08-06-2004 23:12									#1
	Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water.... Got spare money?

Hmmm....now this feels familiar somehow....writing a new thread in the strategy section for SMAC/X...

This is an old game.

Positively ancient by the time-standards computer games are measured by....practically a....dinosaur (gentle poke at Master Sid).

Because of that, we have seen a gravitation toward the mathematical pinnacle/extreme of the game, and by that I mean, Uber ICS, precise mathimatical gridded layouts of landmasses in order to provide the maximum possible gain in terms of land use, etc.

And that's a good thing.

We've done that.

We know what is maxially possible in terms of milking the utmost out of every scrap and shard of land and sea in-game, and that's an awesome thing to know.

(can you almost FEEL the "but" coming??)

But....

then there's the Metagame.

I have often said that the heart and soul of the metagame revolves around noting prevailing trends and then striking off in a radically new direction.

Crawlers....mass produced to create silly kinds of per turn energy, giant crawler parks, bases spaced one tile apart, continents pocked with scores and perhaps hundreds of boreholes, mathematics tell us that all of these things are good and right and proper, and that they lead to optimal in-game outputs, and my intellectual brain understands and accepts that. I have DONE that, and participated ardently in hammering out the strategies now in wide spread use (after all, bases 3-apart is a limited-form ICS, and I too, have totally abused crawlers, worked out hyper-fast beelines, etc).

My intuitive brain, however, rebels against the notion that such vast, meticulous micromanagement is necessary, or even (necessarily) desirable, and so...a new direction for me.

A....minimalist approach to playing.

As a place of beginning, I think my next game will be one of base-spacing with no overlap. Absolute heretical thinking, I realize, but truly, it's just simply not necessary for that Nth degree style of playing to one-up the AI (this can be clearly illustrated by a review of the games of those who have taken and beaten the One City Challenge).

At the cornerstone of this new approach will be the following paradigms:

* Each base shall be an island unto itself - any crawlers used will be used exclusively INSIDE the base radius, to work "unused" tiles until the population grows sufficiently, and then, some will be retired until I strike the desired balance between workers and specialists.

* My former reliance on token garrisons backed by rover-based prototypes will need rethinking and enhancing, as rovers will be more critical than ever in terms of defense with the wider spacing.

* No more directed research games for me. All done with that. Been there, done it, got the tee-shirt, and am so familiar with my beelines of choice that it has become a mechanical exercise. Further, the beelines have become so tight that there's a diminishing marginal utility in terms of making them faster yet. I cal already get to game-breaking crawlers in the early 20's....how much faster do I NEED them? Is finding a way of shaving 1-2 turns off of that really necessary? Blind or Double Blind, often with TechStag enabled to slow me down and to present greater challenges.

And probably several others that have not yet revealed themselves to me.

Now, I fully realize that NONE of this will ever become game-standard in MP....MP is all about maximization and optimization, and as such, this idea in an MP arena would be the purest form of folly, but that's not what it's about. Mostly, it's about picking a new direction and creating a new paradigm, because we long ago reached that point of diminishing returns in discussing the optimal, mathematically driven approach, and in the closed system that SMAC/X represents (granted, a very large, robust closed system, but closed nonetheless), there's just not much in the way of new frontiers left.

And when that happens, it's time to break out the pioneer gear, and head into uncharted (for me) territory.



-=Vel=-

	08-06-2004 23:20									#2
	Inflate your Upload Space

Welcome back in the ranks of normal players, Vel...

Wanna start a PBEM under most of those conditions?

	08-06-2004 23:26									#3
	Increase Your PM Length

Thank ya, Geo!

As to MP...I am uncertain that such a system would even be *possible* in MP, without an exhaustive book of rules (and even then, it'd be open to all sorts of exploitation). The game is as it is, and as it is, all of the abovementioned stuff is possible.

Very quickly, we'd get into a situation where there'd be hair-splitting over exactly how the new "style" would be implemented in a PBEM game, and it'd be a recordkeeping NIGHTMARE which would detract from the fun.

Another reason I think I'm so interested in trying something new (again, new for me, I realize that there are a significant number of players who have been doing this for quite some time, which makes me, strangely, the "newbie" ), is pure beauty.

I'm an artist, and frankly, bases three apart (or closer) just ain't all that attractive on the ol' map! So...that's at least part of what's driving the desire. To be able to make use of the minimalist approach, to still be able to royally tromp the AI, AND to do it while making something that is a thing of beauty, rather than something that looks a lot like a high-tech parking lot....yeah, that's good stuff...

-=Vel=-

	08-06-2004 23:37									#4
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Unless most of the participants of such a MP game are newbies or only just learning all these 'micromanagement' tactics. My first PBEM for instance has only one 'micromanagement' veteran, the rest is newbie or mostly unaware of the strategy guide...

It's simply no fun for me using all those exploits against the AI, doing all that precise management of bases. Just go (a bit) with the flow appeals best to me.

