Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Sorry, indeed what=want http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, that's look good for me. And some further suggestions: 1 planet start (planet is Good) - it will slow down the game at early stage but prevent most part of issues with map knowledge.
From another hand lord evil's suggestions was 5 planet start - that's too many IMHO. So if you don't like 1 planet and 5 planet then 3 planet is just what you need.

Quote:

I thought of the standard emp-files also !! Intimidator,

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Oh, please don't do it! Race optimizing is a part of the fun. May I suggest the following conditions:
1. Planet and Atmosphere type from standard setup, ie 8472 must be Methane/Gas.
2. Every major race must pick up its own race culture: ie 8472 must have 8472 race culture.
3. Every major race must have their planet type world natives trait and their racial technology trait: ie for 8472 must have Gas World Natives and 8472 Technology trait.
4. Happiness type from standard setup: ie, Renegades for 8472.
5. Everything else is to player's discretion http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

This way you're still canon, and pleased with your race, so no justification, like: "I lost because of bad .emp setup" or such http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Negative side of this setup: minimaxers (me too) will do their dirty business http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif However, minimaxing is somewhat limited in the mod (min GC=90%, max SC=110%) so decide yorself.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Great idea indeed. If we are going this way someone has to make set of intel rules for every of major races and common rules for minor races (one for all). And one of the rules I can suggest - no offensive intel attacks against AIs or human driven minor race.

Last question is about diplomacy limitation: if where will be any limits to partnerships etc? I hope that where will be (beyond the RP limitations, like 8472 vs Borg), let say max amount of Partners is about 2, max amout of allies (TA&TRA) is about 4-5. This is to avoid dummy total partnership situation, where many races parasitize on stronger ones.

Oh, and the very Last suggestion, it's common for many games - no tech trades and no population swaping.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Orions are still in an open slot, and they are not so bad, belive me. Anyway better than minors.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Hi all!

Wow, there is so much in this thread...
Problem is, we are in an excavation and there is so much to do here, that i do not have the time to follow this discussion in time...
So please excuse when i post on something that was metioned a day before because i just had not the time to look after.
Even this time now is stolen from work...

Just some shorties:

I do much like the idea of banning warp point techlology from game, but i think all the o´ther technologies to create planets or to create nebulaes or storms is that interetsting that it should be allowed in. Point is this way would only work on trust, that nobody would use warppoint technology.

The idea with the house intel is a great thing but i think w should discuss the details.

What is with the thing about the "Quests" for the minor races we spoke about intimidator? Especially those minors designed to be "true" computer controlled species? Would you like to play them as "shadow" players to simulate their correct behaviour in star trek?
I think these would be very interesting in a roleplay setting like it is used to be here.

I strongly recommend the use of shuttles and fighters and mines( just look at star fleet battles where shuttles are sometimes the edge you need)
But again, i never saw the borg use any shuttle or something like that for example, so we should perhaps try to House" them also to the corresponding race.

5000 points and 1 planet to start with is also a very good and challenging idea!

So, thats for the moment. I hope to be able to look after it tomorrow evening ( yes its easter know, but works d be done here).

Ralf( and Petra)

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Hi,

Lord Evil: Yes I intend to control the AI-minors the same way you are doing in '
Menace of the Drow Elves '. But I really hope that there will be people that are willing to play one of the minor Races.

-- HELLO OUTTHERE, Don't be afraid sign up as a minor. Winning is not the most important in this game, keeping your ROLE is. And if you playing a minor, you could Last to the end. (example: the Vulcans, join the federation soon and you could even bear it to the end and win.)

I agree with your points about planet creation etc.. So indeed it will be a rule on TRUST.
But I think we are all grown-ups here and nobody will cheat. (BTW. as soon as someone opens/closes a WP, we all know the next turn)

I will post a list of rules tommorow, after I sorted all of my mails out. Because I'm drowning in mails and message about this game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Intimidator

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Just a small suggestion: Minor races should get 1500 racial points, PLEASE ! This would make the game more interesting for minor race players(like me)

please please http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Okay, 1500 racial points and a medium sized planet instead of an large one is more than enough penalty.

