.com.unity Forums - A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=9908)

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

You cannot control your opponents. You can play a perfect game with the talisman and still lose.

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Quote:

Originally posted by rdouglass:
IF, sometimes I am totally amazed at the logic you use to justify your position. It doesn't matter what you say, you CAN do everything perfectly and still lose with the Talisman. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

I have a feeling that his statments aren't based on logic this time. Perhaps this is one of those times he's playing the devil's advocate. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif
Geoschmo

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Well, you can try to buy time with diplomacy as I've done myself a few times, but I would argue that that only works with inexperienced players or with players who aren't really in it for the win. I guess it's also easier to do on a map with lower player density. If I'm playing in a game where I want to compete I will do everything I can possibly can to bring down a religious player before he gets the Talisman, and have generally found it easy to assemble/encourage coalitions and knock those zealots off early.

[ July 14, 2003, 21:27: Message edited by: gravey101 ]

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Quote:

IF, sometimes I am totally amazed at the logic you use to justify your position. It doesn't matter what you say, you CAN do everything perfectly and still lose with the Talisman.

I never once said that having the Talisman guarantees victory. But, playing well (with fast expansion and such) combined with the Talisman does guarantee victory in most game situations (except when you get the other players to ally against you, which is nowhere near playing well at all, as diplomacy is a big part of a MP game). Playing well requires expanding faster than your neighbors and then being able to overwhelm them. Otherwise, it is not playing well, but at best playing adequately. Even expanding as fast as them means you will still most likely be able to win with the Talisman because all else being equal, the Talisman ships will win in combat. You just have to form your own alliance and not get them to gang up on you. If you expand slower than them, you are certainly not playing well.

There is a certain point of no return that once you reach, victory is pretty much guaranteed. The Talisman makes reaching this point a lot easier, as your ships are extremely overpowered in combat.

Quote:

What does the things you do have to do with whether the other players are going to gang up on you or not?

You can talk to them and use diplomacy to get some of them on your side. This prevents you from getting ganged up on by a bunch of enemies, as they will have to fight your allies too. So, if you make no effort to gather allies, you aren't playing the game very well, as no matter what, you will fall, talisman or no. Don't let them ally against you. Don't be an overly aggressive evil overlord, and you greatly increase your chances of not being seen as a huge threat. Now, if they still irrationally gang up on you and you never do anything in the game to threaten them, it is probably not a group of players you should play with again, as they are not interested in fair play, only winning at any cost.

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

[quote]Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

Quote:

Now, if they still irrationally gang up on you and you never do anything in the game to threaten them, it is probably not a group of players you should play with again, as they are not interested in fair play, only winning at any cost.

If the talisman more or less guarantees a win for the talisman player unless his is ganged up on, it is not irrational to gang up on him. Nor is it "unfair" to do so - in fact, it should be expected.

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I never once said that having the Talisman guarantees victory.

Correct, and noone here said you said it did. Why bring in unrelated comments like that at all? They just clutter up the discussion. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
But, playing well (with fast expansion and such) combined with the Talisman does guarantee victory in most game situations (except when you get the other players to ally against you,

Well now, this is a few orders of magnitude less of an absulute statement then "Used correctly, the Talisman is an impossible trait to defeat." It is difficult to have a debate if you change your position in the middle with no warning. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
which is nowhere near playing well at all, as diplomacy is a big part of a MP game). Playing well requires expanding faster than your neighbors and then being able to overwhelm them. Otherwise, it is not playing well, but at best playing adequately.

You are still going to have to explain to me how you can control the speed your opponent expands, excepting contested systems of course. You can play the best game you have ever played in your life, in fact you can play the second best game in the history of SE4 and still be behind you opponnent. And this somehow you define as not playing well? that makes no sense at all.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

Even expanding as fast as them means you will still most likely be able to win with the Talisman because all else being equal, the Talisman ships will win in combat.

Again correct, and again no one made this claim. But getting into fights against a tailsman player where all else is equal is suicide. The same could be said of anything in the game.
All else being equal, the player with dreadnaughts will defeat the player with frigates every time.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
You just have to form your own alliance and not get them to gang up on you.

As Gravey said, you can try. But you can't guarantee this. It depends on the experience of your opponents. If they are aware of teh effectivness of the Tailsman you will have an alliance of one, and that ain't gonna get you too far.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

If you expand slower than them, you are certainly not playing well.

See above.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

There is a certain point of no return that once you reach, victory is pretty much guaranteed. The Talisman makes reaching this point a lot easier, as your ships are extremely overpowered in combat.

Can't disagree with this, but I don't think anyone here was trying too. And it's again a far cry from your earlier unconditional declaration.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

You can talk to them and use diplomacy to get some of them on your side. This prevents you from getting ganged up on by a bunch of enemies, as they will have to fight your allies too. So, if you make no effort to gather allies, you aren't playing the game very well, as no matter what, you will fall, talisman or no. Don't let them ally against you. Don't be an overly aggressive evil overlord, and you greatly increase your chances of not being seen as a huge threat.

