/#4 by Citizen Copernicus - 5/18/2003 8:21:25 PM /Now, now, let's not be judgemental, as some of /us Midwesterners like me benefitted from this scoring /mechanism (even though I didn't realize it was a /scoring gimmick at the time, I just like running up my /population numbers a bit). Casting stones, glass houses and all that. At least me and Copernicus make no secret of it ;)
Stardock Forums
Laugh, I was ranked 13th before the questionable game with a total score of 12k or so. If I had not milked the score I would still have had a total score of 14k if I had submitted it at the normal time. Enough to put GROSS still over 3k ahead of you :)
Hey, those first ten games put me quite abit behind on my work, I wont be submitting any games before monday night :)
They are an evil empire, about the only thing evil about me is my 'unethical points' :) Hey im the first one in line hoping they recalc the scores to put everyone back on a more ethical playing field. The only difference between my 23k+ score and any score over 10k in my opinion is that I made it obvious and made a stink about it on the boards. I feel any score over 10k was milked to a fairly signifigant extent. Not that I think there is anything r
Hey, when I milk a score, at least I make it a challange I did milk it on 1.035 the supposed nerfed score version!
The military swap is another great feature too :)
At first I didnt think I would like the governers either, but now I adore them. here is why. The ford governer is the default governer for every planet. You dont even HAVE to set a planet to a governer. Simply putting the item in Ford's queue will make the next item every planet builds that item. You can then goto any particular 'exception' to this buy going to that planet and changing the governer to one that is still blank. Thi
Ive played fewer games then you, I have treated your opinions with far more respect. I have actual points to which you have next to none. And yet im the hardcore elitist? You seem to me to be a veteran(pun intended) elitist who enjoys bashing 'new' players on the forum. All I ask is that Brad looks over the suggestions and makes up his own mind, I have great respect for the style of game he has created and the potential that exists for his future
Even if you have to use starbases, its still less work constructors are very cheap compared to dreadnoughts and they cant lose. If your trying to use military you can actually lose a fight. Losing means doing it over again, hence more 'work'. Cultural bombing is easier, more effecient and less prone to failure. And if you get 3 or more influence resources built up, you dont even need starbases.
Why shouldnt the 5 percent also be entertained, isnt that the point? You seem to have little regard for anyones enjoyment but your own(and those you identify as being like you, which I grant you think is most people, but of course your the one in a really small minority, as is everyone) The AI isnt clever, clever implies actual intelligence and the AI has none. ZERO, try to understand that machine intelligence does not exist and baring some miracle bre
#19 forceinfinity I havnt done any math or tests on the subject as I dont really fight often, but I have noticed that fleets do signifigantly better then solo ships. In your given example, after the first round you would have done 60-25 or 35 damage, a dreadnought as about 100 hitpoints? if in the counter attack, the defenses dont stack, and they probably dont, the dreadnought would probably kill a 3rd of your corvettes right there in the firs
Your method is an alliance=tech=culture situtation Too make them equal you just remove them from the formula as you have done. Other then making all victory conditions equal your method is no different in its vague statements then what currently exists. Points are assigned based on many of those criteria and like I said, I have nothing against making the different conditions equal, so long as the different methods of getting to the end point are equ
By flat you mean all victory conditions are equal? I may not have any problems with that, it clearly would be better then the current situtation where the easier conditions are worth more. What about scoring different galaxy size and difficulty levels? What do you think the score should be based on? Purely time to win? Purely pop when won? And if all systems will be open to massive abuse in your opinion, including i presume your ow
Well if you go the military route which is probably more enjoyable, it would take a lot more time to do a turn, going the influence route as I do makes for relatively shorter turns :)
My 'normal' game where I dont do anything lame like milk a score for points takes about 4-6 hours for a gigantic map and is worth about 7-10k points The milked game took about 9 hours and was mostly done to prove a point. Before that I was ranked 13th with a score of about 12k, so while it made a big difference, id still be pretty high without it :)
I didnt make the different victory conditions worth silly non logical amounts, its one of my major beefs with the system. Its one of the things I want changed back to something more normal. Beyond the issue assbackwards ranking of the different victory conditions, you seem to have no actual points that matter to me, my issues and anything I care about at all. And in the case of the assbackwards ranking of the different victory conditions, we are in
Well, for human life, as humans are uniquely adapted to Earth. But life in general, I would disagree, though of course PQ can be defined as being only relevent to human life.
Ah well, I cant argue against anyone who would use a calvin and hobbes reference!
You can convert every system any empire owns. Some systems do have a high resistence to it but none are immune. Just takes longer with some.
XP isnt the only measure of the value of a ship. There are military racial bonuses, planet building and global effects that can greatly enhance the abilities of a ship. Without knowing what these were at in your particular game, the developers can not really act on your suggestion. For instance, if he had tri-strominium armor and some big ship bonuses, then it would and should make sense for his battle axe to beat multiple smaller ships.
As judged by the population it can support? Any other method of judgement that I can think of is totally arbitrary and meaningless. Given that the population is just tax payers and that I have seen 16 PQ planets hold 35 billion tax payers which would result in about 100 billion people I seriously doubt this is all that reflective of reality, but hey who knows what technology will let us do in the future eh :)
Its all good, im actually from the midwest so I have contemplated joining them, but Id still perfer a pacific northwest empire.
Code Monkey, quite frankly you make no sense. Ratings exist to rate people, you either care about the ratings or you dont. Either way of looking at it is valid and what I would determine as casual would be those that fall into the ranks of those who don't give a damn about the rating systems. They play the game for fun. That to me is the majority of people. You talk like such as they do, but all you talk about is how your rating got hosed, so clearly
10 hours, gesh your evil :) It was only 4 hours! Evil never triumphs, you will all succumb to the awesome culture of goodness! I just need to find an empire first.
I just wish there was a Pacific northwest team(USA) I could join. Someone should make one