| Re: Glacier II |
Thu, 04 September 2008 21:05   |
|
|
|
| mlaub wrote on Thu, 04 September 2008 10:41 |
I can send you the stretch program. You could build a universe with 16 of your test races... So you get a better idea of spacing between races. Let me know which you prefer.
-Matt
|
That's a good idea to get a feel for spacing but testing would be a pain.
For testing your race(s) I suggest that you create a game.def with seed & test them one at a time. That way testing is fast because you don't need to run the .hst + the universe is identical including your starting position provided that your test race always uses the same name & game settings aren't changed.
To get a sample universe for Glacier II just run the game.def & then run stretch with the following DOS command (add paths):
stretch glacier2.xy 1 3
If you want a suitable game.def let me know & I'll post it.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Glacier II |
Fri, 05 September 2008 13:14 |
|
 mlaub |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| GreyMatter wrote on Fri, 05 September 2008 09:21 |
Actually I *was* testing with the AR - by the description above something tells me perhaps you were not using your AR correctly - e.g. trying to expand too early ? with my AR I was still sitting on HW until around turn 15, then sent out scouts, and first colonizer only at around 2420, research at this point was all energy - only after 2420 it started to get tricky exactly as you described above - BTW I was able to hit 4K @2450 with that AR in Tiny sparse..
|
In testing, IIRC, I hit 4.5k@2450 with a 6%. Tech was awesome too. So, I suspect that you could do better.
| joseph |
Mind you with the changes since the last game I would say you are very unlikely to have any AR players. The extra distance will be a killer.
|
I partially disagree. The distance effects everyone (Except IT), not just AR's. The added advantage of taking con normal really helped my AR's in testing.
Ofc, I openly admit that I am not an AR expert...
Joseph- I wonder if you ever tested normal race for this game?
| Quote: |
Perhaps allow ARs to keep their starting ships and/or maybe take 9% PGR ?
|
Nope on both counts. The reason for the ship deletion at the beginning of the game is mechanical, not thematic. I don't like messed up waypoints they give after "Stretch.exe" is used. I also received a Stars! internal error in my first test universe when I tried using a starting ship. The easiest remedy is to have everyone delete the designs (and the ships by doing so). Once I did that, I received no gen errors.
As too the 9% AR? Never tested it. I can't imagine it would be balanced at all. The extra % is just to great an advantage I'm sure. As it is viable to produce a dual immune 12% race that is competitive in a normal game, so I suspect that 9% would be a monster.
I'll do some testing, see about the viability. Maybe change the rules next time.
Thanks!
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Glacier II |
Fri, 05 September 2008 14:02 |
|
| mlaub |
| Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
Players so far:
Email?
1. DenHam
2. Skoormit X
3. Shadow
4. Aphar X
5. Sulph X
6. Greymatter X
7. Ringo X
8. Jools
9. Siltano X
10. Alex the Great X
11. mlaub X
12. Dashiva X
13. perrindom X
14. DTWillson X
15. Ken X
16. Comander Korf X
Standby
-- vonKreedon
0 spots left! Feel free to register as a standby!
I still need confirmation emails from (please include your HWF username):
DenHam
Shadow
Jools
Send me an email at starsaddict@gmailDOTcom (remove DOT, insert .) with the subject GlacierII if you are still interested.
Once I have everyones email, I'll send out instructions and Dave's (our Mod) email address.
Thanks!
-Matt
[Updated on: Sat, 06 September 2008 13:24]
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Glacier II |
Sun, 07 September 2008 08:34 |
|
|
|
| mlaub wrote on Sat, 06 September 2008 03:14 |
The reason for the ship deletion at the beginning of the game is mechanical, not thematic. I don't like messed up waypoints they give after "Stretch.exe" is used.
|
If you build a new ship and using that new ship merge with the rest, the messed up waypoint problem seems to be fixed as soon as you split them and save.
If you stipulate that no ships can be moved until that is done, that allows an AR to keep their miners.
Whether, it fixes the "internal" error too I don't know. Haven't experienced it.
Sulpholobus.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Glacier II |
Sun, 07 September 2008 11:41 |
|
| mlaub |
| Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| Sulpholobus wrote on Sun, 07 September 2008 06:04 |
Ouch!
Comets hitting your HW in this universe is truly devastating 
Just got hit in a practice run 
Can I have a regen?
S.
|
This is the reason I chose the no random events last game. 
I did not include it in the rules, but I was going to mention it in the my setup email to everyone. In principle, I hate to regen turns, as it usually creates more problems than it fixes. However, I would say yes to a regen if you lose more than 10% of you pop before 2450. You should have other colonies by then...and those will count in the total. Losing 10% pop is pretty easy to recover from, and after 2450, it would have to somehow be a catastrophic comet strike to get a regen. However, if you choose a OWW, and it gets smacked by a comet, I may feel less sympathy for you (you chose to put all your eggs in 1 basket...).
So, the short answer is, "Yes" in the early game, on a case by case basis in the start of the mid game, and "no" after that.
In case anyone is wondering, planetary defenses do not work against comet strikes.
Also, you may actually benefit from a massive strike (minerals). And it will be your choice at that point.
Thanks!
-Matt
P.S. One last point. I will not regen backawards 2 turns for comets. So, if you send me a email 5 minutes before turn gens, and the turn gens before I read the email, the comet strike will stand. Please give me at least 2 hours.
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Glacier II |
Sun, 07 September 2008 11:48 |
|
| mlaub |
| Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| Sulpholobus wrote on Sun, 07 September 2008 07:34 |
| mlaub wrote on Sat, 06 September 2008 03:14 |
The reason for the ship deletion at the beginning of the game is mechanical, not thematic. I don't like messed up waypoints they give after "Stretch.exe" is used.
|
If you build a new ship and using that new ship merge with the rest, the messed up waypoint problem seems to be fixed as soon as you split them and save.
If you stipulate that no ships can be moved until that is done, that allows an AR to keep their miners.
Whether, it fixes the "internal" error too I don't know. Haven't experienced it.
Sulpholobus.
|
I am going to say the ships still need to be deleted. The AR's I tested really were not effected by the deletion. Plus, I have already given them 3 huge benefits from last game (Nerfed SS, gave them the NAS option, AND normal construction).
Thanks!
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Glacier II |
Tue, 09 September 2008 08:58 |
|
|
|
Hello again.
I see one slot is left...
A Friend of mine may be of interest to join this game. If it is possible, please stand by one day more. I'll invite him.
If I find out he is not interested, I'll post here earlier.
Thanx
Well, he just has no time...
[Updated on: Tue, 09 September 2008 13:08] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
As to the others? dunno.
Re: Glacier II
