Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » New Game Announcements » Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted
| Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Mon, 31 March 2008 13:48  |
|
 jimroberts |
 | Petty Officer 2nd Class |
Messages: 52
Registered: March 2008
Location: Germany | |
|
(Current information now moved to top for ease of reference. Latest change 2008.04.09, battle-board-overload definitely forbidden.))
Current state
Player list as of 2008.04.04. We now have the target of TEN players, assuming that those interested are switching to definite: me, rolfverberg, m.a @ stars, Darkwyng, Aphar, Michael (private contact), Kettch, q974739, Sulpholobus, Joseph.
So anybody now offering is too late, unless one of these ten withdraws.
Organisation Micha has kindly offered to superhost for us after he gets back from holiday, so planned start is in the week beginning Mon 14th Apr.
Game announcement
I'm proposing a large conventional game with about ten players. No public scores, no accelerated start, not max minerals. Any sort of race allowed. Play will be fairly slow to allow time for diplomacy throughout the game, to allow for micromanagement for those who like it in the middle game, and for careful battle planning in the end game. In spite of slow play, I would like to see an end in a reasonable time, say about a year at most. Any sort of race should be able to win, if it is good in its own way, so multiple victory criteria.
Edited to add: This game is mainly for beginners and players with just a few games' experience.
There aren't going to be any radical changes to my proposal, so if there are a lot of things you disagree with, you are just not interested in the sort of game that interests me. In particular, don't propose AccBBS, banning PRTs and the like. Some little things can be changed, see below.
Proposed name: Pebbles in the sky. (Unless this has already been used.)
Proposal- ten players. It might well be hard to get ten in a reasonable time, so we might settle for less.
- diplomatic. Hopefully no pre-game alliances, but alliances during the game are fine: tech exchange, mineral trading, whatever. At some point, your ally will probably stab you in the back to try to win, unless you get him first
- large, dense. This gives us 640 planets, so reasonably large but not unmanageable empires.
- distant. This is more reliable than farther for avoiding unfair distributions.
- standard. None of the check boxes in Step 1 of New Game Wizard checked.
- non-AccBBS. For a lot of race designs, the first 20 years starting from 25000 pop are interesting and important.
- no Public Player Scores. Use your scanning to find out as well as you can who's ahead of you.
- unrestricted. Well, as far as possible. There are exploitable bugs, things that are clearly not intended by the designers, please don't exploit them. But there are other dubious tricks that might help a race in a losing position at least postpone extinction: I think we should look tolerantly on this.
- (Update 2008.04.02) Only one race per person! (How could I have forgotten this?)
- PRT, SRT all OK. I don't believe that (for instance) CA can easily beat anyone else.
- chaff. Definitely OK.
- split fleet. OK. Animals scatter to escape predators. Throwing a weakling to the wolves is common behaviour.
- battle board overload. Update 2008.04.09 Forbidden.
- North-south/east-west minefield avoidance. Do not do this!
- Starbase friendly fire. (I'd never heard of this until today!) Forbidden.
- Oviously, anything involving editing game files is forbidden.
- rate of play.
- First 30 years: daily.
- After that, when two people request slowdown, three times a week. Update 2008.04.02: Later perhaps dropping to even slower.
- Generally: pauses for important holidays, unexpected problems etc. as required.
- proposed victory criteria. After at least 100 years, at least four of
- 30% planets Update 2008.04.02: maybe more - under discussion.
- tech 25 in 5 fields
- exceed score 9000
- exceed second place score by 30% Update 2008.04.02: maybe more - under discussion.
- production capacity (resources) > 150000
- own 300 capital ships
- highest score after 130 years.
[/list]
Might change
- galaxy clumping, if it's popular Update 2008.04.02: it isn't popular, so no clumping.
- details of victory criteria
About me.
I've played three public multi-player games from the beginning and a few others as replacement for dropouts, but nothing since 2001.
