 |
| |
|
|
Hendrik
|
|
I have seen very little debate on the fastest transcendance on a huge map, and the earliest transcendance in the apolyton Hall of Fame on a huge map is some time in year 300  The fastest transcendance under any conditions would have to be games played using the Gaians on tiny maps, where the player conquers all the other factions using an early worm rush and then uses tech extortion and commerce income to achieve a very early transcendance, year 84 is the earliest in the HOF but I have seen saves as early as year 71.
Huge maps are an entirely different story. Deprived of the easy cash and research of 6 submissive AIs, you would be lucky to conquer 1 or 2 AIs quickly enough to have the extra income and research make a difference.
The question about fastest playing style arose when Sikander and I argued about the speed of his UofP game vs my Morganite game. The thread starts with him posting his UofP playstyle, and I play a game as Morgan to show what he can do. I transcended by year 136, this is the fastest transcendance I am aware of on a huge map. The save files can be found here: and I have a synposis of what I did typed up if anyone is curious.
Sikander's builder game
However I am doubtful that this is the fastest possible method. Many players here are excellent at refining strategies, this game was played with only a loose strategy. I just hit turn complete for the last 15 years or so because I got so bored of micromanaging all of my bases.
I mainly intend this thread for builder style strategies, I didn't conquer a single base the entire game and stole/traded less than 10 techs total. What is the fastest builder faction there is, and what is the fastest playstyle? If anyone has transcendance saves from before year 136 on transcend difficulty then please post them, otherwise consider this a challenge! Feel free to create the most optimal "random" map you can if you wish to avoid war.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
 |
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:25
|
|
I didn't look in the HoF in ages, which were the restraints?
I mean, your specifications are
Huge
Random Map, customised at will
Transcend
any other setting goes?
And about the rules?
I figure the basic, mandatory ones will be in place, like not exploiting the SE flip-flop for rushes or AI diplomacy, not exploiting the Infinite Drop bug, not exploiting the F4 screen bug.
But many other pbem rules are just agreed options.
That is, no Stockpiling is a IN HOUSE Apolyton rule for pbem tournaments, but is really an option you can choose and agree upon.
The usage of DW upgrades is really an option you can choose and agree upon.
No base joining beyond Hab Limits is a IN HOUSE PURITAN Apolyton pbem tournament rule against the game mechanics, but it should be really allowed, and anyway is an option you can choose and agree upon.
You see, for single player result comparison, it's necessary that a common frame is explicitly determined.
Anyway, I've never been much into SP challenges, and long-term strategy is notoriously my Achilles heel, so no help from me on this subject.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Googlie
|
 |
Commanding Officer, CRYPTEIA
Apr 1999
time: 21:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hendrik
Feel free to create the most optimal "random" map you can if you wish to avoid war. |
This proviso would make a mockery of the challenge (as a frequent PBEM CMN I could create the ultimate builder map - nothing but goodies, monoliths, no fungus, lots of monsoon terrain, sprinkle boreholes everywhere, eliminate all the spore launchers, etc etc
The only true challenges for fastest transcend, if seeking to establish relative skill level of the players would be a controlled challenge, with, as MariOne says, common rules, as well as a common map, faction, AI opponents, etc.
But even Ironman can be circumvented with a (tedious) every turn save
For those reasons no-one put much stock in these HoF entries within a month of SMAC hitting the shelves.
G.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
|
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:25
|
|
Actually, in the "Fastest Transcend" I think the skill was more in devising which were the most peculiar settings allowing the fastest conclusion, without cheating.
I don't think you needed to use a preset map, you just could use any random map generated by the game with customised settings, size included IIRC.
Zsozso did set the record, IIRC somewhere in the low '70s (I would not swear on '71, but it could well be '72 or '73).
This one should be the same, with the only difference that you're bound to use 64x128 maps.
If you use a preset map, or the Huge Map of Planet, you'd only compare player skills on THAT map. You could always have the doubt (or the disclaimer) that it could be possible to transcend earlier on a different map.
Instead here Hendrik wonders which is the earliest possible Transcendence on Huge (without cheating, with the original alpha.txt), leave alone comparing player skills.
Just stating "Huge" means just ANY, *game generated*, random map. If you think that after all the map you used was not optimal, go for another run, and another, till you're satisfied, or bored.
