Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

Actually I think Religious has become a disadvantage because every game I've played in the Last six month has had the religious player suffer a coalition against him.

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

I agree with the "almost a disadvantage" PoV. The games I play are always with "Can only colonize atmosphere type." option in the game setup (which obviously affects my PoV). This means that there are NO gas giants I can colonize (yes, I am still trying to eek out a living amongst the moons) and production can be seriously hampered (the population production / construction bonuses are NICE) unless I am lucky with the map. Great use of units and the proliferation of SS construction yards in my empire nicely balances it though. If one does not mind utilizing units extensively, the extra moons (which often outnumber the possible gas giants with a breathable atmosphere for other races) are perfect. Also, with one or two trustworthy allies, moons can make great supplemental defences for an ally's planet.

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This from the person who claims PPBs are balanced. Out with it, Geo, you're really Aaron, aren't you.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, I am not Aaron. I just play a lot of games on PBW so I don't jump on the bandwagon every time someone claims to find the super secret formula for SEIV success. I have learned they all have their weaknesses. To me actual proof is worth a lot more than any theory or scads of charts and formula. If PPB, tailsman, or multiple training facilities were the nirvana they all were claimed by various people, then everybody would be doing them, or at least everybody that won games would be doing them. And I can tell you from experience everybody doesn't do them, and those that do them don't always win.

I never said PPB are perfectly balanced. I think they might be a little cheap to research, and at level 3 they are a bit strong IIRC. But overall they aren't the uber waepon that people claim them to be. They are simply too short ranged and too expensive to be the ultimate weapon. Those are huge weaknesses that are easily countered.

Geoschmo

[ December 20, 2002, 22:17: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why?

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

I would say the None races, with Rock/None being generally better the Ice/None, have little advantage over other races, unless you play the players can only colonize their own atmosphere type (None). In this case, they have more potential sites for building shipyards than any other races (other races will need more orbital shipyards). However, the None player will have very few worlds that can utilize planet bonuses, because what good is +20% bonus if you have to give up one of your 5 facilities to get it. None worlds are smaller and thus easier to take out (fewer weapons platforms possible).

[ December 20, 2002, 12:50: Message edited by: LGM ]

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

Well, to get back to the original topic...

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

I guess I was in a bad mood Last night. I also hadn't considered how a Rock/None race would deal with getting the Gas/None and Ice/None techs. I can see where that's their counter-balance, now. They give a good start, but beyond that...

Thanks for the perspectives, guys. I see it in a totally different light, now.

--Ed

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

Religious isn't nearly as big an advantage when more than one player takes it, either. In one of my PBW games, we've got 3 Religious races and 1 Ancient race, out of 5 players. I remember another PBW game where the first three empires I met lived on Gas Giants.

Things go in and out of fashion, as opponents find countermeasures, and people get tired of playing the same race every game.

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">To avoid arguments, I don’t do this anymore. However, I do see it as plausible from a role-play point of view. Either it's non-stop intensive training, or the crew is split up into Groups so they all get a crack at the training. The end result is more rapid training -- not better training.

Training facilities is a technology a militaristic race would love. If Klingon's actually existed, I'm sure there'd be training facilities on every moon. Non-stop training, yeah.

[Insert you favorite Kligonese statement here]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, except that there is no reason why having a moon would help training at all. Being able to build more training facilities in one spot is one thing, but that's not allowed... unless you have a moon. Makes zero sense. Also, since moons are also (unrealistically) rare, it also nonsensically limits the systems where this nonsensical technique can be done. It also can't be done until the race has enough colonization tech to colonize both the planet and the moon in a particular sector. None of that has any sensible explanation. I don't object to the idea that you could build more extensive training facilities in one place and get better training, but the restrictions on where this can or can't be done make zero sense, and also introduce a silly reason for trying to get a moon (or better, two moons) and its planet colonized together. It just doesn't make any sense.

PvK

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Balderdash. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif If the tailsman were such a tremendous advantage, how come out of 6 original tailsman races in Furball 3, only 1 is still a viable empire and he is in trouble? And that was a ten planet high tech start. If ever a game was tailor made for the supremacy of the tailsman this was it. And they have performed dismally. No offense intended to the players that chose it. Just calling it as I see it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Come up with all your reasons and explanations, but in practice they just don't hold up.

Geoschmo</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Probably because the players didn't manage to develop it or exploit it. As I think I said, it's only a huge advantage once it gets to that point. But at that point, it is a huge advantage. Especially in an unmodded game in the late-tech stage, where most people have access to the same things, and hitting at long range is fairly difficult, except for talisman players, who hit all the time. The players have to be skilled enough to realize how to take advantage of it well, which isn't all that hard, and they do have to surivive to that point. But once there, it's a massive advantage. Not always insurmountable. The real counter, as I and others have written before, is coalitions against them. Diplomacy is often the most powerful part of the game, perhaps second to skill vs. newbie-ism.

PvK

Re: "Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races
 

You are correct Pvk, but you are proving my point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif It's the skill of the player that makes the difference, not the uber weapon or tactic. I don't agree it's unbalenced. I used to, but after some success against it recently I am no longer convinced.

I am not saying it's not a nice thing to be able to hit every time, of course it is. I am simply saying it's not the ultimate weapon. If it were then a less skilled player could use it and be victorious.

As far as Furball 3 is concerned though, it was a high tech start and six of the twelve races were religious races. Those two factors should have compensated for the two biggest weaknesses of the tailsman. It's cost to research and the tendancy for players to gang up on religious races. But despite this the Religious races are all but dead.

In the DimX2 game I faced an opponent who was highly skilled and used the Tailsman to it's utmost potential. For a short time he was effectivly holding off a four empire coalition. But I believe Mark to be a highly skilled player and believe he would have done very well in the game even if he had chosen another racial trait.

Geoschmo

[ December 21, 2002, 21:18: Message edited by: geoschmo ]