| New Basic Game: War of the Worlds |
Tue, 28 March 2006 20:19  |
|
 Mark |
 | Crewman 1st Class |
Messages: 39
Registered: March 2006
Location: michigan, USA | |
|
Game parameters:
HOSTED on AUTOHOST (HOST will play)
GENERATION: 24 hours between generations
until requested to go to 48 hrs by 2 players
NUMBER OF PLAYERS: 8
PLAYER SKILL LEVEL: All (but host is intermediate to advnced)
UNIVERSE SIZE: Large (will depends on number of players)
DENSITY: Sparse
PLAYER POSITIONS: Distant
OPTIONS: Accelerated BBS play
Random Events: Yes
Public Player Scores: No
Galaxy clumping: No
Slower tech advance: No
PRT: CA must leave 150 points on defenses(or 200pts on anything)
JoaT must either not take NAS, or must have 100 points left over
NO PRE-GAME ALLIANCES!
Trade, diplomacy, technology exchange and alliances are permitted and encouraged.
Only the following cheats are allowed:
- CHAFF
- SPLIT FLEET DODGE
Other cheats are not allowed.
VICTORY CONDITIONS:Last man standing (no alliance victories),
Player Vote or
OWNS 60% OF ALL PLANETS
EXCEEDS SECOND PLACE SCORE BY 100%
HAS THE HIGHEST SCORE AFTER 80 YEARS
WINNER MUST MEET 2 OF THE ABOVE CRITERIA
AT LEAST 80 YEARS MUST BE PASSED BEFORE A WINNER IS DECLARED
Players are set inactive after missing four (unexplained) turns, but will be set active again when they submit a turn. If anyone has to drop, please try to find a replacement first, and let me know you are dropping rather than just stopping submitting turns.
If interested, drop me a message.
Mark
[Updated on: Tue, 04 April 2006 21:10] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Basic Game: War of the Worlds |
Fri, 31 March 2006 12:09  |
|
| NingunOtro |
 | Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 105
Registered: September 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium | |
|
Might be altogether something completely different: lack of space favours short term fighting which can be considered by most the fun part of the game. It also makes sure the distance to someone you consider a threat to your possibilities stays reasonable and therefore that your fate stays in your own hands.
With lots of space and big distances, and also lots of players, everything changes. The distance acts as some sort of isolation from short term fighting and shifts priority to building an competitive economy because you not only have to fight those close to you, but also stay economically competitive with others that are beyond the reach of your war fleets. Diplomacy also plays a more interesting role as you need to maneuver the neighbors of those you consider a threat into action. Some frustration can arise when an far competitor gets the pole position because its neighbors are weaker while you can not expand at an competitive pace as yours refuse to cooperate. Distances also translate into time to build bigger empires, and bigger empires are a more daunting task to take down, thus monotonous, micro-management rich, strategically challenging, time-consuming, etc.
Which scenario anyone prefers depends on whether you are interested in playing short term military strategy games or real global strategy scenarios. Real Day Life time restraints also play a role if people need to see the end of the game reasonably soon, otherwise pace of turns can slow down to only a few or even only one turn per week, giving plenty of time to give attention to many details. But this of course are no interesting options for desperado-like gunmen: quickstart shortfight mentalities. Live fast and leave an painless body-bag behind when you go.
Real life offers the same kind of choices, and the ingame attitudes hardly differ from real personal attitudes.
Tell me how you live, and I'll tell you how you like to play. 
If we were esteemed intelligent 'enough', they would have contacted us.
If we can not find them, either we are not smart enough, or they are smarter at hiding.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Basic Game: War of the Worlds |
Fri, 31 March 2006 12:26 |
|
| c64k |
 | Petty Officer 3rd Class |
Messages: 42
Registered: March 2006
Location: .us | |
|
| Kotk wrote on Fri, 31 March 2006 11:44 |
Result is (like we see) 60 planets
|
60 planets under territorial influence/control, sure, but 60 planets *colonized*? Those are pretty wide habs...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Basic Game: War of the Worlds |
Fri, 31 March 2006 14:55 |
|
| miklem |
| Crewman 1st Class |
Messages: 35
Registered: April 2004
Location: Russia | |
|
Large Sparse Universe seems to be interesting - I vote for it. But try to play in medium too.
[Updated on: Sat, 01 April 2006 15:43]
WBR, MikleMReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Basic Game: War of the Worlds |
Fri, 31 March 2006 18:35 |
|
| GreyMatter |
 | Petty Officer 2nd Class |
Messages: 57
Registered: September 2004
Location: USA | |
|
I totally agree with Kotk above:
It is not the big number of planets that makes this game fun - larger/denser universes only add more MM.
For example we just played NoImpact in Small/Dense with 10 players - it was more than enough for a fun rollercoaster type game !
More interesting options that change game dynamics and require for a non-typical race designs are :(IMHO)
1) PRT cost balance
(CA-150..200pt, JoaT-no NAS + no OBRM, IT-50pt, SD/IS-25pt) we have this partially in this game.
2) Force Alliance restriction:
even when the game advertized as 1 race winner only, but alliances are not restricted formally - the game just slides into allinace A vs Aliance B game anyway (or worse into allince of strong players gang-banging smaller guys)
so possible choices are...
- restrict allinance size to 2 max, set rest to enemy all the time and no any tech trading between alliances at all.
- rank 1 player may not have allies at all or only with last ranked player,
rank 2,3 players may only have 1 ally and not each other or #1,
rank 4-6 players may have 2 allies,
rest - no restrictions.
3) Slower Tech Advances - this does make games more interesting !
e.g. in NoImpact with the STA we still managed to get e18/w24/p12/c16/L14 by 2496... but the early Jhad battles were so much fun.
4) OBRM and mine settings restrictions:
This one is tricky but may be well suited for Larger universes (like in this game) to make RM option more attractive than basic mining and therefore lead to a race design with narrower habs... Thus reducing MM for a large empire, yet making that same large empire more exposed at its various mining sites to even the weakest players' attack.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: New Basic Game: War of the Worlds |
Fri, 31 March 2006 19:04 |
|
| Madman |
 | Officer Cadet 1st Year |
Messages: 228
Registered: November 2003
Location: New Zealand | |
|
| GreyMatter wrote on Sat, 01 April 2006 11:35 |
I totally agree with Kotk above:
It is not the big number of planets that makes this game fun - larger/denser universes only add more MM.
For example we just played NoImpact in Small/Dense with 10 players - it was more than enough for a fun rollercoaster type game !
|
That is quite a different sort of game.
I quite like a game where there is a strong economic component before war begins (I'm more an econ player than a war fighter), so I like a bit of space at the start, but I also find that more than about 80 planets get's over-burdened with management, and I tend to do well so have more than my share of planets. As a result of this, I won't play in games with more than 40 planets/player.
| Quote: |
More interesting options that change game dynamics and require for a non-typical race designs are :(IMHO)
<snip>
|
Other things that (IMO) make the game more interesting:
* No Acc-BBS start. This is not a huge difference, but Acc-BBS favours HG, factoryless and quickstart at the expense of HP and AR (or any race that has to get something set up quickly, like mineless, if anyone is mad enough to try that). At the cost of an extra 7-8 turns at the start, race options are widened a bit.
* Require things like BET, no IFE, or weapons expensive. A few years ago I played in a duel that had several restrictions - slow tech, expensive weapons, BET, no IFE, and possibly one or two other rules I can't remember - it was a lot of fun.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Ooops, I just know that was to easy a name!
.
Strong players seem to have significally bigger territory than their fair share so even in large normal and 16 players they usually colonize 30 planets with minor hostilities.