After 50 random maps, I would say that exceptional flukes apart, the record time you'll have set depends from game nature and player skills, rather than from one maps in general.
And then, the more players participate in the attempt, the more you could say that the overall record they found in common was not even depending by one or the other skills, but it's indeed the earliest Transcendence *the game* allows on huge, provided and conceded *in general* "top skills" and optimal conditions.
One could be rather interested in knowing that *it's possible* to Transcend on Huge say in 2220 (I think I once did, in a pbem tho, cooperating in 3), the doer of the deed being an incidental detail
___
STILL, you'd have to agree about what "no cheating" means, just for the sake of exactly defining the kind of record you set.
Just as earliest Tiny Transcendence is not the same as earliest Huge Transcendence, you'd understand that earliest Huge Transcendence WITH Stockpiling has not the same meaning as without.
Last edited by MariOne on 14-01-2003 at 20:47
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hendrik
|
|
I wanted to create a challenge with as much leeway for different options as possible. Both Sikander and myself didn't abuse the stockpile energy bug by putting it in build queues deliberatly, however we did not put units in the build queue after facilities, we benefitted from the stockpile energy bug only so far as we were building facilities.
Basically all I want to determine is what faction is the fastest "pure" builder. This is impossible to determine in MP, because there are so many variables.
If you want to play from an existing save, then archaic started his game on the ultimate builder map, I played my game on a random huge map. Both saves can be found in the Sikander build thread.
But in order to make the challenge easier for different playstyles and/or factions, feel free to play on a randomly generated map, with any settings you wish. The Pirates would do much better on a waterworld, the morganites need a lot of room to expand, Lal can benefit a lot from having a lot of coastal bases, since he can handle the extra pop.
As far as SMAC/SMAX, both Sikander and myself played using SMAX, my Morganite strategy benefits tremendously from the PEG.
As this is supposed to be a "pure" builder comparison try to keep offensive military action to a minimum. One method to ensure that you won't be bothered by the AI is to save the game at year one, activate the scenario editor to see where the other AI start positions are, and then load the previously saved game.
The dangers of saving and reloading are somewhat minimized in a "pure" builder game, as there are virtually no variables in this sort of game. Sikander played with random events off, I forgot to play with them off and had them on, but they made a relatively minor difference in the game. Saving and reloading mostly affects combat results... when you are following a builder strategy there is very little reason to save/reload.
As far as using colony pods to exceed hab limits etc... feel free to do so! I don't think this is a practical method to speed up research when you are using directed research, but if this proves to be the fastest technique then so be it.
As far as factions... both Sikander and myself played with the original SMAC 7, if you think there is some killer combo then go for it.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Hendrik
|
|
Mario- fine then, any basis you want for fast transcend. But doesn't a single person have an answer to the question of fastest SP transcend? I haven't seen a single date posted yet.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
|
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:25
|
|
heh, you've learned that I like a lot to meddle with the organisational aspects even of things that I haven't the slightest intention to go for in first person... 
Evidently, the big shots either left the field long ago, or they're busy with other things and don't care anymore to play a SP game on Huge till Transcendence.
Tau & Googlie,
of course the fact that I advocate freedom of base joining does not mean that also I find it actually convenient, except in peculiar cases.
I have to say tho that I profited of it in MASTOR pbem game (organised by Raspy in '99, and ended last year), thanks to PTS-pod-factory trick I learned here from Ogie. It helped me boost my booming-hindered Hive population, one of the factors to my dominance in that game (the other being JAM backstabbing his allies and jumping on the winner's chariot  ).
And sometimes in SP I found myself hitting the 16 pop limit long before HabDomes, with little room for efficiently founding new bases...
Take a 16-sized base, with excess nutrients available & capable of producing 3 mineral rows a turn, what would you best do with them in say 4 turns? Crank out 4 pods (while the base sustains its pop during booming conditions), and the 5th turn you have a 20-sized base. In the worst case this means 4 more high-level specialists, in an already fully infrastructured base.
Other better uses of those 12 rows?
It depends of course from the specific situation.
You could put up a satellite, but what if you also already had 16 of each available kind?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
zsozso
|
 |
of Chiron
Oct 1999
time: 00:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MariOne
Actually, in the "Fastest Transcend" I think the skill was more in devising which were the most peculiar settings allowing the fastest conclusion, without cheating.
