mega newb |
Fri, 25 April 2008 18:11 |
|
neilhoward | | Commander | Messages: 1112
Registered: April 2008 Location: SW3 & 10023 | |
|
3x teams of four
1st team
1x wm
1x ca
1x is
1x it
max growth rate 8%
hab
0.71 to 1.40
-40 to 40
0 to 20
and 50 rwp left over to your choice
2nd team
3x ar
1x pp
3rd team
2x he
1x ss
1x sd
game parameters
large packed stretched w/util 3-7 randomly after races submitted
distant
slower tech adv, and abbs or neither randomly selected aftet race submission
random chance of galaxy clumping after races submitted
*corrected gravity range and added max growth rate for team one
[Updated on: Sun, 27 April 2008 15:42]
By the time you realize how steep the curve is, you will be using five types of calculus to get to the market. You will then need three different calculators to perform what you once considered basic arithmetic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: mega newb |
Sat, 26 April 2008 16:08 |
|
neilhoward | | Commander | Messages: 1112
Registered: April 2008 Location: SW3 & 10023 | |
|
I picked the gravity and temp ranges for humans. We can live in a wider band for gravity, but it would impact reproductive health.
I think the race wizard radiation possibilities are wonkey.
Earth mammals are exposed to more than 200 miliREM yearly from naturally occurring sources. Viable Human reproduction occurs under much greater amounts (>5000mR). I assume the games creators 1 used mR to indicate miliRADs, the dosages of which are variable depending on the type of radiation, and 2 intended the rw to measure solar radiation not terrestrial or cosmic. With those assumptions a 0-20mR band is quite generous for humans.
I chose a max growth rate of 8% for humans as well.
Still very generous I think.
[Updated on: Tue, 29 April 2008 08:09]
By the time you realize how steep the curve is, you will be using five types of calculus to get to the market. You will then need three different calculators to perform what you once considered basic arithmetic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: mega newb |
Sun, 27 April 2008 02:22 |
|
craebild | | Lieutenant | Messages: 568
Registered: December 2003 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark | |
|
neilhoward wrote on Sun, 27 April 2008 05:08 | That would be unfortunate. Hopefully some players will be up for a challenge.
|
Any players going in on team 1 would not be taking a challenge, they would be committing suicide with their races.
If you asked for 4 teams without restrictions (except that each team may contain only one CA if CA are permitted), then you might get more interested players, and a medium packed universe that is not stretched would also get more players.
Last, you should list what options are used in the universe creation, and you do not do that. Your comment "and abbs or neither random", although you comment that slower tech advance is used does indicate that accbbs probably will not be an option.
If you insist on the combinations of PRTs you list, then I might be interested in playing one of the AR in team 2, but that depends on what the universe settings are, I do not want to play in a game with slow tech advance on and accbbs off, that would be far too slow a game, and I do not want to play an AR in a stretched universe, as AR require early colonies to be close to their HW.
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Ræbild / Christian Raebild
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: mega newb |
Mon, 28 April 2008 22:49 |
|
neilhoward | | Commander | Messages: 1112
Registered: April 2008 Location: SW3 & 10023 | |
|
Thanks for your feedback Sulpholobus.
Sulpholobus wrote on Mon, 28 April 2008 09:07 |
... when I last looked at US population figures the rate of growth between each census averaged about 1.23 - so 20% PGR looked reasonable ... obviously I forgot to factor in that the time between each census is 10 years.
|
No wait. I think you have something with the 20% pgr. I was just thinking if the planetary max pop was increased (to ~ Earth's projected population for 2050), and crowding was shifted to match 20% is close enough. Assuming 1/1 male/female ratio, no twins, an expected life span of fifty years, and onset of sexual maturity at ten. Each woman (with an Infant Mortality Rate of 62.5%) could produce twenty colonists. With a lot of prenatal drugs and a fundamentalist religion they are good to go.
Sulpholobus wrote on Mon, 28 April 2008 09:07 |
Although, I don't know if you've noticed this, but the planets in stars take an average of 10 terran years to orbit their sun
S.
|
Now if I hadn't spent all my resources on inflammatory language and an abrasive attitude, I would have been able to afford a planetary scanner, and I would have noticed that.
By the time you realize how steep the curve is, you will be using five types of calculus to get to the market. You will then need three different calculators to perform what you once considered basic arithmetic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: mega newb |
Tue, 29 April 2008 00:59 |
|
neilhoward | | Commander | Messages: 1112
Registered: April 2008 Location: SW3 & 10023 | |
|
m.a@stars wrote on Mon, 28 April 2008 09:32 |
neilhoward wrote on Sun, 27 April 2008 22:05 | You see where I am going with this.
|
Nowhere?
|
To quote someone with much more experience than I have
Quote: | Anybody can move population around.
|
I want to prove him right.
It is not impossible. I am going to leave teams two and three with their random locations, but distribute team one within 600ly of each other.
I am running my eighth test now (first one to survive until 2490!!!). We turned over the initial colonizers to the WM to run popdrop relays on the most viable HE colonies first. Then redistributed the colonies evenly between the WM, IT, and IS (leaving IS with the worst) and got some tech trades in the process. The IT transfered their privateer to the IS so they could top off yellows accompanied by the CAs modified miner. Put up empty forts to stop bombing and invasion. Kept pop on the colonies low (under 25k) until the 3/3/3 terraforming was done on each, then traded them again. Gave the worst rad to the WM, worst temp to the IS, and worst grav to IT. By the time the second redistribution was done(took ages) the CA had enough tech to start fixing the nastier targets. Started second popdrop relay last year. Need more coffee.
Insane? Of course.
Impossible? Not until the first bit of bad news.
By the time you realize how steep the curve is, you will be using five types of calculus to get to the market. You will then need three different calculators to perform what you once considered basic arithmetic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: mega newb |
Tue, 29 April 2008 04:50 |
|
m.a@stars | | Commander | Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004 Location: Third star to the left | |
|
neilhoward wrote on Tue, 29 April 2008 06:59 | I am running my eighth test now (first one to survive until 2490!!!). We turned over the initial colonizers to the WM to run popdrop relays on the most viable HE colonies first. Then redistributed the colonies evenly between the WM, IT, and IS (leaving IS with the worst) and got some tech trades in the process. The IT transfered their privateer to the IS so they could top off yellows accompanied by the CAs modified miner. Put up empty forts to stop bombing and invasion. Kept pop on the colonies low (under 25k) until the 3/3/3 terraforming was done on each, then traded them again. Gave the worst rad to the WM, worst temp to the IS, and worst grav to IT. By the time the second redistribution was done(took ages) the CA had enough tech to start fixing the nastier targets. Started second popdrop relay last year. Need more coffee.
Insane? Of course.
Impossible? Not until the first bit of bad news.
|
Impressive!
But, competitive enough? Against two other teams, at least one of which is likely to have better econ, tech, pop, or all three than Team1?
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|