Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » Sense of playing a senseless game?
Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Sun, 14 August 2011 19:37 |
|
Taka Tuka | | Master Chief Petty Officer | Messages: 102
Registered: March 2004 Location: Germany | |
|
Hi guys,
I would like to get some opinions about a special case:
In a team-game (WOL V) with 4 teams of 2 players without rules, except up to 1 CA in each team only, 2 teams do ally after (maybe before) the first 6 years. Both teams are designed for early wars. 1 team can win only!
No question, to ally it's not against the rules, because there are no rules. So even pregame-alliances were not forbidden.
BUT does it make sense to do this in a game of 4 teams only?
IMO at least it will be a game between the two allied teams only, after the supernumeraries - the other two teams - are eliminated.
So I'm asking you folks, if out of your point of view it makes sense for the two - at least - needless teams to continue playing this game under this circumstances or if they HAVE to continue playing.
I would like to stop playing this game and to ask the two allied teams to play THEIR game alone (why they not look for a host to play such games with two teams only (team-duell) without stealing time of other players? ).
Would it be o.k. to leave the two allied teams play alone - means, asking the HOST for setting the other teams to inactive?
YOUR OPINION?
Thx, Taka Tuka
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | | |
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Mon, 15 August 2011 11:57 |
|
BlueTurbit | | Lt. Commander
RIP BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 | Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002 Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
AlexTheGreat wrote on Mon, 15 August 2011 07:09 |
Thanks for the compliment (highly skilled & experienced). You are too kind but the statement is probably exaggerated.
|
Not really. I did post game files a while back, where the CA Quokka race came in a strong second, a decade ago, in the game discussion forum here.
Quote: | Who knew that my red laser QJ5 chaff would be permitted to destroy the fort. Chaff was in clear view & headed for Zucchini the previous year. It needed just one En6 shield &/or one red laser to kill the chaff.
|
That happens with beginners going through a learning process. You do know I'm training a beginner against you more experienced cry babies playing CA race. LOL
Quote: | As Taka said, there are no rules to stop what you did. It's the age old "spirit of the game" that some would question.
|
What I did? Trade tech and discuss strategy with probably the second least experienced team. Also no CA on that team, versus the other two CA teams. Sir. I have email records that show that this deal between our teams was not pre-planned, and communications did not even start until a few years after the 50-year gen. You want me to make you look foolish and post those here?
Quote: | The ships sent as "tech exchange" were reasonably advanced DD skirmishers with a cost of around 100 res & 75-80kt minerals so the 8 being send cost a total of around 800 res & 600+kt minerals. That's pretty expensive given that scrappers would have cost about half of that.
|
Again, I have emails. Including the one where I was surprised and shocked about the type of tech ships that were to be sent to me in the first exchange, as I was notified in advance? And the response that explained why this was done. And the response that explained why I only got five instead of eight as promised. I don't think you want me to start posting proof here that what you are suggesting is false and bad speculation. Because then you would eat a lot of crow here.
Quote: | I understand why Taka is upset. This game is supposed to be a 4 team contest. Even if the 2 teams in question have not allied as such it is clear that the strategy is to exchange techs so that they can gang up against either the Gryphin/Humanoid alliance or our own first & then the other once that alliance has been exterminated.
|
Well, excuse me, but you wouldn't trade techs with another team if offered? That would be stupid, no? LOL The two teams you keep referring to, are playing against two teams with CA races. Are you that ignorant about CA races, and their potential? Or are you just playing dumb to justify your partner wanting to quit playing?
Quote: | The 2 alliances in question are indeed on the other side of the universe & that is part of the problem because there is only one alliance in between in this game. So we have 2 teams each with 2 ITs each with any/300 gates & an agreement to transfer advanced weapons & a record of transfering ships between teams.
|
I don't know what you are saying. There is one alliance on either side of each team. And as far as I know there is only one team with two IT's. Did you break your scanners?
Quote: | I am no stranger to fighting in adverse conditions (I was a member of the Independant Alliance in Babylon 5 v2 where that alliance was virtually doomed from the beginning; we fought to the end). But this is different because there were a variety of ways the game could go; there is little doubt how this is going to go.
|
LOL This is going bad because the Taka are saying they want to quit. Based on what? Tech trading discoveries? What other strong evidence do you have of more? Do you not read the rules before you join games? Any strategy that is not forbidden is on the table at any given time. So now you want to justify dropping out because you don't like how the first few hands in the game have been played?
Quote: | We Stars players like a win but we play the game largely for fun. This game had every chance of being a lot of fun but here we are 7 years into the game & the game is probably predeter |
...
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Mon, 15 August 2011 22:42 |
|
|
BlueTurbit wrote on Mon, 15 August 2011 11:57 |
AlexTheGreat wrote on Mon, 15 August 2011 07:09 |
Thanks for the compliment (highly skilled & experienced). You are too kind but the statement is probably exaggerated.
|
Not really. I did post game files a while back, where the CA Quokka race came in a strong second, a decade ago, in the game discussion forum here.
|
OMG, you are far more experienced then (which is nice - many players like a challenge, including me). Galaxy Wars was my first game. That's why I played CA; I didn't want to be beaten too badly. My next game was Diadochi Wars in 2006 in which I played JOAT. I have played CA in one other game. I consider myself an Intermediste or Advanced Intermediate.
Quote: |
Quote: | Who knew that my red laser QJ5 chaff would be permitted to destroy the fort. Chaff was in clear view & headed for Zucchini the previous year. It needed just one En6 shield &/or one red laser to kill the chaff.
|
That happens with beginners going through a learning process. You do know I'm training a beginner against you more experienced cry babies playing CA race. LOL
|
Sure but your original statrment complaining of the destruction of the fort made it appear to be a stronger attack designed to destroy the fort. It was merely a ping.
Quote: |
Quote: | As Taka said, there are no rules to stop what you did. It's the age old "spirit of the game" that some would question.
|
What I did? Trade tech and discuss strategy with probably the second least experienced team. Also no CA on that team, versus the other two CA teams. Sir. I have email records that show that this deal between our teams was not pre-planned, and communications did not even start until a few years after the 50-year gen. You want me to make you look foolish and post those here?
|
I agree that you did nothing illegal. I am also sure that there was no pregame collusion. There is no need for any evidence especially since I think you are of my school of thought regarding telling lies (I never tell a lie because I want other players to trust me in both this game & in future games).
I understand that you are allied with one of the Zems in another game so there is a familiarity that probably helped cement an agreement. We also asked if you were interested in talking & the Zems even asked for a NAP (where we agreed to talk but then heard nothing more). This is all quite natural & I have no complaint about that. But I would not have asked to form an alliance or an agreement involving offensive coordination. That would turn it into a cakewalk (which some might enjoy but where is the challenge?). I was also not expecting an us v them game which, in my experience, always makes a game less interesting; that is what multi-player duels are for.
I guess it's my fault that I did not see "us v them" or "ganging up" as a strong possibity (there's no reason at all, within these rules, why it couldn't become 3 v 1). I'm a bit rusty or maybe I just didn't read the rules carefully enough.
Quote: |
Quote: | The ships sent as "tech exchange" were reasonably advanced DD skirmishers with a cost of around 100 res & 75-80kt minerals so the 8 being send cost a total of around 800 res & 600+kt minerals. That's pretty expensive given that scrappers would have cost about half of that.
|
Again, I have emails. Including the one where I was surprised and shocked about the type of tech ships that were to be sent to me in the first exchange, as I was notified in advance? And the response that explained why this was done. And the response that explained why I only got five instead of eight as promised. I don't think you want me to start posting proof here that what you are suggesting is false and bad speculation. Because then you would eat a lot of crow here.
|
As I said, there is no need for proof; I would never ask for proof unless I suspected cheating which I don't. The type of "scrappers" suggests that they are warships but I accept your (& Zem's) explanation.