Inti,

BTW. you will need those points with the Borg at your doorstep http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ April 10, 2004, 13:57: Message edited by: Intimidator ]

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Remember, if you choose events to be on Catastrophic, warp points CAN close on their own through natural events. So just because a warp point closes, that doesn't mean someone was cheating. The solution for this would be:

1. Have either no events, or have events on anything but Catastrophic.

2. If a warp point closes (I don't think warp points naturally open but i could be wrong about that) then we could get someone impartial to look at the game file, and take a look at the ships of the players who were in the system at the time of the event. If a warp point closing ship is found, the appropriate measures can be taken, but if its a natural event, the game can go on.

Personally, I favor option 2, because I like having the events on catastrophic. The chance that I could get a message that my star is going nova adds a lot of fun to the game for me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif . Then again, maybe I'm just masochistic http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Please tell me what you think of this.

[EDIT: Warp points do NOT randomly open. Only close. And I was wrong about the severity. The event severity only needs to be High not Catastrophic for a warp point to close.]

[ April 10, 2004, 15:07: Message edited by: Renegade 13 ]

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yeah, but what can you say about this:
Type := Warp Point - Opened
Severity := High
Effect Amount := 1
...
Start Message 1 := Our scientists have detected fluctuations in [%SystemName], They suspect that a new warp point is forming. We should send a ship to study this phenomenon.
(from Events.txt)

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

We can control it if necessary, but again: 'I trust all of you' http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

And if in the end game it starts happening twice a turn, I can begin getting suspicious http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Inti,

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, there's only one thing I can say about that:

Oops

I was looking at the stock events.txt file, not the STM one. For some reason, the stock game doesn't have that event implemented. However, Atrocities did put it in. Guess I should think a little more before moving my fingers on the keyboard!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Another question: since we have Stellar Manipulation allowed (except Warp tech) what about Weapons of mass destruction? I'm not an expert in ST universe, but so far I know about only 2 of them: Doomsday Machine and 8472 6-in-the-circle planet destroyer. Opinions?

So the actuall question is: are they allowed? (as the Last resort).

[ April 10, 2004, 18:03: Message edited by: aiken ]

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Didnt atrocities move that to weapon tech? I dont think you have to research it in Stellar Manip. to make it work??


Cant wait to play http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Are we just waiting for players then we are ready to go? or is there a date in mind?

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Didnt atrocities move that to weapon tech? I dont think you have to research it in Stellar Manip. to make it work??


Cant wait to play http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Are we just waiting for players then we are ready to go? or is there a date in mind? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">WMD has Stellar Manipulation 4 as prerequesite. So you have to research SM to get it.

As for now latest STM Version is not uploaded to PBW, so where is no much sense to start the game without the mod itself http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And give Intimidator some time to arrange things in the best way.

Happy Easter fellows! Christ has arisen!

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

I recommend we not use INTEL.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

If we want to get this game going we will need to get Geoschmo to upload it to PBW.

So if you have time, consider writing him a nice polite email. Remember he runs this thing pro-bono so any donation he gets does help. But since he is only one guy he has a limited about of time that he can spend uploading mods and such. So if we are all kind and such perhaps we could persuade him to spend a little extra time on upload this mod by this weekend... oops tis the weekend already. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

And I RECOMMEND NO INTEL. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Hi,

Thanks Aiken, you are right. I need some time to get it on track (a lot of work).

But BlackRose, don't be affraid I'm NOT going to wait for human-minors for months. But I still have to work on the map, with Tnarg (he is back monday) So at least a week before start. (But that would be fast, 10 days since first post)

Atrocities: why do you suggest NO-Intel, I liked the ideas that are proposed ?? But you made the Mod, so please inform me??

Inti,

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

I just got an great idea: maybe it's smart for me to start playing the Romulan against AI for the time being (could use the training) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Inti,

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

The reason I recommend no intel is mainly because it will simplify things.

You can allow intel, but disallow Sabotage. That would work far better.

Sabotage will eventually give access to some very nasty intel projects would seriously unbalance the game in MP.

Also players can then re-allocate some Cunning points to other traits. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Okay, But is there any important difference(never checked) between stock and STM-mod Intel?

