 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:15
|
|
2179 to the gaians
|
|
|  |
 |
|
vitamin j
|
|
and on to the PKs
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:15
|
|
2180 to vitaminj
|
|
|  |
 |
|
smhfan86
|
|
J just infiltrated me without declaring vendetta first and without my consent which is a clear violation of the rules.
"If a probe team action is employed against a Treatied or Pacted faction, the initiator must choose the "Declare Vendetta" option, unless permission is received in advance for the action (email)."
Therefore, there should be definite compensation.
I'll ask Tau Ceti what he thinks it should be.
Turn has been sent to drones.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:15
|
|
To clarify my understanding, the requirement to declare vendetta was put into the MP rules because of a game bug. If A probes B and the probe is "caught", the notification goes to A and asks if he wants to declare vendetta or let it go. Obviously this notification should go to B. Therefore the rule is that you ALWAYS select the "declare vendetta" option when it appears unless you have prior permission.
Note if your probe does not get "caught" then the vendetta is not declared as the option never appears.
The other possibility, like this case, is where a human player spots a probe or probeship and knows they have been infiltrated when the probeship or probe disappears.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:15
|
|
2183 to the powerful vitaminj
|
|
|  |
 |
|
smhfan86
|
|
so what's the bug then? is the bug when player b doesn't get informed of the infiltration?
cuz that rule should be clarified as to what constitutes a need for permission or declaration of vendetta and when.
i was playing the whole time assuming if someone infiltrated me, i would be informed by the computer automatically.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
smhfan86
|
|
Okay, i understand the game bug now. the declaration and notification goes to player A, when it should go to player B.
Confusing.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
smhfan86
|
|
wait a sec. why does it say you have to get permission from a treatied or pacted faction? wouldn't that imply the vendetta should be before the probe and not after?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tau Ceti
|
 |
Kyoto, Japan
Nov 1999 time: 14:15
|
|
Uh... why? 
You need to get permission if you want to perform the action without causing vendetta. Teammates may sometimes want this, notably during sunspots, when the normal means of sharing techs are unavailable. If you want surprise, and/or you do not mind causing a vendetta, don't ask.
Anyway, the wording has been changed to If an aggressive probe action (anything except infiltration) is used on a faction you have a treaty or pact with, you must select 'Declare Vendetta' in the dialog box that appears afterwards, and notify the victim of your transgression, unless you have received permission in advance. No notification is required in other cases. which I hope is clear enough.
I took the opportunity to make some other changes too. They are highlighted in italics, so check them out here.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
smhfan86
|
|
2183 to drones.
okay, what the heck is the crawler upgrade, and if everyone else has been exploiting it, how can i?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
vitamin j
|
|
It's a way to buy minerals for a lot cheaper than you'd have to pay if you used the ''hurry" option for building. Just design an armored crawler with the most expensive abilities you can tack on. They can often be worth 100 or 200+ minerals, but they're relatively cheap to make if you use a plain crawler and upgrade with cash. I think it's a totally ridiculous thing to allow, but if everyone doesn't agree to not use it, I'm going to.
There's a good thread in G/H/S on the various bugs/features most relevant to MP. It's authored by Helium Pond and was bumped up not to long ago. I think it's called "consensus on cheating". I recommend checking it out.
I also want to tell everyone that I'm moving (back) to Colorado on Thursday. It will probably be the beginning of next week before I'm able to play turns again. Sorry for the inconvenience.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tau Ceti
|
 |
Kyoto, Japan
Nov 1999 time: 14:15
|
|
Yes, using upgraded crawlers to advance SPs (and prototypes, if you wish) is allowed and encouraged. Like Flubber, I do not know of any MP games that ban this; some people have criticized the practice when it has been brought up in the general forums, but they tend to be SPers only for some reason.
Personally, I see no good reasons to ban it. Crawlers follow the exact same upgrade cost formula as all other units, so there is nothing anomalous there. Besides, you get into a lot of trouble if you attempt to regulate something like this. There are perfectly legitimate other reasons why you might want to upgrade crawlers, for example to armoured/trance to defend against worm attacks or to drop for the additional mobility. Should you then not be allowed to use such an upgraded crawler for a project at a later date? And if not, and you had also built other crawlers of the same design, you would have to manually keep track of which ones had been upgraded?
I say nay. Let efficient crawler design be a part of your strategy. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
smhfan86
|
|
Could I get a link to this GHS thread?
Personally, I'm a newbie at multiplayer so I don't know all the tricks of the trade.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
vitamin j
|
|
Tau: There is an anomalous thing with the crawler upgrade since you can't cash other units in for projects and prototypes at full value. Anyway, it doesn't really matter I guess, as long as everyone knows. What this basically means is that it's a complete waste of time to have a base working on a project ever, if you have the ability to build crawlers. Save your crawlers and build your projects all at once.
Being a relative newbie to MP myself, I thought Flubber brought up an interesting point: "Killing a defensive probe is also considered to be hostile." But this will have no immediate effect on diplomatic status, right? And you will recieve a message informing you of the attack on your turn? I've been wondering about this.
And thanks for the good wishes, Flubber. It'll be good to get back out that way again. And it's weird, but I really miss being on mountain time!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:15
|
|
Hi gang
we have been discussing things but who has the turn ?? Is it me?
There is often a difference between what the game considers hostile and what a human would. For example, if you started placing ships on my terraformed sea tiles to deny me access to the resources . . . the games would do nothing . . . well it does allow a "demand withdrawal" but using that is forbidden in MP rules since it would allow the AI to make the choice on behalf of your human opponent. My response would be to kill the ships after a warning . Things like blockading a base would be similar.
On the killing a probe . . . IIRC probe battles are considered covert while killing a probe with a unit causes a vendetta. I do not recall whether you get a message when a probe is killed by another probe but usually people notice when their probes disappear. Besides, the winning probe is left standing there and if you spot one outside your base, it doesn't take much to figure things out.
So where is the turn?
I am really enjoying this game and want to get back to it.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|