I don't think you needed to use a preset map, you just could use any random map generated by the game with customised settings, size included IIRC.
Zsozso did set the record, IIRC somewhere in the low '70s (I would not swear on '71, but it could well be '72 or '73).
|
The best was 67 turns. There was an old thread about it on this forum, not sure if it still exists, though.
BTW, happy new year(s!) to all the good-ol' friends around here!
Although I have retired from here years ago, I'm still alive and still have my SMAC+X CD So if you define the conditions of that challenge I might just make a crack at it...
[goes off trying to remember the old days and strategies while searching for the mentioned CD...]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mongoose
|
|
Harrisburg,PA USA
Apr 1999
time: 00:25
|
|
This thread was dealing with HUGE maps. It's not right to throw in tiny map discussions.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
|
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:25
|
|
< rocks down from chair >
Zsozso posted!
Welcome back, what brought you here again?
Did we "evocate" you by talking of your records?
BTW, I wasn't following the matter closely at the time (nor ever did), so I wasn't aware until now of David Byron's record...
For all who happened to have praised my committment in game details, and those who hated my longwinded posts... It's probably just because they were not here at Apolyton SMAC gloden age: I'm just a SMAC accountant in the face of zsozso and his likes, whose skills were and are way over my head.
I was never actually into it, but I think that even in my best times I'd hardly could have managed all those dedicated strategies and even the "mild" challenge accomplishments, like the 0FOCC, or the Nomad one, leave me in awe.
___
PS: if you use the Lens icon in his post (Find more posts by zsozso), you'll see that he came back to post on the challenge subjects after a 22 months hiatus!
PPS: you'll see in the thread that Petek scooped up, that indeed the "Fastest" record was allowed *anything* that did not involve alteration of the original files or exploiting the lamest bugs.
Playing on Citizen not much for the drone absence, but for the faster research parameter and of course for being able to produce pods at b4 getting a base to size 2 and keeping it was a smart thing.
Of course, this is the general frame. Then one might argue - OK you found the settings allowing for the fastes, let's try now to set a record withouth THIS or THAT "too" peculiar setting.
For instance, if you want to set the fastest Huge record you might give it at try at Citizen level. If you get the record there, notwithstanding that it would be an astounding accomplishemnt as zsozso pointed in the linked thread, you might be left a little unsatisfied/unfulfilled and say "But, what if we also set a Transcendent level constraint".
On Huge maps sometime might pass before you meet other factions, and making them submissive or cooperative might require a bigger military initial investment, which you might not have time enough to make it rewarding. That is to say that on Huge, Transcend level might actually be more "difficult" as the "better AI" tradeoff for level restraints could not be as effective as on tiny maps.
BTW, don't forget that in SMAC there is still the maintenance bug, whcih has been fixed in SMAX only.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
zsozso
|
|
of Chiron
Oct 1999
time: 00:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MariOne
< rocks down from chair >
Zsozso posted!
Welcome back, what brought you here again?
Did we "evocate" you by talking of your records?
BTW, I wasn't following the matter closely at the time (nor ever did), so I wasn't aware until now of David Byron's record...
|
Its a nice feeling that people still remember me... 
I had to leave smac because It was getting way too addictive to me and I wasn't concentrating enough on other matters of life (like my kids or running my software company). After this 22 months break, I still love smac and intend to play and post a little again - although not as actively and not with such devotion as before.
David's record was worth mentioning not only because he deserves the credit, but also because it is a radically different strategy (his moth-style) which works amazingly well despites its simplicity in all kinds of situations.
I think that's the way to do the huge map fast-transcend as well. There it will beat the submissive-AI technique with even higher margin.
quote:
Originally posted by MariOne
PPS: you'll see in the thread that Petek scooped up, that indeed the "Fastest" record was allowed *anything* that did not involve alteration of the original files or exploiting the lamest bugs.
Playing on Citizen not much for the drone absence, but for the faster research parameter and of course for being able to produce pods at b4 getting a base to size 2 and keeping it was a smart thing. |
I aggree, that the "clean" challenge is to use whatever legal settings to achieve the absolute fastest transcend. In a way, it is part of the challenge to find what settings, options will allow the fastest result. So, the "do it on huge map" is a further restriction, just like there were variants on the OCC to make it more difficult. That is why I suggest to set up a precise set of constraints.