And about your comments about sabotage, as we use those intel-restrictions which are described in this thread. There will only be a few race which are using sabotage, and all in ST-universe ways of doing

Inti,

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That takes the oomph out of a lot of the races though http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Cant imagine Cardies and Rommies without their intel! NVM the Dominion http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Did you see the proposed Intel projects? We could tone them down some ofc if you feel that it is too much of an adv. Also consider many of the racial buildings that are based on Intel.

The other thing I've been thinking about is possibly limiting how the races interact with one another, For Example:

Race: Borg
Allowable Treaties: None

Race Federation
Allowable Treaties:

Partnership: ]
Trade Alliance: ] Limit to 1 Major Empire
T & R Alliance: ] Unlimited Minors
Military Alliance: ]

NI: Unlimited
NA: Unlimited

Subjugation: No
Protectorate: No

Dominion:

Partnership }
Trade Alliance } None
T & R Alliance }
Military Alliance }

NA: 1 Major, Unlimited Minors
NI: Unlimited

Protectorate: No
Subjugation: Yes, Unlimited

Something along those lines? I am probably over complicating things, i'm just a big RP fan http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

I like the Borg Treaty thing. I should use that in the next Version of the mod.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

can I take one of the minor races? Im a noob in mp so I tink it will be enuf for me.. is vulcan free?

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Welcome Dizzycow, and yes Vulcans are free

Major Races: Large Planet / 5000 Racial points
8472 : Aiken
Borg : Petra
Breen : Atrocities
Cardassian : Tnarg
Dominion : Renegade 13
Federation : Annika
Ferengi :
Klingons : Alarikf
Orions : Tomecki
Romulans : Intimidator
Tholians : BlackRose

Minor Races: Medium Planet / 0 Racial points
Bajoran : Kiedryn
Vulcan : Dizzycow
Gorn :
Nausicaan:
Sheliak :

Kazon : Ragnorak-X
Vaadwaur :
Hirogen :
(All the minors are open for discusion, more can added or changed)

WE STILL NEED AN FERENGI..............

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font color=red>Well Crap!</font color>

172 FIX

Download this fix Patch if you have already donwloaded the Star Trek Mod full or patch for 1.7.2.

I don't know how it happened, but some how the changes I made to armor did not save. This file is a new components file that reduces the armor %.

I honestly don't know what in the hell happened. Somehow I screwed up.

I am in the process of updating Full Version and Patches as I type this. So future downloads of the mod will be correct. I am also including the two missing bmp images and the 800X600 file into the both the Patch and the Full Version. Hopefully this will illiminate those conserns as well.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But Atrocities, you can upload full mod Version to PBW File Library yourself. After that make a post on the Admin Request section of pbw forum to install mod. Then cross your fingers in hope that one of the server admins will read your request http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif We will support you request with our votes for sure. That will be much better than to flood Geoschmo with emails.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Hi,

BlackRose: you said it yourself, it will complicate the game a lot.

So I have some other Treaty Rules:

Borg : only Non-agression, with only 1 race at the time
(Example: they did have some sort of pact with the Voyager once, so they are willing to coorporate sometimes if it is in their interest)

Dominion : only 1 Partnership or Military Alliance, rest is unlimited.
(Example: Dominion/Cardasian pact)

All other Major Races : only 2 Partnerships or Military Aliances, rest is unlimited. (Example: Federation/Romulan/Klingon pact against Dominion)

All Minor Races : only 1 Partnerships or Military Aliance, rest is unlimited.


And back to the ever on-going Intel discussion (in all the games I played, the same discussion http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

I think Intel is a must (for the Trek-flavor): Why do you guys/and woman think I choose the Romulan http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Inti,

[ April 11, 2004, 08:32: Message edited by: Intimidator ]

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But Atrocities, you can upload full mod Version to PBW File Library yourself. After that make a post on the Admin Request section of pbw forum to install mod. Then cross your fingers in hope that one of the server admins will read your request http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif We will support you request with our votes for sure. That will be much better than to flood Geoschmo with emails. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The mod is to large to upload to PBW. It has to be done by Geoschmo.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sorry Atrocities, I didn't know this. But from another hand, you can split archive into 2 parts...