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Tue, 16 August 2011 00:55 |
|
BlueTurbit | | Lt. Commander
RIP BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 | Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002 Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
Quote: |
OMG, you are far more experienced then (which is nice - many players like a challenge, including me). Galaxy Wars was my first game. That's why I played CA; I didn't want to be beaten too badly. My next game was Diadochi Wars in 2006 in which I played JOAT. I have played CA in one other game. I consider myself an Intermediste or Advanced Intermediate.
|
And your strong position in that first game and perhaps your second CA game gave you a good insight into the powers of CA races in games. (This is no secret in Stars! games for a long while now.) Although I'm sorry that it was an IT that seriously kicked your butt in that one.
If you like a challenge then don't go negative and complain about how things appear to be turning against you early in a game. Think positive and figure out how to turn things around. It's been done before. There are no guarantees in the future.
Quote: | Sure but your original statrment complaining of the destruction of the fort made it appear to be a stronger attack designed to destroy the fort. It was merely a ping.
|
That wasn't a complaint, that was a statement. I was pointing out that there was no sign of offense yet on our part, only tech trading. The only battles we have been engaged in so far has been your team attacking us. Like the unarmed scout you killed a while back in the deep south of the Taka territory. What? You don't consider attacking planets with armed scouts an aggressive move? There went your chances of any NAP if there were one. How many other NAPs have you killed with your pingers? Maybe your diplomats need to ping more? Me and my partner had to do so much diplomatic pinging it almost wore us out. LOL
Quote: | I guess it's my fault that I did not see "us v them" or "ganging up" as a strong possibity (there's no reason at all, within these rules, why it couldn't become 3 v 1). I'm a bit rusty or maybe I just didn't read the rules carefully enough.
|
Likely. But I did a lot of research in planning this game, including possible experiences of other players. Ask my partner. I even sent him picture of teams/players, and possible experience. I also ran lots of 50-year-gen test beds with races. And sent results to my partner. LOL
Ally in other game with one of the Zem was not the main factor in my decision to trade tech with them here. It was several discoveries, including his ship design when he killed my scout, and the returns the meetings with the MT's yielded. Our tech gains made it easier to trade with someone that appeared to have more to offer than likely what the other two teams have in terms of tech levels. You can't trade tech with someone unless they have tech you need.
I chose two IT after a lot of thought and testing.
Especially weighing in that likely we might be engaged with CA races on the other teams. And I discussed these things with my partner, to get his opinions. The risks and the possibilities.
Knowing Little Eddie in other game also gave me knowledge of his character and the strength of his word of honor.
Also, that the Zem were on the opposite side of the universe made them better for trading, and less competition for planets for a good while, in terms of expanding against other races. I've always had better results in games where I traded with races that were on the other side of the universe.
And there were more factors I don't really want to go on and on, but I could. LOL You see, there were many things considered in our decision to finally decide what and how to do things.
And yes, I also studied the rules and the possibilities.
And as to Creabild having flawed game rules. Well, I'm not so sure about that theory. This is game V in the series. And as far as I know they have mostly done quite well in the past. He didn't make any major modifications from game IV for this one.
Quote: | Tech exchange is fine. It's coordinated &/or ganging up that reduces the value of the game. Yes, CAs have a lot of potential &, in this scenario with a 50yr pregen so does a dual IT team (where the team get 4 fully developed planets with the associated additional res & minerals at 2450). But that is not a problem & is besides the point.
|
Everyone had the opportunity to choose any races they desired. If you thought dual IT was so great, then why didn't you do two IT also? I have yet to play a game where, unless it is expressly forbidden in the game rules, there wasn't a great deal of coordination and trading going on in the effort to come out on top in the end game. Most of the best players who won past games always did lots of trading and coordinating and diplomatic maneuvering.
Quote: | Sorry about that. Yes, there are 3 ITs in the super alliance, not 4. But the principle is the same. I think the rest of my statement is true.
|
Well, it only takes gates to trade tech. IT or other.