Again you are talking about things totally out of your control and saying that you aren't playing well. That makes no sense.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Now, if they still irrationally gang up on you and you never do anything in the game to threaten them, it is probably not a group of players you should play with again, as they are not interested in fair play, only winning at any cost.

And what's irrational about ganging up on the Tailsman player? If you intend to even try to win it's irrational not to gang up on them and get them out early because as you said yourself allowing them to Last till the point of no return is a pretty sure way to guarantee you will lose. Allying with the tailsman player is a sure way to guarantee second place at best. And who want's to be second? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Geoschmo

[ July 14, 2003, 22:01: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Again, diplomacy is a very big part of the game. Have you ever heard of the team victory? The talisman player does not have to destroy everyone. His allies can very well win too. Your statements about the players all wanting to defeat the talisman so they do not lose is incorrect because if they ally with the talisman player, they will be quite capable of winning the game (assuming their alliance emerges victorious). They do not have to fight their allies later on.

It has nothing to do with controlling the other players, it has to do with using diplomacy to get some of them on your side. Failing on the diplomatic front means you are not playing well, as diplomacy is a big part of playing the game.

Quote:

Well now, this is a few orders of magnitude less of an absulute statement then "Used correctly, the Talisman is an impossible trait to defeat."

No, that is exactly the same as what I said before because it is illustrating correct usage.

Quote:

You are still going to have to explain to me how you can control the speed your opponent expands

No I am not, as I never said nor implied that you could.

Quote:

You can play the best game you have ever played in your life, in fact you can play the second best game in the history of SE4 and still be behind you opponnent. And this somehow you define as not playing well? that makes no sense at all.

That is not what I said at all. I never said nor implied that you can not lose if you are playing well. Since you are missing my point and instead focusing on the term "playing well" instead of the actual content of the argument, let us replace it with "playing better" in this instance.

If the best game of your life leaves you far behind the competition, you need more practice.

Quote:

Again correct, and again no one made this claim. But getting into fights against a tailsman player where all else is equal is suicide. The same could be said of anything in the game.
All else being equal, the player with dreadnaughts will defeat the player with frigates every time.

That is a rather contrived example, as the difference in magnitude is far greater than that between talisman vs. non-talisman.

Quote:

As Gravey said, you can try. But you can't guarantee this. It depends on the experience of your opponents. If they are aware of teh effectivness of the Tailsman you will have an alliance of one, and that ain't gonna get you too far.

Only if you fail to convince anyone to ally with you. Awareness of the effectiveness of the Talisman will also allow them to be able to see that the talisman player would be a strong ally, as long as you tell them this. And, I never said you could guarantee getting allies.

Quote:

Again you are talking about things totally out of your control and saying that you aren't playing well. That makes no sense.

No, what you say to other players is entirely within your control. It is entirely possible to gather allies in any game, if you are persuasive enough and if they have not already agreed to band together before you start trying to convince some of them to ally with you. If that happens, then either you have not met them yet and there is no chance of convincing them after they have already formed an alliance, or you are not doing very well with diplomacy, which relates back to not playing the game very well.

Quote:

And what's irrational about ganging up on the Tailsman player? If you intend to even try to win it's irrational not to gang up on them and get them out early because as you said yourself allowing them to Last till the point of no return is a pretty sure way to guarantee you will lose.

The other rational possibility is to ally with the talisman player. You will only lose if you are their enemy. Being their ally will allow you to win (assuming the alliance wins). SE4 is not a one on one slugfest, you know (unless a game is specifically set up that way, which is well beyond the scope of this discussion).

Quote:

Allying with the tailsman player is a sure way to guarantee second place at best. And who want's to be second?

Those that do not have such a huge ego that they only consider being in 1st place as worth their time for winning. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ July 14, 2003, 22:36: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imperator Fyron on July 14, 2003 21:37:
I never said nor implied that you can not lose if you are playing well.

Are you sure about that? Especially considering:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imperator Fyron on July 14, 2003 21:00:
Used correctly, the Talisman is an impossible trait to defeat.

Considering that if you aren't using your stuff correctly, you aren't playing well, that sure sounds like you are implying you can not lose if you are playing well with the Talisman - you are almost saying it outright.

I suspect I'm not the only one who reads the excerpt from Fyron's post at 21:00 that way - would someone confirm this suspicion?

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Obviously you are confused about my statements. Nothing I have said implies that it is impossible to lose if playing well with the talisman.

Re: A thought on the Talisman / Live on Pay-Per-View: Geo vs. Fyron

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Obviously you are confused about my statements. Nothing I have said implies that it is impossible to lose if playing well with the talisman.

I'm willing to entertain the notion that I am confused; why don't you explain how the 21:00 quote I dug up doesn't imply that it is impossible to lose if playing well with the talisman, rather than just outright contradicting my observation?