Back to Intel Q: I suggest that you can increase 8472 Intel capabilities with Infiltrator project - just remember the 8472 Terrasphere with Starfleet Headquarters re-creation to train those nasty isomorphic spies. Just an idea, though.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Hello

What aboult shipsets for minor races, like Bajorans??

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Good question,

I tried to find anything, but nothing.
I guess you have to take on of the shipsets from an unused minor, or something you personally see fit as Bajoran. And change the race-portrait with the bajoran picture, and the flag etc..

And send it to me, I will see to it that everybody gets it.

Let me know.......


Intimidator

BTW. The Vulcan-shipset is available on the pbw-site.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Start with the DS9 set and work from there.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For those who have not see it yet. The latest patch 172 and full Version 172 are updated now so if you update now this should not be an issue. If you have updated all ready, that is prior to today, then you need the Fix.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Game : Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict.
Mod : Star Trek Mod v1.7.2
Turns : 48 hours.
Map : Will be send to everyone of you asap, but STAR TREK Universe map.
Events : Medium / Catastrophic.
Technology Cost : Medium
Score Display : Own


----Races:

Major Races: Good/Large Planet / 5000 Racial points

8472 : Aiken
Borg : Petra
Breen : Atrocities
Cardassian : Tnarg
Dominion : Renegade 13
Federation : Annika
Ferengi :
Klingons : Alarikf
Orions : Tomecki
Romulans : Intimidator
Tholians : BlackRose

Minor Races: Good/Medium Planet / 2000 Racial points

Bajoran : Kiedryn
Vulcan : Dizzycow
Gorn :
Nausicaan:
Sheliak :
Kazon : Ragnorak-X
Vaadwaur :
Hirogen :


----Empire setup rules:

1. Planet and Atmosphere type from standard setup.
2. Every major race must pick up its own race culture.
3. Every major race must have their planet type world natives trait and their racial technology trait.
4. Happiness type from standard setup: ie, Renegades for 8472.
5. Everything else is to player's discretion.


----Intelligences limitations rules:

**8472**

Counter Intellegence 1-2
Crew Insurrection

**Borg**

Counter Intellegence 1

**Breen**

Counter Intellegenc 1-3

**Cardassian**

Counter Inteligence 1-3
Intellegence Sabotage
Ship Bomb
Engine Damage
Fuel Leak
Cargo Bomb


**Dominion**

Counter Intel 1-2
Infiltrator
Population Destabilization
Political Assassination
Anarchy Groups
Industrial Sabotage
Communications Mimic
Crew Inssurection


**Federation**

Counter Intel 1
Communications Taps
Embassy Taps

**Ferengi**

Counter Intel 1
Economic Dissruption
Resource Procurment
Trade Disruption

**Klingon**

Counter Intel 1-2


**Orion**

Counter Intel 1-2
Planet Bomb
Planet Sabotage
Terrorist Bombing


**Romulan**

Counter Intel 1-3
Biological Weapon Deployment
Political Assassination
*Entire General Espionage File*
Weather Disruption
Ground Contamination
Food Contamination
Cargo Maintenance Problems
Communications Taps
Communications Interceptors


**Tholian**

Counter Intel 1-3


**All Minors**

Counter Intel 1-2


**Bajoran**

Political Assassination
Industrial Sabotage


----Treaty Rules:

Borg : only Non-agression, with only 1 race at the time
(Example: they did have some sort of pact with the Voyager once, so they are willing to coorporate sometimes if it is in their interest)

Dominion : only 1 Partnership or Military Alliance, rest is unlimited.
(Example: Dominion/Cardasian pact)

All other Major Races : only 2 Partnerships or Military Aliances, rest is unlimited. (Example: Federation/Romulan/Klingon pact against Dominion)

All Minor Races : only 1 Partnerships or Military Aliance, rest is unlimited.


----Stellar Manupilation

You can use all of these techs except Warp point opening/closing.


Sofar all the rules !!
Let me know if there are any question, remarks or new ideas.

Intimidator

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

We Still need an Ferengi and some minors, please join if you like Roll playing in a Star Trek setting.

Inti,

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Question: How are we going to get the player positions on the map correct? Are we all going to have to join the game in a specific order to be able to get the starting positions correct? Or is there some way the game host can set start positions that I'm not aware of?