Quote: | No, this game is looking bad because of weaknesses in the game rules. We knew appox. what techs were right from 2450 (no my scanners work fine) but we were not expecting a super alliance (again, we should have read the rules more carefully). No evidence of a super alliance (or offensive coordination) is necessary. Like most Stars players, when we see something clearly, we recognise it.
|
Again, this is not Craebilds first game. It's not unexplored territory. Yes, study rules and plan accordingly in your diplomacy. This is an important step in every game where it is allowed.
Tech trading, super alliance, whatever you want to call it, that doesn't justify the "quitter" argument of your partner. You ever watch sports? How they challenge the calls made by the referees whenever possible to win a game or play. And what do the refs do? They cite the game rules.
Quote: | It's funny how the lion has more fun than the wilderbeast isn't it LOL.
|
Well, the wildebeast is just plain dumb and unedumucated. They should observe how the water buffalo handle the lions. Strength in numbers is how they go about moving those lions out. Even to the point of rescuing one of their own. Nature teaches lots of Stars! strategy too.
Quote: | The picture has degenerated badly. We probably would not have played this game if we had realised that it might become 2 teams of 4 &, had we done so, we would have designed our team accordingly.
|
Negative thinking produces negative results.
Woulda, shoulda and coulda are your worst enemies.
PS: Speaking of strategy and tech trading, I'm sure you probably have at least two fleets of freighters meeting the MT heading your way, do you not? I mean, you at least sent a test fleet to see what he might be giving and whether or not your partner should send max minerals? Right? You did do that didn't you?
Strategy and trading, it's all in the game plan to success.
You know what? I think this post took me longer than doing my turn file.
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Tue, 16 August 2011 03:40 |
|
TRSMMaiden | | Crewman 2nd Class | Messages: 14
Registered: May 2011 Location: Birkenhead, UK | |
|
[quote title=BlueTurbit wrote on Tue, 16 August 2011 05:55]Quote: | But I did a lot of research in planning this game, including possible experiences of other players. Ask my partner. I even sent him picture of teams/players, and possible experience. I also ran lots of 50-year-gen test beds with races. And sent results to my partner. LOL
|
I can definitely vouch for this lol If you want to see emails in my inbox/sent items to show it then I can provide them. We (though majority definitely Blue who has been essentially training me to hopefully be a stronger player in future) did a shed load of research/planning for this game, our races, providing intel strengths of every other player in the game, some past scores to show what for example AlexTheGreat is capable of from previous games (impressive scores, not relavent to the discussion so much I guess just a compliment actually!), yeah also lots of 50 year test beds.
Basically our team did our homework. If others did not then that is not our fault and no offence intended / all due respect but I do not think that another team should quit / surrender because they did not do their homework and/or did not do enough in-game diplomacy. Not happy with how things panned out, thats life isnt it? and a reason to fight on not a reason to quit / surrender.
And just to mention also (again no offence / all due respect) even speaking as a beginner player, possibility that we may get attacked from two fronts, this is a blindingly obvious possibilty that could happen I would think given the layout of the Universe we are playing in? And again not a reason to quit / surrender imho
Up The Irons!Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Tue, 16 August 2011 04:22 |
|
BlueTurbit | | Lt. Commander
RIP BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 | Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002 Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
But of course. Taka and Alex figured in a spiral galaxy team game, they would make NAPs and only cancel one at a time after their CA finished doing his number. LOL
But to have to fight possibly two fronts at once. Why, that would be unheard of in Stars! Must complain and resign now, before the first ten turns are done, and join the next WOL game, and make sure all future WOL games are designed the way we want them to fit us. Maybe if things turn out better for us there, we can play to the end.
LOL What a couple of jokers these two. Excuses, excuses, excuses, to drop out early in a perfectly legit game that is playing according to all the rules and as advertised.