	08-06-2004 23:46									#5
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Well, I certainly agree with that! Against the AI, it's easy enough to defeat them without using even the first exploitive tactic (my general approach is to ignore them entirely unless they have tech I need, at which point, I will try to purchase it, and failing that, simply steal it out from under them), and to kill anything that lands on my turf, but until I get clean reactors (non-aldeberan game) and a p-sphere, I'm content to just stay home and build.

Clean reactors though, is for me, when the game becomes about projection of power, cos I instantly regain that portion of my industry that had been previously lost to unit upkeep (everything gets wholesale converted to clean, excepting crawlers and probes in service of course), which sees my bases operating at 100% of mineral output efficiency. That, plus raking in a few thousand EC's every turn generally puts me in the position of being able to do any damned thing I wanna, even WITH a minimalist approach (and at that point, I turn my attention to building up vast fleets and divisions, and posting them strategically around the globe, either to assist my allies in fending off invasions, participating IN invasions, or generally being the "big stick" in a region that needs it).

-=Vel=-

	08-06-2004 23:51									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

A new measurement tool to compare myself to the AI.

Forget the power chart....relatively unimportant....THE thing I am concerned about is tech lead.

To that end, it is important to infiltrate all factions, and/or build the Empath Guild to keep myself apprised of their comings and goings. Likewise, acquisition of world maps is of paramount importance.

For this reason, despite the early easy gold potential in selling comm fq's and 1st tier techs, I never do, and will only relent in giving up techs to extortion if I'm in a position where defense is impossible (ie - in a blind game, if I don't have even synth, and santiago comes knocking with impact rovers, yes, I will give up a tech to buy time).

I will, however, gladly trade tech one for one (even if it's a project or key tech), and will always willingly buy tech at any price to boost my raw tech lead.

There is vast power to be had in keeping the other factions in the dark about each other, and for this reason, I never am the first to call council in any game (even tho I am usually the first player to know where all the factions are). I enjoy being able to deal with them on an individual basis, and this is a key way to build an even larger than the norm tech lead.

All of these elements will be pivotal (and probably take on renewed importance) in the game style outlined above, but we'll see....I've not yet played such a game...

-=Vel=-

	09-06-2004 01:26									#7
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Freaky - this is exactly what I've been doing in my last games. I played a blind tech stag Gaians on Friday, another on Saturday with unplanned base placement, and Sunday was an OCC with the PKs. My current game is only three bases, with no overlap - quite to opposite, there are unused spaces between the bases...

It makes a change against the AI.

It would be death in a PBEM, but this is FUN

-Jam

	09-06-2004 01:35									#8
	Inflate your Upload Space

I miss the Civ2 style Demographics screens, where you could compare your relative strengths against other factions in numerous categories. Mineral output, population, growth, you name it.

Ironically, I always felt that the powergraph was always misleading because I felt that technology disparity was an illusory advantage. With effective use of probe teams, it's not hard at all to achieve technological parity.

I do like your idea about a no-overlap, blind tech challenge.

	09-06-2004 01:48									#9
	Remove this text

What, no love for turning Chiron into Geidi Prime?

If The Baron found out he'd uncork you like a cheap bottle of worm bile ...

	09-06-2004 01:55									#10
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I agree that in MP, the tech lead is largely illusory, but against the AI, it's a useful benchmark to see how far ahead you are, cos let's face it, the only time the AI can sneak up and techsteal from a human is if you are just plain lazy!

On the other hand, you're right....all too easy for even a human playing a research-starved faction (drones, believers, cult) to catch up with a good ol' fashioned tech rape.

I think though, that on balance, the tech portion of the power chart is fairly good, as the tech lead represents potential energy (the potential to build base facilities and units unavailable to the rest), although it would have been nice if there had been some consideration to actually *building* the above--because until you do, the tech advances in and of themselves do NOTHING for you.

It's my intention to shift gears, and begin exploring the virtues of this new direction in my current game (the one I'm writing the story for over in the fiction section)...should be entertaining....I'll have a developed core of three-apart bases, and a larger continent with the more relaxed spacing I spoke of...we'll see what happens there...

-=Vel=-

	09-06-2004 05:44									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Ofcourse I already play without some of the worse excesses, like crawles or dense ICS. Still, the no-overlapping is something I've been meaning to try.

Play as Hive, huge map of planet, standard SMAC, blind research. The first colony pod out set up shop at the edge of the base radius of the Hive. Reload autosave1.

Not being able to found bases everywhere was frustrating for Hive... on so many levels. Less benefit from the support, less income (the 1 research from base tile being most of the research Hive gets early on...).
Still by 2195 I had enslaved Lal, got the CN and VW, and was second on the powerchart to a Jungle Zak. Just for fun I had set randomized faction ideolgy/personalty. Got a soulmate in the form of an agressive police-state loving Dee, she's running PS/Planned atm, I'm so proud.

One challenge I forsee is the minerals, bases will be positively churning them out - at 50 something BEFORE genejacks, getting enough cleanmins will be doubly probelmatic due to a low base count - less treefarms. Prehaps I'll get some wormraperape for planetpearls later.

