|Re: Benchmarking races
||Thu, 10 July 2003 09:48 |
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
||Fri, 11 July 2003 00:10 |
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:
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,
Nothing for now.
Report message to a moderator