[Updated on: Wed, 09 April 2008 05:47] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Mon, 31 March 2008 14:00  |
|
|
|
I suggest that no restrictions on race will lead to some forgone conclusions... for example CA+TT is a pretty well established winner in an open arena... there are others...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Mon, 31 March 2008 15:31 |
|
| jimroberts |
| Petty Officer 2nd Class |
Messages: 52
Registered: March 2008
Location: Germany | |
|
donjon: especially given who you are, I respect your opinion, but in my limited experience I have played against CA+TT which didn't do very well. If we get an expert in this game, he will probably slaughter me and my known possibles whatever he plays (and I hope to learn from the experience), but I'll put up against a beginner or near beginner CA+TT any time.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Mon, 31 March 2008 15:40 |
|
| rolfverberg |
 | Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 103
Registered: March 2006
Location: Ithaca, NY, USA | |
|
I'm interested
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Mon, 31 March 2008 18:53 |
|
| Braindead |
 | Officer Cadet 2nd Year |
Messages: 238
Registered: April 2005
Location: Ohio | |
|
Here are some comments:
- You should mention what level the game is for. In your case, it looks like begginers or begginers/intermediate
- You wanted the game to be slow, but 3 turns per week is not slow. Especially with a large universe and with full diplomacy on
- If you are looking for a slow game, you might want to consider Slow Tech option as well
- Large/Dense has a lot of planets. If someone reads up on CA designs, they'll just wipe the field (with or without a partner)
Mess with the best, die like the rest!Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Tue, 01 April 2008 06:32 |
|
| m.a@stars |
 | Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| Braindead wrote on Tue, 01 April 2008 00:53 |
[*]You wanted the game to be slow, but 3 turns per week is not slow. Especially with a large universe and with full diplomacy on
|
I hope the pace can be slowed down if players agree on it. 
| Quote: |
[*]Large/Dense has a lot of planets. If someone reads up on CA designs, they'll just wipe the field (with or without a partner)
|
Same could happen if someone reads up on JoaT, IS, HE, IT, AR or even SD designs... 
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Tue, 01 April 2008 16:39 |
|
| iztok |
| Commander |
Messages: 1206
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!| m.a @ stars wrote on Tue, 01 April 2008 12:32 |
| Quote: |
[*]Large/Dense has a lot of planets. If someone reads up on CA designs, they'll just wipe the field (with or without a partner)
|
Same could happen if someone reads up on JoaT, IS, HE, IT, AR or even SD designs...
|
Could, but will not, if anyone with at a decent grasp of pop management fields a HG CA with TT. From his 65 planets he'll have between 50k to 100k resources at 2450, AMP and Armag nubs at 2460. There's no way he can lose with them against Doom and Disruptor BBs other races will (maybe) have. 
CA is simply too strong for beginner to cope with. I strongly suggest the OP to disallow it in his most-beginners' game.
BR, Iztok
[Updated on: Tue, 01 April 2008 16:40] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Tue, 01 April 2008 16:45 |
|
|
|
Please be aware...
We are not trying to "clip your wings" we are trying to help you field an epic game in which everyone has a fair chance.
regards,
dj
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Tue, 01 April 2008 17:26 |
|
| m.a@stars |
| Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| iztok wrote on Tue, 01 April 2008 22:39 |
CA is simply too strong for beginner to cope with. I strongly suggest the OP to disallow it in his most-beginners' game.
|
Yeah, I fully expect only beginners will want to join an unrestricted large/dense game with loads of MM in the offing, particularly if they don't know how to gang up against a CA monster.
If that'll assuage your fears, I don't think I'll field a CA for this game, so you can scratch the "big bad CA stomps all" scenario for this game, thanks. 
By the way, I'd like to see two "Victory Conditions" bumped up, just in case:
45% owned planets (or 40% at the very minimum) should be needed.
Similarly, 30% difference score should not be enough to ensure #1 wins. Make it 50% at least.
[Updated on: Tue, 01 April 2008 17:31]
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Tue, 01 April 2008 21:02 |
|
| Alter Ego |
 | Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 283
Registered: November 2002
Location: Germany | |
|
| iztok wrote on Tue, 01 April 2008 22:39 |
Hi!
SNIP
Could, but will not, if anyone with at a decent grasp of pop management fields a HG CA with TT. From his 65 planets he'll have between 50k to 100k resources at 2450, AMP and Armag nubs at 2460.
SNIP
CA is simply too strong for beginner to cope with. I strongly suggest the OP to disallow it in his most-beginners' game.
BR, Iztok
|
Err...
You did notice that this is not an AccBBS-game? CA will dominate, but I seriously doubt the resources you stated are feasible.
Regards
AE
War does not determine who is right. Just who is left.
Bertrand Russell
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 01:49 |
|
| Darkwyng |
 | Crewman 2nd Class |
Messages: 15
Registered: April 2008 | |
|
Hi,
I don't understand why you go on and on about CAs. If they are that remarkable, I'd like to see one and be mopped up in turn. It'll be quite interesting.
