| New Game: "Antagonism" |
Tue, 07 October 2008 08:00  |
|
 iojho |
 | Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA | |
|
This is going to be a classic game with only the most common restrictions. Maybe the unusual is that each player must set the others to “enemy” and battle orders to attack everyone during the entire game.
Players of all skill levels are invited to take part in. However, in order to make the game competitive both for “the less experienced players” and “the more experienced players”, I am going to use the handicap for the more experienced players of 50 RWP set to defences. Who should be considered as the more experienced player depends on the host, which makes the decision based on the player’s preferences (so If you want to join, pls let me know how I should rank you, i.e. as the less or more experienced player).
Conditions of the game:
- Medium
- Normal
- Distant
- AccBBS
- No random events
- No PPS
Restrictions as to races:
- CA as PRT is banned
- Joat cannot take NAS
- 50 RWP set to defences in case of the more experienced players
Other restrictions:
- Standard cheats disclaimer (i.e. only split-fleet-dodge and chaff is allowed)
- No pre-game alliances
- Players must set the others to “enemy” and battle orders to attack everyone
Winning conditions:
- One winner only
- Winner is declared in unanimous voting of the other active players
Turn generation schedule:
- M-F at 7 GMT
- M-W-F on demand but not earlier than the turn 2425
- Major holidays are free from generations
- The game is put on hold if the player missed 3 turns in a row in order to find the replacement
I am looking for 8 – 12 players.
The host is iojho. He wants to play, unless LOS – FOW II runs (but whether it runs at all is doubtful as only 4 players applied so far). Andreas agreed to check the races. Pls, send your races with PWs to andreas (at) studnitz (dot) de.
The game will be put at SAH.
I want to begin ASAP.
Players so far are:
More experienced (50 RW points leftover)
- iojho
- Per (decided to join at 50%)
Less experienced
- cyph34
- Hamal
- SaxMeister13
- Traveler
BR,
iojho
[edit 19 Oct: turn generation schedule changed from max 24 hours between the turns to M-F at fixed hour]
[Updated on: Sun, 19 October 2008 06:57]
"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."
Karl Marx,1844Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Fri, 10 October 2008 06:19  |
|
| iojho |
| Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA | |
|
Hi cyph34r,
There is no need so that you left 50 RW points.
iojho
[Updated on: Fri, 10 October 2008 06:46]
"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."
Karl Marx,1844Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Fri, 17 October 2008 13:29 |
|
| iojho |
| Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA | |
|
Hi Hamal,
I understand you want me to reserve a place for you in this game.
Our races will be reviewed by Andreas. His mail is andreas (at) studnitz (dot) de. But you do not need to send your race right now. So far there are only 3 players including you and we do not know wether this game will start at all.
So keep your race ready, make some tests and be patient.
When to send the races I will announce later if we have more players willing to play.
BR,
iojho
[Updated on: Fri, 17 October 2008 13:40]
"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."
Karl Marx,1844Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Fri, 17 October 2008 16:17 |
|
|
|
I'm a definite beginner, but I'd like to join too if there are still spots open.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Sat, 18 October 2008 03:20 |
|
| iojho |
| Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA | |
|
Hi,
Ok then we have even 5 players now with Per and SaxMeister13.
Plyers so far are:
More experienced (50 RW points leftover)
- iojho
- Per (decided to join at 50%)
Less experienced
- cyph34
- Hamal
- SaxMeister13
BR,
iojho
[edit: typo]
[Updated on: Sat, 18 October 2008 12:25]
"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."
Karl Marx,1844Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Sat, 18 October 2008 11:53 |
|
|
|
| iojho wrote on Sat, 18 October 2008 09:20 |
Ok then we have even 5 players now with Per and SexMeister13.
|
Small freudian mistake?
I think it's SaxMeister13... *grin
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Tue, 21 October 2008 13:53 |
|
|
|
hello,
may I join ?
I guess my level is intermediate
I love the idea of setting all players as enemies.
is it the diplomacy banned? it would speed up the whole game
cheers
kick
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Tue, 21 October 2008 14:52 |
|
| iojho |
| Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA | |
|
Hi Kick,
Yes of course you can join us. Welcome  You describe yourself as intermediate but should I undestand you want to leave 50 RW points? Please write something more about your experience, in particular, how many games you played so far and maybe how many you won. You may write in this thread or PM me or send me an e-mail to iojho (at) aim (dot) com.
