[Updated on: Mon, 20 March 2006 06:48] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Heh, I also remember in that game, the colony we talked about was much larger than 'privater sized'... More like 250,000 population. I also lost about 2000kt of badly needed germanium en route to the world, because I didn't realise that I needed to remove the 'unload germanium' orders when adding waypoints in space... That iron and boranium rich colony would've lasted a LOT longer if those minerals had arrived. That was also the colony in whose orbit I learned that range 0 beamers will almost never get a shot in, because they are too heavy... Not a great example

Obviously tiny 25k to 100k pop colonies are easy targets... Of course they are so small it doesn't hurt the defender much to lose them either...

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Tue, 14 March 2006 22:48]

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Tue, 14 March 2006 23:10]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Ptolemy wrote on Thu, 16 March 2006 16:58

Actually, in the game mentioned, I was the IS HP and I wasn't in last place.

Some confusion here - the last place IS HP I brought up was from another game, LOC (Locked in the Closet,) that I brought up as a counter example (intentional overextending leading to a win) and I was playing it.

In CLFKIAB you certainly looked to be in a decent position. Your alliance with Multilis looked unshakeable. I guess that might've lead to a win for you if your pop drops brought you up to 1st in resources. By this point, at least, your expensive mines would've been no barrier to success.

I tried to get Ptolemy to join me in fighting Multilis's HE 3i very early in the war (well, actually before the war even started.) I certainly don't think he would've survived both of us. Multilis - don't forget you were HP too, cheap mines or not

Additionally I don't think anyone else would've attacked Ptolemy had he gone to war, as his only major neighbour was the IT that dropped (I think after getting boxed in by Ptolemy's overexpansion?)

I don't think it's strange at all that Multilis and I had good diplomatic relations despite our all out war I take emotion out of my diplomacy as much as possible. Allying with Multilis would've been an excellent result for me, especially if I could get him fighting with his previous ally - I felt confident I could catch up with you in peacetime (I had massive growth in the far south) and I was getting my butt handed to me, so...

Raindancer was certainly coming into his golden age, but with no sign of the Ptolemy/Multis (+IT +SS) alliance breaking up we didn't feel we could recover unless we could break up the alliance. The IT race was definately teetering... If he had switched before giving your alliance the Nubian tech he was researching for you, then maybe Raindancer could've turned the tide, but I think it was too late for me.

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Thu, 16 March 2006 21:43]

Report message to a moderator

Sure, your factory settings were great, but as a low-growth HE your population growth was sluggish... It would've been interesting to see what would've happened if Ptolemy had dropped his orbiting population. Your resources were below mine for quite some time (I was QS, not HP,) so it's hard to see how you could've competed if you had a second front to cover (rather than have him cover part of the border for you...) Oh, and don't forget the effect of a lack of gates on a 2 front war.

But this is a huge hypothetical, and as you suggested, I am also quite certain that had we ganged up against you then Raindancer would've joined in on your side instead (he said he joined me because I was nominally the underdog in the war.)

But we are a long way off topic... I _think_ I've made my point that this particular case was not an example of overexpansion, it was way more complicated than that

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

low-growth HE your population growth was sluggish

12% growth at all planets, compared to others who have to travel farther to what are often below 66% greens...

You chose a really low growth JOAT so your pop growth was more sluggish.

Quote:

was not an example of overexpansion

Both you and Ptol spread very aggressively that game. Others such as first Mits guy allowed the expansion.

In other game you mention, Pickle Pea knows he made a mistake in what he allowed.

In Trans game, Ptol was aggressive over a certain green, which made my neighbour Ken Mitchell more hostile to him, which in turn helped lead Goober to conclusion he could get away with a nasty backstab.

[Updated on: Thu, 16 March 2006 22:49]

Report message to a moderator

multilis wrote on Fri, 17 March 2006 14:47

Quote: low-growth HE your population growth was sluggish 12% growth at all planets, compared to others who have to travel farther to what are often below 66% greens... You chose a really low growth JOAT so your pop growth was more sluggish.

12% is sluggish... I was comparing your growth to the other races, in particular the IS HP next door.

I already pointed out my race had better resource production per unit of population, thanks to QS pop eff. Our population growth were both bad - mine was just not even across my worlds... All my breeders, my high greens, had better growth and up to 240% of the population total. I don't know if you were using all your worlds as breeders or not so it's hard to compare. With better resource settings and comparable growth I had a definate resource advantage... Have you forgotten how long I lead you for? It's only when the bombing and packeting took it's toll that I fell behind...

Anyway...



My point is that overexpanding as a strategy is only a bad thing if someone pulls you up on it. If they don't, it's a _huge_ advantage. It's the cheapest territory you'll ever find.

I guess it depends exactly what you mean when you say 'overexpansion', if you read it as "expand so much you lose", then obviously it is a tautology to say it is a bad move, proved by it's own defination so is meaningless to debate.

