Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

Jump to Stars! AutoHost


 
 
Home » Old Game Forums » Cute Lil Fluffy Kittens in a Box » Game Objectives
Game Objectives Thu, 22 January 2004 08:21 Go to next message
Raindancer is currently offline Raindancer

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 261
Registered: February 2003
Location: Finger Lakes NY, USA

Animals here.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but the victory objectives are:

Victory:
Rank 1 after 2525

Are all (or most) players playing in an attempt to win?

What is the point of a 5 player alliance, when in theory only one can win? Especially in a game with 10 players?

I know in some games, alliance victories are allowed, but these generally allow a max of 2, maybe 3, players in the alliance, and something about alliance victories is often added to the rules of the game when it is starting.

[I played in one game where each player was only allowed to have one other player as Friend, and two more as Neutral, and the rest needed to be set to Enemy. It worked quite well...]

If many players ally with the number One Rank player (and stay allied), then there is absolutely no way that the One Rank player will be taken down, and no way for any other player to win.

I generally find the game more interesting when most of the players are playing to win...

Other thoughts?

Animals

Report message to a moderator

Re: Game Objectives Thu, 22 January 2004 11:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
multilis is currently offline multilis

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 789
Registered: October 2003
Location: Edmonton, Canada
David of the Quacks here.

You have openly said you have an ally. So has Black Hand.

So in some measure players are working together even though the official objective is to be the sole guy on top. Players don't like getting wiped out.

For myself, I am trying to finish #1 in the score. I don't need to wipe out all others to do so, just have the biggest economy and have the game voted over.

For others, I can't speak of what their plans are. I give them whatever planets are nice greens for them and try to stick to the reds, so when they look at me they don't see planets they want. I have no benefit in making war with those who aren't threatening me.

One day I may get backstabbed or ganged up on. I do my best to make arrangements to handle such a situation. Others benefit from advantage cooperation brings while they would be at more of a disadvantage if they were alone.

Similar to how the Animals are now working with Plague, Budgie and Black Hand. Can't blame you for wanting more help.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Game Objectives Thu, 22 January 2004 15:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Raindancer is currently offline Raindancer

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 261
Registered: February 2003
Location: Finger Lakes NY, USA

Quote:


You have openly said you have an ally. So has Black Hand.



I do not have a problem with one ally. It just seems rather silly to me to have 4, maybe 6 races working together, when there are only 10 players in the game. (Granted all these numbers to be lowered by one after this turn...)

It has been my experience that the player WITHOUT allies gets killed quickly.

Quote:


So in some measure players are working together even though the official objective is to be the sole guy on top. Players don't like getting wiped out.



So why not just play a 'race' game, where everyone is set to friend? Wink

Quote:


For myself, I am trying to finish #1 in the score. I don't need to wipe out all others to do so, just have the biggest economy and have the game voted over.



I understand, and agree. If I was number one I would gather as many allies as I could, and just pick on the number two, and maybe number three players, to make sure no one could overtake me. So that makes sense if you are the number one player. But obviously not ALL the players working togther are Rank One.

Quote:


One day I may get backstabbed or ganged up on. I do my best to make arrangements to handle such a situation. Others benefit from advantage cooperation brings while they would be at more of a disadvantage if they were alone.



Again, I am not suggesting not having ANY allies, but that half or more of the players in the game working together defeats the victory conditions of the game, IMO.

Quote:


Similar to how the Animals are now working with Plague, Budgie and Black Hand. Can't blame you for wanting more help.



Well, I initially had only one ally. It was only after a group of 4 players (maybe involving up to 6 at some level) attacked one other single player, that it became a necessary defensive maneuver to gather more allies and start working together. This is not my preferred way to set alliances in a "there can be only one" game.

If there were no alliances bigger than 2 players, it would be quite possible for a player in the middle ranks to win the game.

Animals

Report message to a moderator

Re: Game Objectives Thu, 22 January 2004 15:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
multilis is currently offline multilis

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 789
Registered: October 2003
Location: Edmonton, Canada
There is nothing in the game objectives about having even 1 ally. Yet you have had one. Why? Because it is in your best interests.

If you were friendly with me and I was giving you green planets and minerals and tech would you be so eager to suddenly instead face my warships, while I tried to make peace with everyone else?

If I get backstabbed by one of my friends, I will be quite happy to be giving their green planets to you whenever I could in order to get you as a friend. And you might be inclined to accept.

David

Report message to a moderator

Re: Game Objectives Thu, 22 January 2004 17:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Raindancer is currently offline Raindancer

 
Officer Cadet 3rd Year

Messages: 261
Registered: February 2003
Location: Finger Lakes NY, USA

Quote:

There is nothing in the game objectives about having even 1 ally. Yet you have had one. Why? Because it is in your best interests.