And thanks a lot Intimidator for setting this game up. It should be a real good one. (Especially because I get some good intel attacks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Rules and everything else looks great http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I was wondering when you thought of treaties, what I was trying to avoid was the massive amounts of Trade Alliances and T&R Alliances that are so benificial, are those limited as well?

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Intimidator, please check your email.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes. The game host can assign all players to the empire slots on PBW in order instead, as long as he has the exact player account names of all players.

[ April 12, 2004, 01:15: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

I'm getting a bit confused here...with all these settings, are they going to be turned off in the game setup so we don;t have to worry about "accidentally" using/doing/researching one?

I mean, that's a lot of intel limitations, but unless it's turned off in the game setup, I can *totally* see myself not rememreing them. I'm in a number of games, and, well, I don't have a superb memory...

Also, I'd like to question the utility of setting artifical limitations on what empires can do with intel. I myself don;t use it much if at all, but, well, it;s hard to think of a good reason why the klingsons are liited to counter-intel 2 while other s can go higher...after all, you can;t force people to role-play and, well, there should be some sense of "what if," no?

just my $.02

thanks,

Alarik

(and I remain a belevier in having someone make a quickie map up so we don;t all have the "ancient race" trait...it's really easy to make a map with the game, then save it, and then very slightly modify it to change system names and place players and delete a few warp points to get the borg and 8472 to fight, etc...)

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

If I had $.02, I'd spend it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...35113?v=glance
You had better hurry while supplies Last. I have one and they are quite cool.

I have the following
Enterprise (TOS)
Enterprise A
Enterprise D
BOP
D7 (TOS)
Romulan Warbird (TOS)

Very very cool.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well I think that was the game that Intimidator wanted when he called for players, was a as realistic as posible trek universe, one which Klingons were not known for thier sabatoge/espionage prowess http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Same goes for the map. As far the intel goes I was just going on my opinions re trek, taking into account intel operations vs Klingons which we knew to be successful also minding that certain races nothing materialized, ie Tholians, Breen, Dominion etc. Its not totally balanced but in a way it is http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif As far as the rules go all you ahve to remember is Counter Intel lvls 1 and 2 and your set http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Okay I'm back Online again. It's a pitty that I life 7 hours later than the most of you, so comms. are a bit slow. But I have done my reading again, so here are my comments:

Alarikf: I understand your problems with Intel, but as BlackRose said it is his view on Star Trek Intel (which I share). If you think that you (the Klingons) should have another Intel-ops. Let me know. And the only thing you have to do to remember is stick a note on your monitor with 'Klingon: counter Intel 1-2 only' http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

BlackRose: I want everybody to be free in Trade and Trade & Research Treaties, but are hoping that all of us keep remembering their Trek-Role (example: Dominion will not trade a lot,they are too arrogant to want other people's rescources and Klingons aren't famous about their research capabilites so an trade & research treaty will not be common etc etc....)

Renegade 13: As soon as everybody signed up I can change the starting points in the map according to pbw-player-setup or something like that. If there is another way please let me know !!

Tnarg: I read your mail, will you contact asap!

Intimidator,


BUT I STILL WANT PLAYERS. FERENGI, Nausicaan, Gorn, Hirogen, Vaadwaur.... or even you want Trill, Betazoid, Mintaken or even the f**king Bandi it's all up to you.....................

[ April 12, 2004, 11:42: Message edited by: Intimidator ]

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Well, it's not so much that I feel that the Klingons should have more counter-intel levels (although I do) it's just that I find it strange to "guide" the role playing. Takes away the "what if." And there is the fact that the stock klingon race has bonuses to intelligence, so, they're good at it..but they can't do counter-intel level 3?

Anyways, really, I', not complaining about the klingons. I just prefer the "self-organizing" role playing that occurs rather than trying to guide people into taking the expected "canon" actions.

I remain concerned about using the stock map. Really, it's easy to generate a map and then, in 30 minutes, modify it so you get the same effect...

but I'll shut up now and wait for the game to start...

thanks!

