Report message to a moderator

Bystander wrote on Sun, 03 June 2007 16:10

I only have one idea for a special rules game - something that would prevent powerful players from being friends with other races. But it could only loosely be tied into a "Firefly" theme. Perhaps the meddling "Alliance" government is enforcing the rules . . .

Forbid treaties and demand "Enemy" relation between the #1 and #2 race (optionally also between #1 and #3 race). Once every decade and in immediate manner (no exit clause crap).
For example: At 2460 the RubberDucks were #1 and the Quawkers were #2. From 2461 they may not privately communicate with each other and have to fight each other. That lasts so until 2470, then ... if one of them exits the "arena" someone else enters it.

When no PPS then host has the task to monitor (and to timely announce) it.
For example: Hosts E-mail to all at 2460: "Any treaties between RubberDucks and Quawkers are now void and they are in war that lasts at least until 2470".

Promise to kick out (possibly find replacement) to one using "score lowering" cheats.

Allow only solo victory.

Report message to a moderator

Dibs on the Reavers!


I was thinking earlier actually of giving one race a large expanse of territory and a head start, and having all other races teamed against it. The "Alliance" could be a CA or something with all expensive@3 tech, and the other players maybe playing with a point handicap or starting a little later after the Alliance has grown for a few turns.
Of course if you have the Reavers in play, they'll just be out to kill everything. Make them be WM starting in their own area with their victory condition as whenever any other race is completely wiped out, or maybe that they have to invade or bomb flat X number of planets.

[Updated on: Sun, 03 June 2007 15:22]

Report message to a moderator

Kotk wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 00:34

Forbid treaties and demand "Enemy" relation between the #1 and #2 race (optionally also between #1 and #3 race). Once every decade and in immediate manner (no exit clause crap). For example: At 2460 the RubberDucks were #1 and the Quawkers were #2. From 2461 they may not privately communicate with each other and have to fight each other. That lasts so until 2470, then ... if one of them exits the "arena" someone else enters it.

Yup, I'm using a rule very much like this in the game I'm hosting at the moment (Bidding for Techs.) I think it's added a little more dynamics up at the top than I'm used to seeing. I think I'll probably apply this rule to most games I host in the future.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Bystander wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 04:32

1) All executed battle orders must be capable of targeting any neutral or enemy ships/orbitals through primary or secondary target.

How does this actually discourage allying though? More to the point, how does it discourage allying between the top ranks more than it does between the lower ranks?

Quote:

3) You can only have 15 ship designs

Hmmm, cut down by one... If anything, wouldn't a scarcity of ship slots increase reliance on allies? I suppose it reduces slots available for tech scrappers, but swapping tech by invasion works fine and doesn't cost a slot. Again, how does this affect the top ranks more than the lower ones?

Sorry to be picky I'm just trying to figure out how your idea works.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Bystander wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 18:34

What is the one circumstance where you don't have total control over your own number of ship designs?

If you have less that 16 designs, and are friends or neutral with another race, and they are friends or neutral to you, they can give you a ship/design. One of the many reasons I often set everyone to enemy.

Of course I wouldn't know this, as I would NEVER build a small fleet with intentionally provocative names like "Archons must die!!!", sending it to an interesting position in open space, one jump from say a HW, and transferring it to another player. It's even better if the target is a WM, and can see the designs right off.

-Matt

Report message to a moderator

mlaub wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 03:50

Bystander wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 18:34 What is the one circumstance where you don't have total control over your own number of ship designs? If you have less that 16 designs, and are friends or neutral with another race, and they are friends or neutral to you, they can give you a ship/design. One of the many reasons I often set everyone to enemy. Of course I wouldn't know this, as I would NEVER build a small fleet with intentionally provocative names like "Archons must die!!!", sending it to an interesting position in open space, one jump from say a HW, and transferring it to another player. It's even better if the target is a WM, and can see the designs right off. -Matt

!!! Go Matt!

mch

Report message to a moderator

Heh, evil thoughts Matt... I harbour suspicions that they might even be memories

But... Still... Such a rule is hardly going to break up alliances (or stop them from forming,) unless you mean to suggest that should you recieve designs that push you up over 15 designs, then you are out of the game, without having an opportunity to just delete the unwanted designs... In which case any allies could kill each other at any moment of their choice, simply by transfering one of each of their ships...

In such a universe, perhaps less alliances will form, but the ties will probably be stronger not weaker - the level of trust needed would be so much higher... And since the description suggested a delay before the player is dropped, then they have time to return the favour...

[Updated on: Tue, 05 June 2007 02:41]

Report message to a moderator

Dogthinkers wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 02:40

Heh, evil thoughts Matt... I harbour suspicions that they might even be memories But... Still... Such a rule is hardly going to break up alliances (or stop them from forming,) unless you mean to suggest that should you recieve designs that push you up over 15 designs, then you are out of the game, without having an opportunity to just delete the unwanted designs... In which case any allies could kill each other at any moment of their choice, simply by transfering one of each of their ships... In such a universe, perhaps less alliances will form, but the ties will probably be stronger not weaker - the level of trust needed would be so much higher... And since the description suggested a delay before the player is dropped, then they have time to return the favour...

So mlaub and Dogthinkers knew exactly what I was hinting at.

But if players sign up with the understanding that there can be only one victor and don't have strong personal ties with other players, then I THINK it might work well.

To answer Dogthinkers concern, let me propose a scenario. Two players at 25K resources around 2440, remaining several players averaging about 10K with less technology. As one of the 25K players, would you rather continue an alliance with the other 25K player, wipe out all other players and then play essential an even duel with your opponent? Or would you rather turtle-up, quietly get some defenses ready, disqualify him in one shot, and then take two turns of abuse? And how do you know your ally is not thing about beating you to the same tactic?

Report message to a moderator

It would work soooo well.

Senario 1. You are winning - you dare not take any ally as they will nearly always take the opportunity to remove you from the game.

Senario 2. You are 2-5th - you might be able to take a weak ally because for as long as you are of more benifit to him alive than dead he wont. But you would have to be very careful.

Senario 3. You are 6-12th - you could probably ally with someone with a bit of confidence that you wont get hit - particularly if you are fighting together to resist a bigger opponent.

Senario 4. You are 13-16th - you should be able to ally with most other players, particularly if one or 2 big players are running away with the game. Still beware of an imediate neighbour deciding that your planets would fight better under his control

I love this idea - in the middle of a big game at the moment, but if you take a month or so to get this one off the ground count me in.
Joseph
(PS- Giving the extra ships would be like backstabbing someone with the Eifel Tower. But not a dishonerable backstab because expected by the rules).

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

Report message to a moderator