 |
| |
|
|
Basil
|
 |
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Apr 2000
time: 21:13
|
|
I suggested an rp-oriented SMAC(X) game on one of the threads in the strategy forum, and several people expressed interest. I am continuing it here, as it had digressed far from the original theme of the thread. At this point, I am considering organizing two games, one with the original SMAC factions (but not necesarily using SMAC code), and the other using SMACX factions. A possibility is running a "Secrets of the Progenitors" game - more details on this far below.
House rules:
I have a couple of ideas relating to faction agendas which would, I think, complement a role-playing SMAC game. They both relate to faction agendas, and the "problem" that faction agendas don't normally matter to human-played factions.
Idea 1: A faction may not use any advanced SE setting that conflicts with its agenda. For example, the Morganites may not use the Green setting, because it conflicts with Market. They could use Simple economics, because that is not an advanced SE setting.
To me, this rule goes a long way towards making the factions play with "their own personalities".
SMAC factions that are particularly hurt by this rule are the Believers and to a lesser extent the Gaians (both of whom lose the ability to easily pop boom). SMACX factions that are hurt by it include the Cult and both Progenitor factions.
Idea 2:
A faction may not win a cooperative victory with another faction with an incompatable agenda. So, for example, suppose Zak, Morgan, and Deirdre are in a Pact (yeah right!  and the Gaians build the Ascent to Transcendance. The Gaians and the University would be considered to have won, but not the Morgans. If the University had achieved Transcendance then only the University would be considered to have won; the other factions would be disqualified by the presence in the pact of a faction with a conflicting agenda. So in this situation both the Gaians and the Morgans would be lobbying the University to drop its pact with the other.
The idea here is to attempt to recreate the natural alliances from single-player in multi-player.
Game options: blind research, random events on, all victory conditions allowed, spoils of war off, Unity survey off. I am leaning towards Look First off; I am not sure about Do or Die. Thinker or Transcend difficulty.
Planet settings: it will be an average Planet except in size ( >= large, <= huge), and native life: I am thinking of abundant native life.
Faction tweaks: The native life roughly balances Idea 1's negative impact on the Gaians and the Cult (I estimate, perhaps incorrectly). Also, I find those factions more constrained by role-playing considerations than most others: RP'ing Morgan means attempting to make as much energy as quickly as possible - not a harsh constraint - whereas I can't really see the Gaians or the Cult building condensors. However, the Believers definitely need a boost - I am thinking of a +1 growth modifier. H'minee needs to be cut back, as well (although being an AI would be a sufficient disadvantage).
SMAC-faction game settings: I find the setting of the SMAC story "world" much more self-consistent than that of SMACX, but when I play SMAC I find myself missing some of the options of SMACX (such as covert ops centers and flechette systems and correct calculations of facility costs). So, here are some possibilities for the SMAC-faction game:
1) use the standard SMAC code.
2) use SMACX code with the SMAC tech tree (should be easy to do if the game is played in a scenario folder).
3) use my "Secrets of the Progenitors" tech tree. In this, the tech tree looks like SMAC from the human factions' point of view until late in the game (or until they meet the aliens). (This only requires about 4 changes to the SMACX tech tree.)
4) use the standard SMACX code, but with the SMAC factions.
These are the people who have expressed interest so far:
SMAC game:
Basil Deirdre
Vel Morgan
Waynehead Yang, Morgan, Deirdre
Kinjiru Any
SMACX game
Vel Morgan, Sven, Domai, Roze
Waynehead: Domai, Yang, Morgan, Deirdre
Kinjiru: Not Domai
Skiguy500: Domai
Remember that the theme of these games is their role-playing emphasis, not winning, let alone winning in the shortest time with the most efficiency (except for Morgan attempting an economic victory of course).
Players should be able to check their email/play at least once per day, as otherwise it will go very slowly.
So, if you're interested, post, saying which game(s)/faction(s) you're interested in playing, how big a game you'd like to play in, and preferences/suggestions/comments for the proposed rules and world settings (do they make sense or am I crazy?)
Lots of editing trying to get arrange peoples' preferences in a table 
[This message has been edited by Basil (edited June 08, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Basil (edited June 08, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Basil (edited June 08, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
joer
|
 |
Frankfurt, Germany
Apr 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
Yup, I am interested as well.
Two more suggestions:
- blind research: every faction should not change the default settings of their tech preference (building, exploring, conquest & research), so their research stays true to their ideology.
- factions should not build or use something that goes totally against their ideology: no p-spheres, nervestaples and genejacks for Lal&Domai, no gas for Lal, Domai, Gaians, Cult, no boreholes for Dee, no Ascetic virtues for Morgan, no Theory of everything for Miriam, etc...
However, I think that strengthens the momentum factions slightly, but I still think it's important.
I'd play every game with whatever you determine, SMAX or SMAC, with whatever rules, in as many games as you can get... 
Personal Preferences: large map, spoils off, unity survey on, all average world parameters, no random events, pod lotto off, Do or Die, no abudent life (Cult with abudent life & blind research seems really insane...they can overrun anybody from the start).
Factions, in order of preference: Angels, CyC, UoP, Gaians, PK
Oh, and I'll be gone until Tuesday, but afterwards fully availible again.
-joer.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
waynehead
|
|
Durham, NC
Nov 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
I'm in, but one small problem - I can't play MP PBEM SMAC. I don't know why, and sadly, no one else does, either. But if we were to use SMAX code in all of these games, I'd be fine.
------------------
My sorry excuse for a website
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DilithiumDad
|
|
Over at ACOL we are already on Round 2 of roleplaying SMAC. The first game ended with the University-Gaian alliance completing the Ascent. The second is more military, with the Hive (yours truly) fighting the AI Santiago and the Peacekeeper player. Here is the thread:
http://www.an.i-dentity.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000234.html
------------------
Creator of the Ultimate Builder Map, based on the Huge Map of Planet
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DilithiumDad
|
|
Here are some tips for someone with experience:
1. Rigid rules for SE don't cut it. Everyone knows that Wealth is true agenda for Morgan, for example. The rule is that if you can justify IN DETAIL and make a story out of it, then it flies. If the other players and the lurkers who are following the thread don't buy it, you'd better switch your SE. Example: I roleplayed Lal and made a case for Thought Control with Demo/FM/Wealth: throught control through subliminal advertising and promoting a consumer culture.
2. You need players that make detailed commentary in their turn-taking threads. There needs to be real dialogue. Role-playing SMAC should be like a group novel-writing exercise with real global cooperation, competition and conflict.
3. Keeping some AI players helps keep the flavor of it going. Best is 4 human and 3 AI.
4. A role-playing game is much more fun as it keeps players involved in the game beyond the mechanics of base maintenance and unit movement. There are great opportunites for diplomacy and propaganda and for story-telling. At ACOL there have been a number of people who read the turn-tracking threads for our role-playing games and occasionally added their own comments. How many non-players read YOUR turn-traking thread?
------------------
Creator of the Ultimate Builder Map, based on the Huge Map of Planet
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Basil
|
|
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Apr 2000
time: 21:13
|
|
Heyas,
Something of an embarrassment of riches here, player-wise .
Game 1: Big and slow. Rules: SMACX with customized alphax.txt. 7 Players (is this insane? If it works it should be interesting.) Morgan: Vel, University: Ogie, PK: JoeR, Gaians: me, Spartans: Kinjiru, Hive: Waynehead, Believers: Googlie.
Since it is inevitable that someone will drop out, everyone should send their password to someone else so that the game won't end when someone disappears. (In the absence of an impartial volunteer, "someone else" means me, I suppose.)
Game 2: SMAC, standard alpha.txt. PK: Rob, University: JoeR +?
Game 3: SMACX. Domai: SkiGuy500, DataAngels: JoeR +?
Tell me if you want to be in multiple games, or if you'd rather be in a different game (or if you think 7 players won't work and want to be in, say a four-player game).
Thanks for the advice, DD. I've read your game-threads before .
I should have been more explicit about why I chose those particular rigid rules for SE choices: those are the rules that the AI is coded to follow. The AI is at liberty to choose Dem-x-x-TC as Lal, and it can and does switch between different values as Morgan, but it is not allowed to choose Green as Morgan even if it evaluates that as being the best option. So since
[*]these rules have a clear basis in the game
[*]they are easy to define clearly
[*]they help emphasize the particular characteristics of the factions[/list]
I decided it made sense to "hard-code" them.
Og: I'd put team games into a different thread.
I do think that this (feedback in the game thread) seems a good way to moderate most issues of whether a faction is behaving in an anti-RP fashion (such as Lal breaking UN conventions or Deirdre building condensers).
I'm not sure about the blind research: I was under the impression that a faction's research was weighted towards their natural interests as well as towards the options the player chose. Eg when I'm playing Deirdre, I am really successful in researching Exploration (the faction's emphasis) if that's what I want to focus on (player choice & faction choice agreeing), but if I try to focus on anything else it takes a while before I get the research I'm looking for. Does anyone know if this is true, or am I imagining things?
[This message has been edited by Basil (edited June 10, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Symil
|
|
Bridgewater, Virginia, USA
Mar 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
I would enjoy playing this game. Maybe as Morgan for the second SMAC?
Symil
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kinjiru
|
|
Nashville, TN
Jan 1970
time: 23:13
|
|
Hey Gang-
This sounds really great and I am SO up for it. Been a while since Corazon and I have been together. Guess I need to play a few quick games and get reacquainted with mi chica loca.
Two suggestions...
1) Make the altered alphax.txt file available a bit before the games gets underway, so everyone can get used to the changes.
2) During the game, please think about what kind of facilities your faction would really be building and if there is any doubt, ask the rest of the players. Just as in the SE choices, if you can make a case that Lal would really build a punishment sphere, and make the others believe you, then go ahead and build it, but otherwise, probably should not build it.
Acutally a third suggestion. Everyone in the game should post here approximately what time they are likely to be checking their mail, playing and sending the turn along. That way, we can order the players in a fashion to maximize the turns/per day.
As for myself, I am in central time US. I will most likely be able to check my email around 8:00 PM and get the turn sent along by 9:00 PM. This is M-F of couse, on the weekends, I will be checking quite often.
[This message has been edited by Kinjiru (edited June 13, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Symil
|
|
Bridgewater, Virginia, USA
Mar 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
I will probably be checking my mail fairly often. I have summer school but aside from that I'm not terribly busy.
[This message has been edited by Symil (edited June 17, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
joer
|
|
Frankfurt, Germany
Apr 2000
time: 05:13
|
|
Sorry to dissapoint you folks, but since I am living in Europe, it's unlikely that my online times will match up with yours.
I'll give them to you anyways. My best times are, given in EST: 3 AM - 5:30 AM and 2 PM - 6 PM.
Another restriction of mine: Most likely, I will be leaving school near the end of this year, so I cannot be part in games that drag on for too long.
Blind research: I cannot confirm that your faction has any impact on what you research. So far, my first tech was always Centauri Ecology when I set my preference to Explore. However, it sometimes does take some time for the game to take focus switches into account.
I am still for leaving the default focus unchanged. Makes things more interesting.
I've emailed this to a couple of folks already, but I thought I might as well post it:
1) If there is any good way of not switching out the alpha.txt, I would prefer not to do it. There is really no reason to hardcode limitations of factions into the game file if we can all say that we just agree on them. Our word should be enough, and isn't worth the pita to constantly swap alpha.txt-files around.
2) I am generally for starting with com frequences of all players, since it speeds up the game -- and multiplayer games are terribly slow anyways -- and makes the beginning more interesting. In addition to having to move your 1 scout unit by one square per turn, you also have to deal with all the diplomacy, pacts, treaties, tech trade&denial, backstabbing, etc...from the start. That's what I am looking for in MP. Why not make it availible from turn 1?
-joer.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Basil
|
|
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Apr 2000
time: 21:13
|
|
Hmm. I thought that you could simply put the .sav file in a scenario folder with the appropriate alpha(x).txt and the game would react accordingly (as in Civ), but after testing over the last couple of days I have discovered I was wrong .
For game 2 (the 4-player SMAC game) there is no need for a distinct alpha.txt file, as noone strongly wants anything that a distinct alpha.txt file can give. So that game can be played as a technically normal game.
Game 1 (the 7-player SMACX game) would be very different without its own alphax.txt, so I will experiment and find out what Tau Ceti means by scenarios screwing up the faction graphics. With luck, one of the game 2 players will set up the scenario for us if we ask nicely.
I am opposed to early communications between factions. I don't like it in general because I know from experience that being able to communicate with player-run factions but not AI-run factions is very unRP'ish in a two-player game. In this particular game that doesn't matter, and I don't know how it would work out, but I fear something worse than I can imagine. Of course, given my faction early universal communication is nearly completely bad for me.
For those who do not know, there is another thread about these games on the Strategy board.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tau Ceti
|
 |
Kyoto, Japan
Nov 1999
time: 14:13
|
|
Kinjiru is close, but not quite on the problem. When you load a SMACX game that was started as a scenario, the game will use the graphics of the factions that are currently in the faction slots in the Alpha Centauri.ini file. They change every time you start a new SMACX game, but not if you load old ones. So if you do not start any new games in between your PBEM turns, you should be fine with just setting the factions once.
Otherwise, to get the proper faction graphics you either have to start a new game with the correct factions in the correct order immediately before you play your turn, or have an Alpha Centauri.ini file with the correct factions and swap that one around instead. Of course, that means you get file swapping again, which is what you were trying to avoid in the first place. Still, the game is playable with the wrong graphics, and forgetting it would be less of a problem than forgetting to swap a modified alphax.txt.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:13.
Apolyton Time is 00:13. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-06-2000 08:35
|
|