Jim said in his first post, this game was without restrictions. If I find a CA, I'll apparently have to declare war on him.
I'm in. I'm Pim Roberts, Jim's son. The backstabbing he mentioned was me (among other).
Pim
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 03:42 |
|
| Micha | 
| |
Messages: 2342
Registered: November 2002
Location: Belgium GMT +1 | |
|
| donjon wrote on Tue, 01 April 2008 22:45 |
Please be aware...
We are not trying to "clip your wings" we are trying to help you field an epic game in which everyone has a fair chance.
regards,
dj
|
And let the CA debat please end here, I think it's pointed out enough that a CA is a powerful race. Maybe the host understimated them having few experience with them, but he should be aware of that now.
Jim, like donjon says the people here are just trying to help, they might do this too strongly tough.  Making it feel agressive towards the newcomers.
Anyway, a host has the right to host a game by the rules he wants, to host the game he is interested in and doesn't find somewhere else, heck, that's the reason why I hosted almost all of my games!
One thing I have to agree on here is that you should mention the level of players you are aiming for. With 3 games in 2001 you'll indeed have a high chance to be wiped out by a good player with *any* PRT ... However if your decision is an "open for all" game, so be it.
Good luck with the game!
mch,
modaw
[Updated on: Wed, 02 April 2008 03:43] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 03:50 |
|
| Alter Ego |
| Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 283
Registered: November 2002
Location: Germany | |
|
| Darkwyng wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 07:49 |
Hi,
SNIP
I'm in. I'm Pim Roberts, Jim's son. The backstabbing he mentioned was me (among other).
Pim
|
Time to look for another father, I'd say...
AE
War does not determine who is right. Just who is left.
Bertrand Russell
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 04:40 |
|
| Soobie |
 | Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia | |
|
I'd contemplate playing a CA in this game, just to see how I go with the universe allied against me.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 05:13 |
|
| m.a@stars |
| Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| Alter Ego wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 03:02 |
You did notice that this is not an AccBBS-game? CA will dominate,
|
With the permission of any well-played JoaT, IS, AR, IT, HE or SD monsters, that is.
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 08:55 |
|
| Kettch |
 | Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 8
Registered: April 2008
Location: Germany | |
|
Me, too.
Oh and I'm the last one of the 'original three' Jim mentioned.
This will be the first game vs real humans, I got some experience from singleplayer, though.
We'll see how it goes 
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 11:37 |
|
| m.a@stars |
| Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
Well, since the game is now stated as "mainly for beginners" I feel I must clarify that, while I haven't played many multiplayer games, and a few of those have been as replacement, I'm certainly no beginner, and I should probably be considered as Intermediate and dangerous.
Perhaps I should promise not to go on rampage before turn # 50?
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 12:08 |
|
| m.a@stars |
| Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| jimroberts wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 17:49 |
an easy win against far weaker players is probably not much fun.
|
Gosh, I certainly hope everyone who joins knows how to put up a fight. In my experience the "easy win" is a myth, unless it was vs the AIs. 
A bigger problem, in this kind of setup, would be dropouts, particularly unexpected unexplained dropouts. One or a couple of those can decide the fate of everyone else regardless of experience and/or skill involved. 
Which reminds me, if every race playing manages to secure at least one ally things should become more leveled, as it's far harder to get the upper hand against two players than one... 
Not counting backstabs, of course!
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 13:04 |
|
| m.a@stars |
| Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
Speaking of which, I guess since the Host will be playing, race files should be passworded... 
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ten-player, diplomatic, large, dense, distant, standard (non-AccBBS), unrestricted |
Wed, 02 April 2008 13:35 |
|
| jimroberts |
| Petty Officer 2nd Class |
Messages: 52
Registered: March 2008
Location: Germany | |
|
> A bigger problem ... would be dropouts,
Yes, every game I was ever associated with suffered from dropouts. I was thinking that this is one of the things we need to discuss before we start. Obviously we all have to use passwords: is there some established procedure on SOH whereby passwords can be stored and given to replacement players, but without any chance of the host (or any other player) getting at them? In one of the games I played, one of the players had all the passwords, but since the host never sent him anything they could be used on, it was safe (barring collusion). That couldn't work here though.
I agree about the advantage of alliances - it's one of the things people should consider in their race designs - have something you can use to attract an ally.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Pages (6): [1 ] |
  |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 04 14:12:46 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
