| Benchmarking races |
Thu, 10 July 2003 09:10  |
|
|
|
Curiosity (plus a lead up to a post I'll be doing in a few days) calls.
How do you bench mark your races and why?
Does anyone still use the old Barry Kearns benchmark?
Has anyone modified it for whatever reason?
Seeded galaxy?
Seeded pre-scouted galaxy?
etc...
I'm still a fan of the Barry Kearns benchmark, bar the max mins it's always been a good referance point. I'd normally test a race through this method, then try without max mins and see if the race is still viable.
So basically... how do you test yours?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Benchmarking races |
Thu, 10 July 2003 09:48  |
|
 Sinla |
 | Warrant Officer |
Messages: 132
Registered: February 2003
Location: the Netherlands | |
|
Never heard of this guy, sorry. 
But what do I do:
1) take a look at the game-settings
2) create a race I *think* will do well (and one I want to play ofc).
3) put it in the universe accordingly and take a look at the first 20/30 years.
4) if it doesn't do too well, try again. Still nothing, tweek or change the design.
And put in RS ofcourse, but that's my style...
I live and breathe Stars! nowadays, so I have the feeling I can distinguish between viable or not (me and my humble self said  ) rather fast. So I keep it simple now, but in my nOOb-years I playtested alot though...
btw, where can I learn the art of diplomacy 
Now that you don't find back in benchmarkresults, but matters even more!
Other human players in a universe determined to kill you can ruin a perfect benchmarkrace! (oops, O/T-alert),
If you can't beat me... Run away...Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Benchmarking races |
Thu, 10 July 2003 10:11 |
|
|
|
Well Barry Kearns was the blokey that came up with (as far as I know) the 100 armageddon BB's benchmark.
I think he also holds the record with one of the many monster CA's he designed (he got 118 by 2455 or something).
I also *think* he was the first to break 100k by 2450... but I may be wrong.
Despite my knowledge and my rank on the forum... i'm still a pretty crappy player by most standards... I just love the game. So I still like to test bed my races... just to check. Every now and again I monsterise a race just to see how high I can get those resources.
As for the art of diplomacy...
Try the old stars-r-us articles on Stars FAQ (http://www.starsfaq.com/articles/sru/art_diplomacy.htm)
or search here: http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8 &group=rec.games.computer.stars
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
 Re: Benchmarking races |
Fri, 11 July 2003 00:10 |
|
| Crusader |
 | Officer Cadet 2nd Year |
Messages: 233
Registered: January 2003
Location: Dixie Land | |
|
Nah! I tried the BB benchmark tests, too. But now I test for two things, resources and tech levels. Some tests are only for one of the two - depending on what I'm really trying to achieve in my race design. But most days I'm testbedding for those two objectives. How many resources and what tech levels do I have by 2450.
I standardize the test with a generic universe definition of:
Tiny
Dense
Max Mins
AccBBS
No Random Events
I will spend the first 30 years really MM the growth, but I simply stop all pop/mineral management somewhere between 30-35 years and let the race grow and simply move the research around from field to field.
I'm looking for tech levels of 10/w/12/13/11/7, where w=weapons as high as I can get 'em.  Which makes it a variable of Mr. Kearn's testing goal, I suppose. I want my resources around 25k, ofc, and I want it all by 2450. I seldom get that, but the closer the better. 
Also, you might note that I will NOT be testing with the HE or AR PRTs.  But that's just me. I will most likely be testing SS, WM, SD, PP, IT, or IS. I've tested JOAT and CA and generally speaking I have no need to test 'em again. They can reach the goals without my help.
Now, I could make the universe size larger, MM longer, and colonize more worlds-build more bases and start colonizing with the breeders, etc., etc. - and get almost all my decent race designs to make good in the testbeds. But that only proves that I know how to manipulate a testbed. Instead, I've chosen to limit my testbeds to more closely simulate what I can realistically expect to colonize before competition pressure forces me to halt early expansion. By "hamstringing" my race testing this way, I sometimes have races that actually do better in the real game than they do in the testbed! I like when that happens. My opponents generally don't. 
Well, it's getting late and I'm getting tired and overusing the blasted smilies. Did I answer your question ok? Did I answer it at all?
Respectfully your humble servant,
The Crusader 
Nothing for now.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Benchmarking races |
Fri, 11 July 2003 14:21 |
|
|
|
| freakyboy wrote on Fri, 11 July 2003 12:06 |
Whats the seed number for that?
|
Once you find a seed number that generates those minerals for that set of game settings on that computer you can just keep the same .def file and switch in new races in order to testbed them in the same conditions.
- Kurt
Time flies like an arrow.
Fruit flies like a banana.
- Groucho MarxReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Benchmarking races |
Sat, 12 July 2003 11:21 |
|
| Steve |
 | Officer Cadet 1st Year |
Messages: 217
Registered: November 2002
Location: 40 deg N, 90 deg W | |
|
Below is my testbed .def file.
Standard Testbed
0 3 3 9230
0 0 1 1 0 0 0
1
dislexic.r1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 100
testbed.xy
No trees were harmed in the making of this sig. However, many electrons were terribly inconveniencedReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
