HairyTheTaco HairyTheTaco

The Illuminati Lodge

The Illuminati Lodge

ok, here it is, the Illuminati communication thread!

a lot of people has been asking when we will put one up, so, here it is. we have finally made it to the galactic map (thanks to Treylis for his high scores), and one of our members has made it to the top 10 players (again, thank you Treylis).




things to discuss:

1) get hold of Treylis
2) find ways to get more recruits
3) find things to talk about in our thread! (im serious) LOL
3,914 views 184 replies
Reply #176 Top
Well I finally finished setting up the PanGaea Cooperative Empire. Think I'll start a thread for it and see what happens... :HOT:
Reply #178 Top
Thanks. It'll be fun anyway even if its just me. I'm already ranked 47. I don't know how active most of the top 50 are, but I'm confident I can climb higher than that just on my own... :HOT:
Reply #179 Top
I say about half of them are not even playing anymore... So you've got great chance to advance.

By the way, the thing about RTS is that whoever clicks fast and build fast always wins. I don't see any strategic point there... LOL

Good luck with your new empire Anton, looks good with your homepage. :CONGRAT:
Reply #180 Top
Thats what I thought. Thanks for wishing me luck. If I can get in the top 25 on my own then maybe it will attract enough attention to get other members. But I'm not going to lower myself to proselytising, begging or poaching. If someone wants to join great, otherwise I know how to have fun by myself... ;)
Reply #181 Top
Oh, and you've hit the nail on the head concerning rts. I dislike it for the same reason I dislike 'snap' and other card games of that ilk...

...the difference between rts and tbs is like the difference between snap and chess...
Reply #182 Top
I'd have to disagree with that thought Anton. I play both tbs and rts strategy games, and while there is a distinct difference, I'd rank rts games about the same as I'd rank tbs ones.

You get a different kind of fun out of rts games than tbs games. In rts games, there is more urgency to the game. In tbs games, you don't feel rushed, but in rts, whether your playing against a computer or live opponent(especially a live opponent) you feel like you have to move as fast as possible, and that is fun in itself.

While their may not be as much strategy in an rts game as a tbs game, rts games are not all "who clicks the fastest". I play rise of nations a lot, and with the new additions such as borders, you are kept on your toes having to THINK about where you should place your next city, or where to place a fortress. There's also army balance. RON requires you to build a balanced army to win a battle. Rushs with just one type of units usually doesn't work(except in the very early game).

For example, if your in the gunpowder age, building just arbesquiers(offensive unit) to attack is easily countered by the enemy sending in several cavalry units. If you had built say, landskneschts(german defensive units) you would have been able to easily defend easily against the cavalry units.

Also, in one of the older strategy games I've played, Outpost 2, the game required some real thinking and strategy. There was no fog of war, so you and your opponent could see exactly what each other was doing. There was a time cycle of day and night, so if you wanted to attack, you would do it during the night. The opponent wouldn't see your units on the minimap if you attacked at night with the lights off(In the game of course). There was a massive tech tree, probably larger than the one in galciv itself, so if you were to rush the enemy, and he was more advanced than you, you would usually be crushed. You would have to do some careful micromanagement to actually defeat your opponent. You could also build defensive walls and turrets in strategic places. Not only this, but you would have to keep your morale up with residences and hospitals. Don't tell me that this game was as easy as "snap".
Reply #183 Top
It may have been unfair of me to compare all rts to 'snap'. I have enjoyed these games myself from time to time, but on the whole I find the inability to freeze time and give out complex orders too frustrating, which is why I prefer to play turn based games.

I don't find snap easy. Thats the point. I always lost at snap because I just couldn't get into its 'snatch em quick' mentality. It seems too rough...
Reply #184 Top
Ah, Outpost 2... all the fun mind games you can play just by turning your head-lights on for a second...

I loved the single-player campaign, too, cause it carried over your technology and population from one scenario to the next, but the the blight/lava really meant you couldn't sit around starving your opponent to death.

One of my strongest memories from the sp game: I've got everything ready to go for the next mission, when an earthquake takes out one of my loaded ConVecs. No biggie, I think, and I start building a new building to load in a spare ConVec. Just then, yep you guessed it, "The Blight Is Approaching!". Micromanaging my building shutdowns to keep my people alive, but happy and not starving to death, while waiting for the thing to finish building, and hoping one extra research topic would get done before the lab blew up... what a rush LOL
[Message Edited]