 |
|  |
 |
|
mart7x5
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Jamski
... It would make the game a lot less prone to "bullying" by which I mean the rich getting together to rob the poor.
-Jam | Do people really play mostly this way?
If yes, where is the spirit of competition, honor?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Vev
|
 |
I am so out of touch
Nov 2000 time: 15:34
|
|
What I was disappointed in this game was the length of time required before the teams met and could discuss. Also, everything was so hushed up and quiet and there is so much you can discuss outside the faction without giving anything away and there is so much you can discuss inside the team with the limited numbers without running out of topics.
I once had a crazy idea where all teams started off inflitrated with each other so that we can casually observe and gossip without fear of giving base information anything away. Of course, faction future plans are still kept within the private forums.
Does anyone see any exploit to this or is it fair enough for all?
Problem with this is that it gives the Data Angels a head start. If that is the AI, well they need all the help they can get. If humans, *shudders*.
Last edited by Vev on 26-03-2004 at 04:22
|
|
|  |
 |
|
MrWhereItsAt
|
 |
New Year's Resolution: 2005 is the year of Where It's At - come get some.
Nov 2001 time: 17:34
|
|
I'm afraid I have to disagree with everyone who says that MP games do not necessarily lead to bitterness and disputes. I have been in every such game on this site and it happens in all of them, to a far greater extent than any SP game so far. I do speak with many many incidents to back my words up with.
I myself am not bitter at anyone, but in a sense everyone. In fact it is more of a disenchantment, born only of the fact of seeing such annoyances surface again, despite my small attempts to avoid them through provoking better contact between us all.
There are two reasons (IMO) for the feuds in this game. The first is that a multifaction game will always lead to them (I am convinced), and I have yet to be shown an instance of such a game that does not. The second is something we CAN help - the very poor state of communication between our opposing faction members due to the ridiculousness of limiting chatting about the game between faction members. If we can free this restriction up then we may stand a chance, but there will still be problems.
Almost the entire Civ3 ISDG and PtWDG lot know each other and get on fantastically in unrelated chat and PBEMs, but that didn't stop some very nasty inter-team problems in the PtWDG, and even within our own team in the Intersite Game.
Whatever measures are put in place for the next game, I will certainly not be participating if it is another multi-faction game. When you are disappointed or frustrated because of something, you try to change it. If you can't then you get it out of your life so it can stop irritating you. If not enough listen to my past and present experiences and decide a SP game is the way to go, then sadly I will have to forego SMACX DGs until enough people realise that a Single faction game is the only way to avoid the disappointments.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
I'm afraid I have to disagree with everyone who says that MP games do not necessarily lead to bitterness and disputes. I have been in every such game on this site and it happens in all of them, to a far greater extent than any SP game so far. I do speak with many many incidents to back my words up with.
I myself am not bitter at anyone, but in a sense everyone. In fact it is more of a disenchantment, born only of the fact of seeing such annoyances surface again, despite my small attempts to avoid them through provoking better contact between us all.
There are two reasons (IMO) for the feuds in this game. The first is that a multifaction game will always lead to them (I am convinced), and I have yet to be shown an instance of such a game that does not. The second is something we CAN help - the very poor state of communication between our opposing faction members due to the ridiculousness of limiting chatting about the game between faction members. If we can free this restriction up then we may stand a chance, but there will still be problems.
Almost the entire Civ3 ISDG and PtWDG lot know each other and get on fantastically in unrelated chat and PBEMs, but that didn't stop some very nasty inter-team problems in the PtWDG, and even within our own team in the Intersite Game.
Whatever measures are put in place for the next game, I will certainly not be participating if it is another multi-faction game. When you are disappointed or frustrated because of something, you try to change it. If you can't then you get it out of your life so it can stop irritating you. If not enough listen to my past and present experiences and decide a SP game is the way to go, then sadly I will have to forego SMACX DGs until enough people realise that a Single faction game is the only way to avoid the disappointments. |
   MWIA is spot on.
Again, I'm in a position where I see things from (mostly) every view, and I can clearly see there is a lot of bitterness and such. I find it kind of ironic that some people think that I'm wrong when I can go into another forum and find out what others are saying about that person
Anyway....Yeah, I'm going to not join the next DG either. Waaaay too much cheating, too much bitterness, and just too much nastiness in this game. People trying to circumvent the rules (and a lot of them getting away with it), legalese, broken friendships...It's just not worth all the emotional energy too me 
Edit: Though MWIA, theres something I don't think you understand. There were people who were infiltrating other factions, and they got away with it cause their smart.