If it means "expand so much you can't defend it all" it is only a bad move if you get called on it AND in the process you lose _more_ than you gained. For example in a situation where you are 500ly from your neighbour you might intentionally expand to 400ly, where you only hope to keep 300ly. The rest is a buffer zone, giving you warning, depth of defense, and something you could give up to avoid conflict.

The opposite of 'overexpansion' - the 'turtle approach' - has you intentionally take less ground than your neighbours, secure in the knowledge you can defend it all. Defend it until your neighbours grow powerfull with all that extra territory, that is...

Sometimes there may be a little middle ground between the strategies, where you are able to expand beyond your 'rightfull' territory, but still be capable of defending it all... But I'd rather push on a little further myself, gamble a little to win big. It doesn't cost much to expand, you just have to have the guts to do it. If someone attacks you and you can't stop them before they raze some major worlds, then you had lost anyway. If you stop them before they raze anything but minor worlds, then it paid off, probably cost them more than it cost you.

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Fri, 17 March 2006 00:53]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Fri, 17 March 2006 17:09]

Report message to a moderator

Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 17 March 2006 06:38

This is also way off topic.

Heh, the whole thread went almost immediately off topic ... starting with multilis first sentence "I remember my first game talking about borders with Dogthinker." That was just an opener to discuss the game.
My fault for not intervening sooner ...

I can't possible split this topic into the right threads, "Border negotiations" on one side and "CLFKIAB game review" on the other side ... so since 95% of the thread is the latter I'm renaming accordingly, and move it to the Bar.

mch,
modaw

[Updated on: Mon, 20 March 2006 06:49]

Report message to a moderator

Micha wrote on Mon, 20 March 2006 22:47

Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 17 March 2006 06:38 This is also way off topic. Heh, the whole thread went almost immediately off topic ... starting with multilis first sentence "I remember my first game talking about borders with Dogthinker." That was just an opener to discuss the game. My fault for not intervening sooner ... I can't possible split this topic into the right threads, "Border negotiations" on one side and "CLFKIAB game review" on the other side ... so since 95% of the thread is the latter I'm renaming accordingly, and move it to the Bar. mch, modaw

Well... I think Multilis was trying to use it as an example to discuss a generic type of scenario. We managed to get off the example a couple of times, but I guess we did start and end with the example...

Report message to a moderator

multilis wrote on Sat, 18 March 2006 08:39

Supposing I have control of my race and spartins, and you each have control of your respective races, and no one else submits... what turn would you want to turn back time to, for gang up on me? (Only fair we also have each other's race designs as well) We would need some sort of backup of the hst file, not sure if that still exists.

I don't think SAH holds the files after the game is removed. I probably still have the original version, but that'd be worse than starting again.

Quote:

I'll throw another option at you. Would either you or Ptol want to duel in small universe with otherwise same settings with your same race design verses mine? You take the empirical evidence of being ahead in score as important, Ptol talks normally crushing a race like mine. Duel is often over by 2450 which means by your evidence you should be ahead in power for most of game.

If you are suggesting taking your race against both Ptolemy's and my race simultaneously, then I'm up for it if he is

If you mean 1on1, that doesn't really prove anything as I wasn't trying to argue that my race would've beaten yours 1on1.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

more generic

Maybe you'll get in trouble now for going off topic, now that we've switched from border discussions to CFLKIAB topic.

There is a saying of walk softly but carry a big stick that I think fits early diplomacy/border negotiations. Sometimes you need to gently explain you do have a big stick if needed to get better/more profitable cooperation.

Quote:

stardock or orbital fort

At times a small minefield or escorting destroyer can also help.

IMO as far as securing territory, first issue is transportation. Cheap/early man-jet destroyer can take out both scouts and loaded privateers before colony is established or prevent upgrading colony.

For your stardock or orbital fort, a counter is picking the ideal time as far as they guy who's territory who is closer goes.

An ideal time might be created by rushing to W10 (for also terraforming tech), then suprise using the advantage of delta torps (or man-jet range 2 cruisers) to improve negotiating power. In jihad era, these ships plus chaff (to compensate for poor shields) plus 100/250 gates can compete in a pinch.


If you get yourself a war (like Dogthinker did in CFLKIAB), then you risk other powers also atacking your far flung holdings. If it was not for him having Straus near me in that game, I wouldn't have been able to ecconomically attack early, would have had to wait till Spartins and I got close enough that I could help him.

Early in that game, a planet in the middle of the universe (I think it was timbukto) had a suprising effect on negotiations. Dogthinker I think grabbed it but both Ptol and Wolves (Steve) desired it, it helped cement some diplomacy that Dogthinker never heard but hurt him longer term. Wolves were in opposite corner of universe.

[Updated on: Mon, 20 March 2006 19:07]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator