| Dynamic Duos 6 |
Wed, 05 March 2014 00:25  |
|
 ManicLurch |
 | Lt. Junior Grade |
Messages: 462
Registered: May 2009 | |
|
With DD5 ending, time to start the next game.
Rules are the same as before:
Race restrictions, CA and IT are banned, Joat cannot take NAS. You cannot take HE factoryless. This means you cannot have factories worse than the default of 10/10/10 and no GR above 10(20)
All races other than your teammate must be set to enemy. No communication with anyone other than your teammate.
No tech trading with anyone other than your teammate. Only one race per player, you can however submit your allies turn if necessary, like when your ally is on vacation, too busy at work, etc.
Race names, including the plural version must be unique:-)
Other game settings are as follows:
- Distant players position
- AccBBS
- random events on
- PPS off.
Standard cheat disclaimer, which means that the following cheats are allowed:
- chaff
- split fleet dodge
- merge fleets after gating
- Mine damage dodge
Turns would be MTWTF until 2430 or someone requests a slow down. From there they would be MWF.
Condition of victory, PPS being turned on at 2500 and then a vote. If there is no clear victor, we keep playing until there is a clear victor by vote.
Universe will be medium dense.
There will be 5 or 6 teams of 2 players. You will start next to your teammate.
In some of the past games with these rules we tried some variations like weapons forced expensive and kill starbase orders banned. I am open to some variations or tweaking of the game rules if it makes an interesting game. So propose any changes you would like to see as well as letting me know if you want to join. We go with a vanilla version of the rules, or make con forced expensive, or only allow one cheap tech per person, go slow tech, max minerals, or whatever ideas you can think of. Also, if there is a volunteer out there who can move Homeworlds so teammates start next to each other and gen the game, I would appreciate it.
I am guessing this game will get started around the beginning of April and end around October
Turns would be MTWTF until 2430 or someone requests a slow down. From there they would be 3 days a week.
Players/teams so far:
Rolf/ManicLurch
Mac
Lucjan
Also we need a volunteer to set up the universe. This involves moving some homeworlds and possibly moving other planets around. If that same person will act as host, that is great. But if you just want to set up, we would appreciate that as well.
Thanks,
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Dynamic Duos 6 |
Sat, 08 March 2014 16:05  |
|
| craebild |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 568
Registered: December 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark | |
|
Loucipher wrote on Sat, 08 March 2014 17:35How do you intend to discern the two 
I guess he means is this:
North/south minefield immunity and east/west speed bump minefield immunity (where a fleet that travels exactly north south is unaffected by standard minefields and a fleet travelling exactly east/west is unaffected by speed bump minefields) should be banned.
mine damage dodge (where if a fleet is composed of two ship designs, the first in design slot order takes 4/5 of the damage while the second in design slot order takes 1/5 of the damage) should be allowed.
The first prevents all damage to the fleet by making a turn in open space, the second reduces fleet damage because of the fleet composition. I would say the are easy to discern, as in the first case the fleet is not taking any damage, and has been travelling exactly north/south or east/west, in the second case the fleet has taken damage, but (probably) less than the race laying the minefield would have hoped.
I can also see why he would want one banned and the other allowed.
The first is easy to avoid, and very unlikely to happen unintentionally (the only case where if would be reasonable to say it was unintentional would be if there are two planets exactly north/south or east/west of each other).
The second can very easily happen unintentionally (most fleets contain more than one design, and most races would need a booster design in the early to mid game, placing the booster design early in the design slot order).
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Ræbild / Christian Raebild
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Dynamic Duos 6 |
Sun, 09 March 2014 12:32 |
|
| craebild |
| Lieutenant |
Messages: 568
Registered: December 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark | |
|
Mac1 wrote on Sun, 09 March 2014 09:22
Weapons expensive is already in SAS games. I played two of them and it was really nice idea.
But to be original here we could do Con expensive, could also be fun 
I would favour not having any special rules, other than those already stated by ManicLurch.
If we are playing with Weap expensive, we might run into the same problem we found in SAS6, where some aspect of the min. damage bug made some ships and starbases cause inordinate amounts of damage, though I would have to check up on the correspondence from back then to see exactly what it was that happened. On the other hand, if this game is only Weap expensive and not also slow tech advances, then that might not become an issue.
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Ræbild / Christian Raebild
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Dynamic Duos 6 |
Sun, 09 March 2014 14:24 |
|
| ManicLurch |
| Lt. Junior Grade |
Messages: 462
Registered: May 2009 | |
|
Quote:If we are playing with Weap expensive, we might run into the same problem we found in SAS6, where some aspect of the min. damage bug made some ships and starbases cause inordinate amounts of damage, though I would have to check up on the correspondence from back then to see exactly what it was that happened. On the other hand, if this game is only Weap expensive and not also slow tech advances, then that might not become an issue.
We didn't have that problem in DD4 with W forced expensive. As you pointed out, SAS also had slow tech. SAS also had like 15 planets per player as well. Each team in the DD series gets about 50-60 planets per team. I do recall some battles with Yak and red lasers in DD4, but not an extended period of them. So the min damage problem could still happen, but it is less likely.
Quote:But to be original here we could do Con expensive, could also be fun
Yes, that would be different for sure. I like this idea. We might see some W12 DDs and a lot of W10 FFs and W16 CCs. The only downside I see is it would likely mean no AR on any of the teams, so a less diverse set of PRTs chosen. Still it would make for an interesting game.
We could also just stick with the vanilla rules. I am just offering some suggestions. At the moment I am favoring forced Con expensive or the Vanilla. We will go with majority vote on any special rules like this.
Quote: So explicitly allowing the damage dodge, not immunity.
Correct.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