Thats why the rule was implimented: So I could active go after these people. Taking away this rule would just allow it again and yes, there are players in this game that would do it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Jamski
There's no way to stop it, Tass. |
ACDGSP
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Googlie
|
 |
Commanding Officer, CRYPTEIA
Apr 1999 time: 21:34
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
I think in the end the map design can be credited with most of the games course. Hive + Drones forced to either coperate or Fight and then within Drop Range of Uni only. |
Hmm - how to respond diplomatically?
In pre-game discussions I was given broad hints that the Hive and UoP would fight at some stage, so in drawing up the map, and placing the AI, I sort of allowed for the following broad alliances:
Hive/CyCon vs Drones/Uni, with PEACE as a broker, possibly aligning with the Angels and believers to form a strong third pact (Believers are submissive to Roze, who likes PEACE)
Hive vs UoP alone, with CyCon/PEACE forming a strong bloc and the Drones aligning with Angels/Believers (who like the Drones)
Given their proximity, I could also see the Drones and Hive allying against the UoP and CyCon for a classic Industry vs Research battle, with PEACE either doing its thing with Roze and Miriam, or possibly joining the researchers as their naval arm.
I drew up the map and start positions with these thoughts in mind.
But it's all been thrashed out already - PEACE tried to screw the last nickel from CyCon, pissing them off, and the rest is history
G.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
johndmuller
|
 |
Capitol Hill, Colony of DC
Feb 2001 time: 00:34
|
|
I like Vev's idea about universal infiltration.
While it would take some of the game out of play, there would be plenty of redeeming aspects, not the least of which would be the educational opportunies: to learn some pretty good stuff from watching the play in the other factions and probably some good stuff about the relative intrinsic values of the factions themselves. I would venture that each of us has something to learn in such an arena - it would be like playing in 5 SP democracy or succession games at once. The infiltration would also remove the temptation to effect infiltration via DL or whatever other insidious methods there might be (and here I though that Cap'n Hercules was being paranoid about all that stuff when Tass is seemingly saying it was apparently going on all over).
As far as lessons-learned goes, one thing that seemed to work against us as the Pirates was the ever looming turn time limit, which put the turn player and diplomats under a lot of time pressure, expecially when we had lots of diplomatic contacts and most everybody else had contact only with us. During this period, IIRC, there was lots of chatter in the forum about taking too much time; ironically it was mostly the PUT who was getting charged with that in the threads, but we were the ones who were trying to conduct diplomacy with largely unresponsive counterparts in the other factions and were feeling the heat. That the Borgs exploited this (by intractable stalling and ultimately expropriatiing the preaccepted tech that was our attempt to work around the time problem) in their betrayal does not make the problem more endearing to me; the fact that we included messages (to the effect that we were preaccepting the tech only as a workaround to keep the game moving) in both email and by reference in the trade window dialog box seemed to be insufficient protection not only in the game but also (and most surprisingly to me) in the ensuing debates and rulings.
As for the rulings - well we weren't too happy a couple of times - but I suppose that is just the way it goes. The gods definitely had their work cut out for them if they were going to keep everyone happy, and while I don't know what other rulings there were that left behind other unhappy people on other factions, I'd be surprised if there weren't any. Aside from the obvious effects upon us in the game, I think that the thing that bothered me the most about the ruling/decisionmaking process was that the issue had already been decided by the god(s) before we even knew there was an issue - and there was no real opportunity to contest the ruling. It seems that the Borg had already cleared the preaccepted tech caper before doing it - which is all very well, and there is certainly nothing underhanded about that, but - talk about the feeling that what you have to say doesn't matter in the least - it would be nice to have some input into a decision that sinks your faction, or possibly some appeals process. Despite all this, I would definitely join the parade of people who are not embittered, although the word 'angry' could very well have come into play at times .
Well, I'm not sure what could be done about either of these problems, although the time problem might be more tractable. I do think, however, that the general format, with maybe a few changes here and there, is still pretty good and worth a repeat without really massive changes in concept.
As to the single faction versus PBEM styles, I think that there are some people who go one way and others who go the other way (plus some "bi"'s too , I suppose) and there's no reason to argue people of one persuasion into the other - if there are enough people to play one kind or the other, the people who can't abide the style chosen can wait a while until their other style comes up again.
Edit: Googs, how can you say we were being extortionate? You must have known how stubborn they were being for their own part - we were mostly just bargaining, and trying to protect our nautical monopoly (you can see what happened to us when we lost it, so obviously it was valuable!), and the Borg took offense at that, to the extent that they started researching the techs themselves, forcing us to trade the techs to them or penalize both our factions by wasting research cycles double researching. Most likely the cycle of rancor began with that, although I have heard other stories.
Last edited by johndmuller on 27-03-2004 at 08:22
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34. Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|