Of course Animals have an ally. Of course it is in Animal best interest. Animals know there is nothing in the game rules about alliances. Animals are not arguing against a single ally. Did Quacks read Animal post? Mad

Quote:


If you were friendly with me and I was giving you green planets and minerals and tech would you be so eager to suddenly instead face my warships, while I tried to make peace with everyone else?



If Quacks remember, they DID try to get Animals interested in Friendship. Animals decided to support the lone player (this also before Black Hand showed his support). We thought that 3 on 1 was enough (this also before Animals knew the extent of the friendships, and that it was really a 4 on 1 already), and that with Animals attacking Budgie also, a 4 on 1 would be quite unfair. We decided, against the odds, to support the underdog, which also meant that Animals were on the outnumbered side.

Quote:


If I get backstabbed by one of my friends, I will be quite happy to be giving their green planets to you whenever I could in order to get you as a friend. And you might be inclined to accept.



Animals have been told that the Quacks are in first place. We have not been able to confirm this, as Quacks shot down all the scouts Animals had in Quack's area. Confused If this is true then Animals would not likely accept. Unless Quacks had a massive exodus of friends, and that Quacks became the underdog themselves. Smile

But this is not really about the Quacks, who may well be in first place. Animals find Quack tactics quite acceptable for someone in first place. It is all the other races willing to go along with the Quacks, who are NOT Rank One that Animals have the objection to.

If Quacks are in First Rank, and if 5 of the 10 races will not attack the Quacks, then the game is already over, by superior Quack diplomacy. It would be ridiculous to continue playing if this were the case.

Animals

Report message to a moderator

Re: Game Objectives Thu, 22 January 2004 19:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
multilis is currently offline multilis

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 789
Registered: October 2003
Location: Edmonton, Canada
"Animals know there is nothing in the game rules about alliances."

Yes, from one friend to any number, all part of the game. No mention in the official objective of even having one friend, it is understood that mutually beneficial arrangements spring up.

Let us suppose everyone gangs up on me now and they take me out. They have reduced the player count by one. But they still have everyone else to fight. And the guy who starts the ganging up is the one most likely to get wiped out as well (by me).

Let us suppose they instead wait till they take a few of you out before they gang up on me. They have reduced the count by several, less competition.

Also, if you can't finish first you might be happy to see how high you can place. Or you might be a friend of me for the whole game, knowing that I may be ganged up on and have my position reduced enough for you, my friend to surpass me.

I think you are stuck in a mindset of exactly one friend, no more or less, just as some are stuck in a mindset of no war till 2450.

As for fighting for the underdog, who helped Spartins? Budgie was the #1 power, and would have been happy to have me join him. You were happy to just watch us fight it out and weaken ourselves, till you felt a danger to yourself, long term.

David

Report message to a moderator

Re: Game Objectives Sun, 25 January 2004 19:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dogthinkers is currently offline Dogthinkers

 
Commander

Messages: 1316
Registered: August 2003
Location: Hiding from Meklar
lol, no way you'll catch me touching *this* topic Laughing

I will, however, clarify a couple of areas about the actual game rules:
1) As pointed out, there are no rules regarding diplomacy
2) Don't forget, the winner is by score at 2425

Report message to a moderator

Re: Game Objectives Tue, 27 January 2004 01:29 Go to previous message
budgie is currently offline budgie

 
Civilian

Messages: 3
Registered: October 2003
multilis wrote on Fri, 23 January 2004 07:52

If you were friendly with me and I was giving you green planets and minerals and tech would you be so eager to suddenly instead face my warships, while I tried to make peace with everyone else?


hmmm, don't you mean, "while I wipe everybody else out first, and build up my economy and mineral supply to ten times yours in the process"

I find it bizarre that everybody is siding with the monster race. I don't understand the logic that is leading people to believe that the best way to come 1st is to help the 1st place race get further ahead... This early in the game we can all realistically aim for a 1st place victory - we are still only half way through the game...

Quote:

Let us suppose everyone gangs up on me now and they take me out. They have reduced the player count by one. But they still have everyone else to fight. And the guy who starts the ganging up is the one most likely to get wiped out as well (by me).


Don't worry about getting wiped out for being the first to gang up on Quacks - that'd be me that's taking the heat, obviously, lol Smile

Quote:

Let us suppose they instead wait till they take a few of you out before they gang up on me. They have reduced the count by several, less competition.


Oh boy, I bet you'd love that. Waiting 'to make it easier'... lol... the longer we wait the stronger you get Smile

Don't forget, if you only place 2nd, you still lost...

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: Spartins leaving, diplomatic relations...
Next Topic: Game Disaster
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu May 19 21:44:22 EDT 2022