| Looking for New - slowly - game |
Tue, 03 January 2006 23:48  |
|
 raka |
 | Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 7
Registered: January 2006
Location: Germany | |
|
Hi,
because of RL I'm looking for a new game with up to 1 turn in 24h untill year 15, 1 turn in 48h between turn 16 and 30 and 1 turn 3 times a week after turn 30.
Sombody else around with same shortage of time and wishes? I can't start before 4th of february, but after there will be no interrupt nessesary untill the end of the year.
By the way, is new game announcements the better place for this posting?
raka
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for New - slowly - game |
Wed, 04 January 2006 10:24  |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
All races allowed, not sure what skill levels to specify (I'm good intermediate)
|
So CA has huge advantage. You may wish to allow multiple skill levels, with beginners only able to use CA, and advanced players do no diplomacy and have all set to enemy, to reduce the skills gap.
| Quote: |
But, should not be more than 8 players imho
|
Partly an issue how many stars in total universe. A tiny sparce game with 16 players would still be easy to micromanage.
[Updated on: Wed, 04 January 2006 10:26] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for New - slowly - game |
Wed, 04 January 2006 16:48 |
|
| Madman |
 | Officer Cadet 1st Year |
Messages: 228
Registered: November 2003
Location: New Zealand | |
|
| multilis wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 04:24 |
So CA has huge advantage. You may wish to allow multiple skill levels, with beginners only able to use CA, and advanced players do no diplomacy and have all set to enemy, to reduce the skills gap.
|
Hmmm ... that's not a bad idea, although I was thinking of having CA (and maybe JOAT with NAS) having to leave some points (maybe 100)? spent on defenses in the race wizard, and maybe CA is not allowed TT. However that's the start of a slippery slope - I don't want to start working out handicaps for all skill levels and races.
One thing I would do if I allow beginners is get them to send me the game files for 25K resources by year 50 or so using whatever race they like (not the race they are going to use in the game!), or files suggesting they've got some sort of basic competence. I read a thread (can't find it now) on the two levels of 'beginners' and I want to avoid that.
| raka wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 04:19 |
Not realy, because of less experience. But, should not be more than 8 players imho. Otherwise a lot of work for the last few remaining players  .
|
That is a problem in a last man standing - but the reason I want that is that in my last game, we were allowed alliances of up to two people - and I made a permanent alliance with a neighbour very early and we crushed the third strongest player without much effort, at which point everyone else conceded. If you allow allied victories, you've pretty much got to ally to win.
IMO, when someone is running away with the game, everyone else will conceed (sometimes at the stage when they _should_ be ganging up on the leader).
Possibly have public player scores (which I don't like much), and end the game if someone is three times the size of second place.
This sound like a lot of procrastinating for a basically vanilla game, but playing Stars! is a huge investment of time for me, and I want to get it as right as possible.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for New - slowly - game |
Thu, 05 January 2006 22:15 |
|
| Madman |
| Officer Cadet 1st Year |
Messages: 228
Registered: November 2003
Location: New Zealand | |
|
1. I notice that is the usual thing to do in games. My preference is to just penalize them sufficently that they aren't overbalanced (no TT plus some number of leftover points in the RW on defenses - can anyone suggest a number of points? 100? 200?), as the more potential races there are, the richer the game.
I do have a non-playing neutral person I can get to check the race files.
2. Temporary alliances to achieve a particular objective (such as kill this weaker neighbour and divide his territory, swap some tech, gang up on the leader, or just not attack each other for a while) are fine - however permanent alliances to win the game are too unbalancing IMO, particularly with the tech swapping. I regard pre-game alliances as cheating.
3. Do you know how to only have PPS on at particluar years and not others? I know how to turn it on at a particular year, but it stays on every year after that. I like the overall score part of PPS, but the rest of it gives too much detail - 'look, the Borg is building a big fleet of capital ships ...'
As far as not having a huge empire at the end, that largely depends on the total number of stars in the universe. I prefer normal or maybe dense (doesn't particuarly advantage or disadvantage IT), and about 30 stars/player. With about 8 players, this is a medium normal, with 16 players, this is a large normal, so you are right, 8 players might make more sense to not have a huge empire at the end.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for New - slowly - game |
Fri, 06 January 2006 01:10 |
|
|
|
To get PPS after year XX: In the victory conditions specify some arbitrary winning condition(highest score) and XX number of years must pass before a winner is declared. At 24XX the game will declare a player the winner, but you can simply ignore it and continue playing.
Once PPS is turned on this way it can't be turned off again.
Checking the PPS box in the first game setup screen enables PPS at 2420 but doesn't declare a winner.
[Updated on: Fri, 06 January 2006 01:10] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for New - slowly - game |
Sat, 07 January 2006 01:38 |
|
|
|
| Madman wrote on Sat, 07 January 2006 19:11 |
Is the Stars! 'The List' still operating, and should I post there too?
|
Yup, its still going. rec.games.computer.stars still is too.
[Updated on: Sat, 07 January 2006 01:39] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
. You always need good communication and if your "partner" is lazy or less interested later on, you stick on him and will have a disadvantage without own fault. Maybe one big reason for many pre-game-alliances (in-game-alliances as well) between well-known partners 