As to "enemy" setting, according to the above mentioned game rules, it is required to set the others to enemy and to keep battle plans set to attack everyone. It does not mean the diplomacy is banned so you still can conclude agreements (including NAPs or alliances). The idea is to make coordinated actions difficult for allies so that those who want to act alone have a chance as well. Due to the "enemy" rule, you cannot use the gates of your ally or refuel your ships at your friend's bases. Not to mention it is unwise to order your ships to meet your ally at the same location.
Please Kick let me know sth more about your experience.
We have now 6-7 players!
iojho
"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."
Karl Marx,1844Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Tue, 21 October 2008 15:05 |
|
|
|
hello iojho,
if I get it correctly, this means alliances are not banned - just made a little more complicated.
I love no diplo/alliance games with all set to enemy (though I only played it once and not with the best results) because the strongest is the winner.
In this case, I am afraid you can enter the game with already done alliances and you will have to spend even more time in diplo.
so tech swap, nap, joint attacks (though not in the same location)
are all possible.
is it right ?
pls allow me a litle time before deciding to join.
cheers
kick
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Tue, 21 October 2008 15:21 |
|
| iojho |
| Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA | |
|
| kick wrote on Tue, 21 October 2008 21:05 |
if I get it correctly, this means alliances are not banned - just made a little more complicated.
|
Correct
| kick wrote on Tue, 21 October 2008 21:05 |
I love no diplo/alliance games with all set to enemy (though I only played it once and not with the best results) because the strongest is the winner.
In this case, I am afraid you can enter the game with already done alliances and you will have to spend even more time in diplo.
|
Yes and no. If you are going to create very close alliance, so then yes, you should expect to spend more time in diplomacy. However, I believe you do not need to bother with doplomacy and still be competetive under the said conditions. Perhaps you should take care of tech trade a bit but you do not need to enter into alliance to trade. Take into account that there is also "1 winner only" rule, so the winner will be the strongest player. Moreover the allies can expect the war between themselves eventualy and this will have also some impact on their relations.
| kick wrote on Tue, 21 October 2008 21:05 |
so tech swap, nap, joint attacks (though not in the same location)
are all possible.
is it right ?
|
Correct
| kick wrote on Tue, 21 October 2008 21:05 |
pls allow me a litle time before deciding to join.
|
Of course
iojho
[Updated on: Tue, 21 October 2008 15:25]
"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."
Karl Marx,1844Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Fri, 24 October 2008 18:06 |
|
| iojho |
| Officer Cadet 4th Year |
Messages: 280
Registered: October 2006
Location: EPBA | |
|
Hi all,
The game is announced for more than 2 weeks and we have 5 joiners only so far - at least 5 declared and I hope still willing to play. But I want to believe that more players will join us during the last week before the deadline. Do not forget we also have Per and Kick who expressed interest but did not confirm it so far - perhaps they will join in. The last chance to get in.
The plan is to start at the beginning of November let say, to send files to Ron, at 3-4 November. So I need your races to be prepared and sent to Wizard till 1 November so that he would have time to review our races and to generate the game. His mail is andreas (at) studnitz (dot) de. Remember to include your PWs as well. Till 1 November there is also time for any other persons to join.
As stated above, we have 5 players which is not too many but I think enough to start if to make the universe sparse. In medium sparse there are 216 planets so it would be 44 planets per player assuming only 5 joiners. I want to keep the universe sparse up to 6 players (then 36 planets per player). If we hopefuly had 7 or 8 then according to the original game announcement we would go in medium normal (288 planets) which would give 41 and 36 planets per player, respectively. I cannot imagine we have more than 8 players so I do not want to consider such option 
I hope we are playing yet soon!
iojho
[Updated on: Fri, 24 October 2008 18:10]
"Every person speculates on creating a new need in another, so as to drive him to fresh sacrifice, to place him in a new dependence and to seduce him into a new mode of enjoyment and therefore economic ruin."
Karl Marx,1844Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Game: "Antagonism" |
Sat, 25 October 2008 03:33 |
|
|
|
hi,
ok I'm in.
I played 3 or 4 games, none won but acceptable results.
what to do ?
cheers
a
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
, am in 1st in In the Beginning, and am in the middle of the pack for Octahedron.