| New game: Infight |
Wed, 18 January 2006 10:08  |
|
 wizard |
 | Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 279
Registered: January 2004
Location: Aachen, Germany | |
|
Hi all,
my second game after War of the Worlds (won by a team of IT and SD in 2453) is going to start soon.
# of players: up to 8
Skill level: Intermediate
Ranked: No
Version: 2.6/2.7jrc3/4
Autohost: Yes
Turns generated: 24 hours up to year 2430, then 48 hours. Weekends off. If you need a pause, just ask the host.
Host is playing: No
Universe size: Small Packed, Distant Starting Positions
Starting conditions: ACC BBS
Victory conditions: Last Man/Last Team standing or consensus
PRTs forbidden: None, but there will be a penalty of 100 leftover points for CA (set to defenses) plus they may not take TT. JOAT may not take NAS. SD may not detonate minefields.
Restrictions:
- no cheats (except chaff and split-fleet dodge)
- no pregame alliances
Special Rules:
Germ starting concentration will be 30 or lower.
Everyone has to be set to enemy except one ally. The ally can be changed once every 10 years. Tech exchange between enemies is not allowed (I'll be watching!).
If you are interested, please send a race file, the password and your desired email address to me at andreas (at) studnitz (dot) de. First come, first serve.
The game is intended to start in about two weeks. If there is a lot of interest, there may be a second game.
Regards,
Andreas / wizard
P.S: Changes from the last game are marked bold.
Edit: Removed traces from the observer race
[Updated on: Wed, 18 January 2006 10:17] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New game: Infight |
Wed, 18 January 2006 12:22  |
|
|
|
Well, I am in again.
Sending you my racefile in the next days.
2 comments:
* Forbidding SDs to detonate their minefields is quite harsh and will probably lead to nobody choosing SD. I had to fight a SD in the last game and I wouldn't mind the MM (well, I do mind the MM but fighting a SD without him able to detonate is like fighting a WM not allowed to build battle cruisers).
* I would rather see a switch from 24h to 48h gen already after 2420... but I guess we can discuss this also later in game when we know wether 24h or 48h is needed.
btw: The last game was a really good one.
[Updated on: Wed, 18 January 2006 12:23] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New game: Infight |
Thu, 19 January 2006 11:45 |
|
| wizard |
| Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 279
Registered: January 2004
Location: Aachen, Germany | |
|
| perrindom wrote on Wed, 18 January 2006 21:50 |
I'll join, my race file will be in next week.
I don't know the guts of it, but SD races can perhaps be compensated with a higher HW Germ concentration. You could also modify the no-detonation rule to apply only to fields in deep space. This way they can still protect their own (inhabited?) planets, and/or let them have a defensive barrier against planet hopping.
/Per
|
Hi Per,
thanks for joining.
As Sotek wrote, that's not possible - but in my experience, SD is still strong enough, they have lots of RW points to play with. The different mine types and lay on arrival are still great.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New game: Infight |
Wed, 25 January 2006 17:32 |
|
|
|
btw: Any reason why the game is not ranked?
Or is the whole rank system idea pretty much dead anyway?
PS: Hertbert isn't playing? That's sad to miss the strongest player of the last game.
[Updated on: Wed, 25 January 2006 17:33] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New game: Infight |
Thu, 26 January 2006 08:53 |
|
| wizard |
| Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 279
Registered: January 2004
Location: Aachen, Germany | |
|
| Altruist wrote on Wed, 25 January 2006 23:32 |
btw: Any reason why the game is not ranked?
|
Yes, there is a reason. IMO, the major flaw with the ranking system is that you degrade the players on the last ranks. That's not fair IMO, as everyone learns from a game, even if you have made a wrong decision in race design and thus are weak in game.
There is still the option to promote the winners of the game, but as host I wouldn't decide to degrade certain players. We can talk about that. IMO it makes sense that you can just get better, but not worse. Open for discussion 
I have still to send the results from the last game to donjon.
| Quote: |
PS: Hertbert isn't playing? That's sad to miss the strongest player of the last game.
|
Yes, he can't find the time for a new game now. He will probably play in the next game with similar settings. Anyways, he's clearly expert, that's why he took a very unusual race design in the last game.
Regards,
Andreas/wizard
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New game: Infight |
Thu, 26 January 2006 14:49 |
|
|
|
| wizard wrote on Thu, 26 January 2006 14:53 |
| Altruist wrote on Wed, 25 January 2006 23:32 |
btw: Any reason why the game is not ranked?
|
Yes, there is a reason. IMO, the major flaw with the ranking system is that you degrade the players on the last ranks. That's not fair IMO, as everyone learns from a game, even if you have made a wrong decision in race design and thus are weak in game.
There is still the option to promote the winners of the game, but as host I wouldn't decide to degrade certain players. We can talk about that. IMO it makes sense that you can just get better, but not worse. Open for discussion
|
Sounds reasonable.
After all this ranking system is a mere hint about a player's strength anyway, additionally I got the impression that many players aren't ranked which lowers the use of it even more.
But this would be an all-ah discussion because changing the ranking system only for one game isn't a solution, either.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
