| Then I did a large, 3 bright and 2 intelligent, me and drengins bad, the rest pure good, and scored 8k. |
|
Yes, setting AIs to good does seem to penalise score. Not sure why though.
          
| |
|
| Yes, setting AIs to good does seem to penalise score. Not sure why though. |
|
Isn't that because a good morality AI may be more likely to trade and ally and less likely to war?
Ray, is it still this way with 1.092?
Rick
    
| |
|
I had felt that the usual alignment bonus (you as pure good and all AIs as pure evil) did not give as large, if any, a bonus under 1.092 as it did under 1.05. I can't say I've tested that conclusively. The other way (you as pure evil and all AIs as pure good) had NEVER given any substantial bonus in my playing at any level, although I would not have said a genuine penalty existed. I'd be interested in Ray's assessment under the beta, too.
 
| |
|
Thanks to everyone for all the advice regarding alignment. I didn't try the "cheese," just used a huge map and turned saintly. 
Another question: Can the AI "win" using the research victory condition as humans do (and, more importantly, make the humans therefore lose)? I just finished a huge masochistic game in which I seriously depleted my planets of population to create transports to finish off the Drengin ASAP since I was desperately afraid that my allies, the Torians, HAD to be close to getting a resarch victory (I confess, having never strung out a game long enough to win by research myself, I'm not absolutely sure how long that takes, but the Torians were researching like gangbusters).
  
| |
|
| Ray, is it still this way with 1.092? |
|
I don't know cause I've not tried it because I didn't want to get half a score for the same effort. It is easier if you play good when everyone is good. But if you play evil, the good AIs all want to cleanse you so I don't think it's easier. Personally don't like to play against all good because they cuddle up too quickly and that makes it harder for me to incite war among them.
Personally, I don't think there is any change in the Betas in this regard because Frogboy didn't mention tweaking any other factors in scoring other than the base difficulties score.
[Message Edited]
| |
|
| Can the AI "win" using the research victory condition as humans do (and, more importantly, make the humans therefore lose)? |
|
Congrats on beating your first Maso game, Fatty! 
No, AIs can't win via research or culture or alliance, they need to capture all your planets to win. However, in the Xpack, humans will no longer be able to win via tech if the AI gets Final Frontier first. You don't lose, you just can't win via tech.
The funny reason given for not letting AIs win via other means is that they didn't pay for the game, we did. 
| |
|
Wow!  With one game I jumped from 103 to 53rd. It's hard to believe that one game can have such an impact on your ranking.
 
| |
|
You grew your 3rd monthly block, Lothmorg. Don't be expecting this kind of increase for the next few game.  And congrats on your new top scoring game of 25k.
| |
|
Thanks! Any idea when SD is going to raise the cap so you can finally post higher scores?
You're probably just a couple hours away from breaking the 200K mark again, huh?
You get to celebrate TWICE!
Congratulations again.
| |
|
Frogboy said the cap will be lifted to 50k in the next build. I don't think they are going to come out with another Beta with the Xpack due in a week's time.
Yeah, I'm hoping to finish my next Maso Gig by tonight. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the Admiral rank is implemented and with the criteria of 50 games and 200k points.
| |
|
Good morning, my fellow Fellowshippers..er..fellow Ringers...um...uh...oh, good morning all!
Just wanted to let you guys know I finally updated the website. I added Downie's two newest installments and updated the roster, as well. Sorry it took so long, but work was really crazy.
I got a couple of hours of gameplay in last night. I went with a Huge/Tough again. I didn't get a terribly good start, but I think I can still pull it out. The Yor are being ba$tard$ again.  I've already been to war with them and beat them. They are paying me a little sum of BCs for a while! Now the Arceans declared war with me. Guess I'll have to teach them a lesson, too! I'll just send the Drengin after them! 
Good luck on the next milestone, Ray! You really do crank out those Gigantic/Masos!
And it was good to see smok-n-joe posting! 
  
| |
|
Admiral Rank achieved!!
Fleet Admiral, here I come!!
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't it be *hooray* time for a new comp? I guess money's tight, eh?
Yes, it's good to see smok-n-joe returning. I'm hoping more of us would return to the game once the Xpack is released.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Isn't that because a good morality AI may be more likely to trade and ally and less likely to war? |
|
This is true if you are good as well. However, if you are evil, they hate you of course. Playing evil against all good is most definitely NOT easier than playing with standard alignments or playing good against all evil. If your evil and everyone else is good, they will all gang up on you in no time and it will be a 5 on 1 war. I know, Ive tried it because I wanted the challenge and like being the underdog. What makes no sense to me whatsoever is that playing this way gets you a LOWER score than a standard alignment (this is in 1.05 by the way and I havent been able to submit my scores). It makes all kinds of sense for you to get a HIGHER score because its harder. It appears to me to be a bug in the way bonus/penalties are levied when handling alignment.
Playing good vs all evil is harder than standard as well and should also get a bonus but not as much as evil vs good IMHO. You dont get the benifit of naturally friendly races but thats about it. Evil AI empires go their own way and rarely ally against you and so you can play them off on eachother.
Either way, I do feel that there is a problem in how the scoring is handled for alignments. I shouldnt be penalized for making the game harder but it certainly appears that that is the case.
[Message Edited]
| |
|
WileyCoyote
Thanks for the reply. I agree with you that playing pure evil against 5 pure good AI should be harder than playing stock allignment and should net more game points. From your description, I will stick to playing pure good against pure evil AI in 1.05. At least one is rewarded a little bit for playing a harder game.
We will have to reconsider when Gal Civ 1.1 comes out next week but as Ray noted, the only scoring changes overtly described for the new release when compared to 1.05 is the bump in maso scoring.
Anyone have any other thoughts on this? Thanks. Oh, and please go to the strategies part of the forum and educate me about sharks & pirates. Ok, now I am pumped up enough to go start another game. Darn sharks. . . .
Rick
[Message Edited]
| |
|
|
|
Thanks Rick. I don't think I'll be even close to cranking out games like Ray does. He's a machine!
I'll be happy with one submission a week, if I'm lucky.
| |
|
Ray - congrats on Admiral!
| |
|
Thanks for the cheers, people.
Check out the new blogs at joeuser. Wondering what we can do with an empire blog.
The only thing I can think of is that it can be a kind of noticeboard for members (esp new ones) who don't want to plog through the 1000+ posts in this thread. But I guess our website can serve that function as well.
Any ideas?
| |
|
Lots of interesting reads over at Joeuser. Draginol certainly has lots to say regarding a variety of topics.
| |
|
I personally would like to see a Fellowship Story group. Brad said individual bloggers could be grouped together, and that would be a great way to keep up with who wrote what!
Anybody think that's a good idea? Or even possible?
| |
|
|
|
|