Also I'm going to use the no supply crawlers inside base radius rule, allowing them outside base radius. And a limit of 1 crawler for size 1 bases, to 3 for size 14 bases.

	09-06-2004 05:59									#12
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Sounds like one heckuva good game, Master Blake!

A question for those who have mucked around in the editor far, far more than I...

Is it possible to make supply crawlers cost support? Further, is it possible to deny selected units access to "clean reactors"? If so, both of these changes made to crawlers would go a long ways toward mitigating their use....just random thoughts here.

-=Vel=-

	09-06-2004 08:49									#13
	Inflate your Upload Space

AFAIK free support cannot be removed from crawlers... clean reactor should be able to be changed.

With Alaha.txt the following changes to weaken crawlers are the only ones possible:
Make them cost more.
Make the module cost like 64 or something, then manually create the crawler units like transport foils - setting the cost. This mostly eliminates the upgrade-exploit. Ofcourse you'd also want to add a sea crawler at doc.init and a rover crawler at fusion.
Push crawlers back in the tech tree. To like pre-sentient algorithms, or selfaware machines, or something.
Moving early SP's deeper into the techtree, like HGP to Genesplicing, WP to eco.eng - now a tech to ind.auto would make it far harder to get those SP's. The biggest overpoweredness of crawlers is actually the ability to snatch SPs.

edit: In my Yang game I abstained from the 2239 election, because my vassels Lal and Miriam and parnter in crime Dee had enough votes for me. I could also have won the election without them. Yang, unstoppable as always.

Last edited by Blake on 09-06-2004 at 09:52

	09-06-2004 10:11									#14
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Here's a rule that could be easily enforced:

No base may be constructed which overlaps more than 3 tiles of another base's radius.

That allows 4-tile horizontal or 3-tile diagonal spacing.

	09-06-2004 14:53									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Heh this is pretty cool, I'm playing as Morgan, and decided to restrict myself to 5, zero overlap bases. So I built the 5 bases as a cross, HQ in the middle.

Turned out I was in the middle of a large convulted continent, to the north was an agressive democracy loving conquring Dee. To the south was an agressive police state loving conquering Lal. In the middle that chewy center Morgan. I managed to throw together a defense with a little help from probes, and held on for decades as both these crazy warmongers besieged my defenses. Eventually I start running PS, and Lal warms up to me and offers a pact in exchange for... get this... attacking Yang, an agressive fundamentalist loving guy with broad interests.

This game I'm not going to take bases, to keep things interesting. Theres some decentely large holes between my 5 bases, for stuffing full of crawlers, and I intend to harvest planetpearls, might see if I can get enough for economic victory.

	10-06-2004 12:39									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

2298 the Morgan Corporation initiates a cunning plan to corner the global energy market, spending 13000 energy credits. The other two factions with the technolgy that can stop this victory are Offical Morganite Partners in Crime (tm).

This is the ideal type of victory for this type of game playing. Unusual.

	10-06-2004 14:36									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Victory in 2318, with lowest population In the meantime I had made enough cash to conquer the market again. Had 2-3 of my bases on 50+ ED each turn, generating about 1000 extra cash per turn. And I only got the empath ability in 2310 or so, thanks to whacky blind research and the randomized AI priorities. Until then I softened the worms up with artillery, and mopped up with elite hovertanks...

	10-06-2004 17:11									#18
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I never understood the Military Strength graph. I've had military victories in which the only times I did no occupy the last place on the graph was short periods immediately before the demise of some other faction.

	10-06-2004 18:37									#19
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Velociryx As to MP...I am uncertain that such a system would even be *possible* in MP,

Obscure rules are not an issue so long as you have willing participants.
Don't look at me, I'm micro-mad. But use some of the hype surrounding your name to generate a cult following.

I mean, I started an Open-Information PBEM. (ytyke)
I also started a communications-turn-1 game (test-0)
Hell, I even managed to get a multiplayer OCC started at one point!

It's all doable.

quote: without an exhaustive book of rules

Maximum number of Mouseclicks/Keystrokes per unit or base.
That's your rule.

quote: Very quickly, we'd get into a situation where there'd be hair-splitting over exactly how the new "style" would be implemented in a PBEM game, and it'd be a recordkeeping NIGHTMARE which would detract from the fun.

Chart your mouseclicks/keystrokes per year as you play your minimalist approach, and honour people to play with so few keystrokes.

I figure people in Apolyton are too distrusting and second-guessing of each-other.
Honour runs through our ranks, and we're not a bunch of idiots. You can set complex rules by honour and they tend to be fulfilled.

quote: AND to do it while making something that is a thing of beauty, rather than something that looks a lot like a high-tech parking lot...

	11-06-2004 06:57									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

It's been AGES since I've built one of these

Attachment: empireinascreen.jpg
This has been downloaded 76 time(s).

	11-06-2004 13:33									#21
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Gaians and eco-damage...