Besides, look at how big those guns are that we found out the Zems are already trading. Well, they wouldn't trade with us. So unfair. LOL
Duh! Big guns, maybe because one chose to research only W instead of next cheapest in their research Q for 50 year pre-gen.
Why gee! We never thought of that either. Another reason for us to resign early.
Give me a break. Early quitters! That's what! Game spoilers.
[Updated on: Tue, 16 August 2011 04:29]
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Tue, 16 August 2011 10:30 |
|
m.a@stars | | Commander | Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004 Location: Third star to the left | |
|
ForceUser wrote on Tue, 16 August 2011 15:00 | it IS only the start of the game and there is much one can do (within the rules of course) to not only make the game a living hell for the opposing team but perhaps even pull out a win. Score a few points in the "honorable" column with some of the other players. I think that THAT alone could be an invaluable lesson for the newer more inexperienced players to know that every action, inside and outside a game WILL affect your public image.
|
Indeed, quitters score negative in my book, and early quitters even more. Getting a replacement, particularly if the replacement turns out to be good, would be a way to get less negative points.
OTOH, I'm always the guy who says "what!? already!?" when a game ends, regardless of my being winning or losing.
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Tue, 16 August 2011 10:30 |
|
ForceUser | | | Messages: 383
Registered: January 2004 Location: South Africa | |
|
BlueTurbit wrote on Tue, 16 August 2011 15:56 |
Quote: | Unfortunately this has happened only 6? turns into the game. There is a TON of effort that went into the game but NO investment
|
Actually it's 2457. This is not your typical game. This game had 50 year pre-gen and turn schedule is set to 100 hours max. It has taken one month from first receiving 2450 files to the present 2457 turn on Autohost.
Investment? LOL Lots of work. Gazillion emails too. And obviously you haven't had to meet two MT's in short time as a team lately.
|
I am aware of the fact that it's 2457. The 6/7 "turns" I spoke of is exactly that, the game was 50y genned and 6/7 turns was played. I applied for WoL V too so I am also familiar with the rules and special nature of the game. I even did quite a bit of work to see the validity of an AR in this environment.
To clarify, effort = the gazzilion emails / pre 50y gen planning / intra-team co-ordination / 1 month or less play time depending on conditions (Team game minimum of a month in MY opinion) / The WORK
Investment is on a more emotional level. Months of communication, bargaining for worlds, fighting over a border world for 20+ turns, using perfectly placed wormholes to sneak a fleet in, have actual major fleet wins/losses.
Those are the things that helps me connect to the story of the game, the events. Not the MM or the work before hand. Basically it is of my opinion that it is more than possible that many players have yet to form any lasting attachment to this game. Some might feel different since we are.. you know, "different"
I did get the impression that there were no pre-game alliances (that alone is a WHOLE can of worms I think should not be discussed here as it is not proven) so I think Eagle may just have misunderstood something?
"There are two types of people in the world. AR players and non-AR players" Nick Fraser
Working on some new stuff: http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/stars-nova/index.php?t itle=Graphics
And the Mentor Database www.groep7.co.za/Mentor/ ZOMGWTFBBQ!! it still works lol!
Check out my old site with old pics at www.groep7.co.za/Stars/
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Sense of playing a senseless game? |
Tue, 16 August 2011 10:46 |
|
m.a@stars | | Commander | Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004 Location: Third star to the left | |
|
Eagle of Fire wrote on Tue, 16 August 2011 15:19 | in the end there was one experienced player in a team of three with two newbies and it was more "Micha's team" than "our team". He gave us so many pointers and orders to follow that, while an incredible learning experience for a newbie such as myself back then, it wasn't really us playing.
|
I've had my fair share of those kinds of Teams, being either the "leader" or a "follower" and it's mostly been "gee, we would never have managed to pull that neat trick on our own" or "whoa, this one newbie is starting to have really great ideas on his own" and always, ALWAYS "we'd never have had this much fun playing solo"
It can be somewhat stressful some times, but ain't nothing easy, at least not under the Stars!
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme! Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 16 13:01:28 EDT 2024
|