Other questions that come into mind:
1. SMAC or SMAX ? What faction choices are allowed in SMAX ? I.e. can I use, say 3-4 University factions on tha AI (for submissive pacts), or let's say 6 pirates on a mainly land map to keep more territory for myself?
2. How about pods ? If you really want to test skills and not luck, maybe it should be played without Unity pod scattering - that would certainly furhter stretch the time.
3. How about random events? Just to eliminate bad luck too, I would suggest turning them off.
4. One could make further restrictions to make it tougher: e.g. mainly ocean, not allowed to use submissive pacts etc.
The bottomline is: every rule-set you choose will define a slightly different challenge and some may alter what is the best strategy to do it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hendrik
|
|
Zso-
You seem to be the first person to take up the challenge, the rules haven't really been defined yet. 2 out of 2 games so far have been played without the use of submissive pacts, Sik and I started this discussion to find what faction/strategy was the fastest for play. As far as UofP clones... the focus in this game is on doing the research yourself. Any combination of single factions bar UofP is good.
If this starts getting competitive we might introduce no random events/ no pod scattering, but right now it isn't highly competitive.. there are 3 people who have posted stuff in the archaic build thread, and you here. It is ok to play with pods and random events.
And that is the only challenge there is... just being as fast as possible. I could improve upon the save I posted here by not researching unified field theory.
If this gets REALLY competitive we should start using the same mapset without unity pods, and have the AI be far away from the human player.
Nice to see you back!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
We used to do these fast transcends challenges all the time. Surely the the threads are still around.
We would play the same map from a common save.
I can't remember the fastest times because each game was different and we were looking to beat each other not establish a benchmark.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
Well, you have set the standard for citizen. Congradulations. Be welcomed to play from Hendrick's position for comparision if you like.
SMAC ON.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
|
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:25
|
|
I wonder...
You played the gaians (unless I missed something newer) because of the free (from production AND support) army.
But as this is not a scoring game, you might as well pick Rare if playing with a worm-unfriendly faction.
In the non-intenstive overview with 7 Zaks, I hardly ever built a unit.
At CITIZEN, you don't have Drone problems, you don't have close neioghbors, so I pcould go with all bases unguarded.
If you really meet or spawn the odd worms, you can bear some loss, or build a single Empath Rover for the purpose and get some cash back.
True, without free worms you'll be slower in popping all the pods, and you'll get less cash from fungus-trolling.
But balance this:
With Gaians, you have greater efficiency, but no research boost.
You have 1 extra nut in fungus, but of course you'll restart till you begin on a grassy slope (or even beter in the Jungle), so Zak could do without the extra fungus nut, and Gaians can't switch to FM.
Zak can begin by picking PlaNets and swtich pronto to Planned. On huge the BureauDrones limit won't hit that soon, and he'll benefit from faster growth and faster pod production (at Citizen growth is not a restriction for expansion, but helps increasing production). Only downside will be being unable to unbalance the SE too much, but in the early phases some ec to speed first expansion might be as important as some research turn sacrificed.
So, in summary, I dunno whether hunting money and efficiency is enough to balance faster research, Planned from the start, and FM when convenient.
Anyway, I realised some other benefits of playing at Citizen, that I forgot, the last time I had used it being 4 years ago 
- as we said, no Cpod base disbanding
- no SE switches cost
- no retooling penalty
- no prototyping cost (useful for immediately available crawler upgrades)
I wonder, if the format of this "challenge" allows for free switching whenever you have to rush the rare unit, always paying a 2ec/min facility price for them.
After all, this is not forbidden in normal play, it is allowed, with a cost. The waiving of that cost is just a feature of the easiest level, along with the others listed above....
Didn't think to apply that to projects....
I think I could have aimed for 2220/2230, would already be a challenge for me to get below 2200 like zsozso did...
Playing it at higher difficulties will reintroduce the growth/expansion dependence, and will maybe a more usual feeling....
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25.
Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-01-2003 12:09
I have never found a need for it in MP, and rarely in SP...
Aaron, I like your angle on the problem, i.e. 'real life' addiction 
:
|