Alarik

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Ah, Ok, I lied, not quite shutting up. I just read your statement below to Renegade 13. The map thing is easy to do. There are really only a few characteristics of the stock trek map that are easily replicated. These are along the lines of: feds, klingons, and romulans are relatively close. Dominion is distant, and has a long distance wp connected to them - which terminates closer to the Cardassian region. Borg and 8472 are close to each other. and each race's homeworld has a specific name.

So, what one could do is start a trek game and generate a large paradise type map with 255 systems. Save that map. It will be very similar to the basic map, just without the above modifications.

Then, place the players starting positions as above. Rename their home systems. add a long distance WP that ends up close to the dominions and cardassia. delete a few wps to force the borg and 8472 to force them to compete for resources and warp lines. Voila! Map is done. Save it, and start the game, just making sure that people join (or are assigned) in the proper order to ensure that they end up in their homesystems (it would be weird for the klingons to end up in Sol, no?)

You know, if you want, I can bow out of the game and make this map in a jiffy. I could stay in, if you wanted - even after making the map - but then people would have to trust me that I didn't look at it (I wouldn't!)...

Ok, now, I really am shutting up.

thanks,

Alarik

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"> <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">
Yes. The game host can assign all players to the empire slots on PBW in order instead, as long as he has the exact player account names of all players.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">All I know about starting positions is what Fyron told me in the above reply to my original question. I don't exactly know what he means, but I've never created a game before only joined, so....that's about all I can say about that.

And Alarikf, I think its fine leaving the map as is, because sooner or later, because of partnerships, or map trades etc, everyone will know almost all of the map anyways. So as long as no one player has knowledge of the map that the other players don't, there's really no reason why everyone couldn't know what it is beforehand is there? Besides the obvious aspect of exploration which is kinda fun. Or am I missing something here?

[ April 12, 2004, 15:42: Message edited by: Renegade 13 ]

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Hi!
So my students are connected to some really tough stones!
Now i have time to do some chatting here. I want to say some points about intel and the federation. I do agree that they do not have the desire, out of the philisophy of ufp, to make some agresive intel actions. embassy taps, comm taps and perhaps census theft and the one projects concerning spying on plaets and ships i think would be the best for the federration to use. But i strongly object that federation intelligence is only capable of counter intel I.
In kirk´s time there is to be named
"operation dixie" which succsessfully penetrated klingon space and spied on the klingon navy and facilities. This is the most important operations to save federation butt in the seven yeaqrs war( okay perhaps a bit before kirk came). The federation maintains along the borders of the neutral zone some advanced sensor phalanxes with extensive intel capabilities. Lets jump to the present ds9 and star trek timeline! I do only say section 31! an intel branch inside starfleet intel itself. If i look at the series, i do remember very tigh intel operations concerning watching for founders, fleet operations ect. ect. therefore i think starfleet should at least have c.i. level II if not III. Their counter espionage is very effective, their offensive espionage is well, lets look better at our heroes like sisko and picard and of course "captain" troy.

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

Well, I think there is also some impact on strategy and builds and so forth...and there is the nasty possibility that since everyone knows where everyone else's homeworld is, a player could outfit a long range warfleet on turn one, travel to their mortal enemies' system, and nuke their homeworld in the first 5 turns of the game. I wouldn't do that, cause it's unsporting and boring, but, still, having homeworld locations known is a pretty big thing, IMHO.

there are other implications: if I know where habitable systems are, then I probably will be able to maximize the effecieincy of my colonization. Why build scout ships, if I know where all the planets are already? If I know where the black holes are, I need never lose a ship to them...

And, well, exploration *is* fun!

In any case, I am in no matter what we decide...

really really shutting up now.

thanks,

Alarik
AKA Kirala of Klingon

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

Re: Star Trek, Quadrants of Conflict
 

At game start there are 255 unconnected circles scattered throughout the map, as the map designer, I myself can't even remember which each one represents unless I look at the map in the map editor. So it is truly a matter of what one wants to get out of the game.

If you want to explore and make the most out of the game, don't look at the map in the editor. If you want to be unsporting and out for blood in a role played game, then look at the map and take the fun out. Simple. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I am not playing this game to win, I am playing to rewrite Cardassian history and enjoy every Last turn. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif