of those?

[Updated on: Wed, 25 February 2004 13:09]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sinla wrote on Wed, 25 February 2004 12:08

You are not *allowed* to tell who you are also then? Or is this just at setup? I always liked the idea of a 'no-friends-allowed' game, is this one of those?

I am thinking about making it truly anonymous, of course, if you said in an email or in-game message that you were "so and so" then it would no longer be anonymous.

However, here is my thinking...

If players know who is who then that information will be carried on into the next round. And, ranking, although slightly different than that which reported in-game, would probably be similar.

This information could then be used against you.

I was thinking about using aliases, here at the school, so if you wish to send a message to Player1 in Round 1. You would mail it to r1p1@shc.edu.bz... then it will get redirected appropriately after substitutions of any other mail addresses which might be in the mail.

Thoughts?

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

hmmmmmm anonymous eh?

you mean no special treatment for being a girl???

Report message to a moderator

When... in Stars! did you ever get special treatment???

...Although I suppose, on occassion you get accused of being blonde, which is true, but not in the sense they mean. And usually they don't live to see the results

I added the cheat clause to game description, and present enrollment.

[Updated on: Thu, 26 February 2004 06:38]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Geez Guys!

Whats up? Don't you want to prove yourself the best?

Well, I have six for sure players, two sitting on the fence and room for another eight players.

And, irrelevant of how many sign up, the universe definitions will remain constant.

... I can imagine six players in Core! ... they wouldn't even need to fight!

I will call for races on the 22nd and hope to start Spars! by the 29th

Lets go people!

I really want to know... who's the best?

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

LEit wrote on Sat, 06 March 2004 06:42

It's unlikely that the better players will join this game, it's just too big, and the random races part could be just too random and painful. The better players will realize this, and most of them won't want the pain

Interesting thought. I would think the better players would be more apt to join this game for a few reasons. First, with better players, there will be a lower dropout rate, which means the games will move faster and be more enjoyable for those involved. Second, the unique set of challenges inherent in each of the three scenarios should appeal to the better players. A better player can take a poor or mediocre race design and make it functional enough to win. I think the so-called "better players" would actually find donjon's challenge very enjoyable. Not to mention that there will certainly be bragging rights associated with it. What better way to let everyone know you're one of the better players (if it's important to you).

And to quote from the label of one of my favorite hot sauces: "Pain is Good."

Maybe the "better players" need to get off their high horses and muck around with the rest of us for awhile to remember where they came from!

No offense meant to any of the "better players" in this post - I certainly don't lump myself in that category!

EDog

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Hmmm, seems I woke some people up in the gallery...

Leit wrote:

It's unlikely that the better players will join this game, it's just too big,

Hmmmm, size?
Spars! is huge but with a minimal number of stars.
Core! is medium but with a large number of stars.
GLD is just a plain medium size universe.

Or, time?
Well, that is understandable, but how can you test a player's skills in one game? You cannot!

Leit wrote:

and the random races part could be just too random and painful

I don't believe you can call yourself an expert if you cannot take any race and make it shine. Setting up a race which you have mapped out and know by rote is not ingenious... once its done then you just replay again and again with slight variations. Starting with raw material, where you need to map out everything anew. And, even better, identify the weaknesses and turn them into advantages???

Probably the GLD Round will be the serious telling of the competition. In both other rounds you can hone the race, and assuming the other players are on a similar skill level to you, all will perform at a similar level. In this round you are handed a set of races, and then you have to choose which is the lesser of the evils, or take a default and lose a ranking... some serious decisions have to be made, with very serious implications.

Ptolemy wrote:

Part of this series seems a little too easy - namely using any race allowed. In that case I'd simply use a maximum resource tri immune HE or a TT CA and by the 80 year mark I should have around 150-200k of resources and be pretty much untouchable.

Then you can assume that everyone else would do something similar, and I cannot believe that you would believe you are untouchable. The eighty years was needed to fit the three games into the space of one year, but all players are going to know that the eighty year mark is the end... and play accordingly.

Ptolemy wrote:

I'd also have a very numerous fleet specifically designed to hit the capitol ship value with minimal expenditure. Using only 80 years, the risk of being seriously damaged by war is minimal.

Hmmm, I wonder...

Ptolemy wrote:

As to the 'random' selection - it's not 'random'. The obvious solution is to simply look at all the races provided (including the 'standard' game races) and select the highest potential rsource generater. Again, 80 years and it's over means that there is little serious threat from war.

You are still playing with a hand of 21 cards out of a deck of millions of cards, and if you choose some cards, then you reap a penalty right off the bat.

Ptolemy wrote:

I do agree that the 'experts' of Stars! are very likely to stay away - it is a long commitment with no real reward for winning and no major intellectual challenge.

What do YOU want? A single game? One game proves nothing... A reward??? Well, there is the recognition... Ron has said that I can design an icon that the winner will hold for the year. {and I will and it will be good } Monetary??? err, I ain't got none

[Updated on: Sat, 06 March 2004 22:27]

Report message to a moderator

Hi!

Leit wrote:

It's unlikely that the better players will join this game, it's just too big,

With its artificial limit of 80 turns in my eyes all three games look just like an economic competition. I know I can put together a big econ, I don't need another three games to prove that. Besides, to end the game just when I could convert that econ into warships and start getting fun is also very unattractive.

Quote:

Leit wrote: and the random races part could be just too random and painful I don't believe you can call yourself an expert if you cannot take any race and make it shine.

How would you make shine a race with 11% PGR and fac cost of 21? Without at least average econ everything else can not come into play. And 98% of random races have its econ way below average. With this settings I'd take standard Humanoids anytime knowing that maybe one player could get better random race the Humanoids are. I'd finish in the first or the second place so losing one score point wouldn't matter so much, compared to being in the bottom half of the pack with a random race.

Quote:

And, even better, identify the weaknesses and turn them into advantages???

Huh? How the could I turn mine eff of 8 or ARM and OBRM LRTs into an advantage? Maybe some expert players could, but I doubt.

There are too many problems involved with random races on GLD game so I'd propose using ONE race for ALL players. Then you could tell quite more precisely who's better.
BR, Iztok

Report message to a moderator

iztok wrote:

With its artificial limit of 80 turns in my eyes all three games look just like an economic competition. I know I can put together a big econ, I don't need another three games to prove that. Besides, to end the game just when I could convert that econ into warships and start getting fun is also very unattractive.

Well, Stars! is a game of economics, cleverly clad in the clothing of science fiction. Presently, I have three very distinct scenarios running at autohost, Tic Tac Toe, 12 Gates, and President. ...

All of them have a totally different flavour, but all games hinge on economics. All appear to be running quite well by the way.

In terms of timing, 80 years is enough... you build your wartime economy early... everything gets shifted... its even ground.

iztok wrote:

Huh? How the could I turn mine eff of 8 or ARM and OBRM LRTs into an advantage? Maybe some expert players could, but I doubt. There are too many problems involved with random races on GLD game so I'd propose using ONE race for ALL players. Then you could tell quite more precisely who's better.

Ah! Some constructive criticism

I accept this as a very valid suggestion. And have rewritten the GLD scenario to incorporate it. ONE set of 16 random races will be given to each player... they must choose from within the set the race they will use for the scenario. Vanilla races are out.

Report message to a moderator

Ptolemy wrote on Sat, 06 March 2004 21:42

Well, I am one of the oldest and definitely better players in the Stars! community.

Wow...

Quote:

Using only 80 years, the risk of being seriously damaged by war is minimal.

In Tic Tac Toe (mentioned and hosted by Donjon) we are in 2461 (medium reshaped universe, with 5 years of travel between the clusters). Major wars going on, 1 race *dead* and 2 well on the way of becoming extinct.Another one I play in a medium is now in 2483, 3 out of 7 remaining. And then another, huge, distant, packed, 20 year jumpstart. Game over in 2 years (now in 2478, game is called Nemesis).
So I don't know what games (and with whom) you used to play in ("since it was released (way back when)..."), but nowadays games can be over more quickly...

Report message to a moderator

One more note to the host though. With this parameters, shouldn't you ban the CA and (NAS) JOAT?

Could make things even more interesting IMO...

Report message to a moderator

donjon wrote on Wed, 25 February 2004 15:04

Sinla wrote on Wed, 25 February 2004 12:08 You are not *allowed* to tell who you are also then? Or is this just at setup? I always liked the idea of a 'no-friends-allowed' game, is this one of those? I am thinking about making it truly anonymous, of course, if you said in an email or in-game message that you were "so and so" then it would no longer be anonymous. Thoughts?

Forget it! It's impossible to keep the players anonymous, if they don't want. Players, which prefer group-gaming, enter in your game together and will mail their race-names directly to each other, but not ingame. At least you can't control and keep, that players are playing anonymus under your conditions and you can't avoid, that they enter your game as a pregame alliance.

That's reality

Taka Tuka

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sinla wrote on Sun, 07 March 2004 16:14

One more note to the host though. With this parameters, shouldn't you ban the CA and (NAS) JOAT? Could make things even more interesting IMO...

Totally banning CA? That is rather drastic isn't it?

I have put the suggestion to vote with the players presently committed and I'll get back to you about it in a couple of days.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

donjon wrote on Mon, 08 March 2004 10:03

I have put the suggestion to vote with the players presently committed and I'll get back to you about it in a couple of days.

the response was next to unanimous...

No CA and no JOAT (NAS)
Updates to the definition have been applied.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator