PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

THIS THREAD IS MAINLY FOR THE PLAYERS IN NEWBIE GALACTIC COMBAT 2 AT THE PBW SITE.
As the game forum is somewhat hard to access I've decided to hold this discussion here at the shrapnel forum.

Hi everyone and thanks for your patience this Last week.

I am hosting Newbie Galactic Combat II. The game is set up in a very large galaxy with 200+ systems and originally 19 players, and currently 16 active human controlled empires.

Initially I was very pleased that the empty slots that came up when someone quit where filled within hours. Many games goes days and weeks without finding replacements.
After I while I started getting 4 e-mails bounced when sending out news from the game, they where bounced as their e-mail provider thought that the mails where spam as they where receiving more than one identical mail.
Their e-mail provider was a Russian free provider equalent to Yahoo or Hotmail. So nothing to put much importance to.

But when I started looking into it I discovered several russian playes in the game and none of them where at war with each other. Most where having partnerships and sharing tech even though they where in the game widely apart from each others.
So I halted the game and sent out an identical mail to all players in the game asking if they knew any other player in the game prior to joining the game and if their in-game alliances where based upon in-game events or externally influenced.

From below one can see that only two of the 7 players from a small area in Siberia knew eachothers previous to joining the game.
Location of players are mostly based upon IP adresses. Tomsknet and Novosibirsk are local IP providers in that area only.
Tomsk and Novosibirsk are neighbour cities in Siberia, Russia.

PLAYER - EMPIRE - LOCATION - (Stated pre-game contact) - e mail response -joined turn
Darklord........ Ghouls.......... Russia, Siberia, Tomsk.. (0).. 3 days.. 17
Sergetti........ Blacky.......... Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk.. (-).. -.. 13
Romulans........ Dark ATM........ Russia, Siberia, Tomsk.. (0).. 4 days.. 59
Els Homes..... ..Winter.......... Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk.. (Stalin).. 3 days.. 20
Terran Galactic. Mao Dzedun...... Russia, Siberia, Tomsk.. -.. surrended.. 54
Sons of Thunder. Joker........... Russia, Siberia, Tomsk.. (0).. 5 days.. 12
Traders of Yard. Alex Reaper..... Russia, Siberia, Tomsk.. (0).. 3 days.. 7
CCCP............ Stalin.......... Russia, Siberia, .. (Winter).. 3 days.. 0

Weyrlings....... Ruatha.......... Sweden, Linköping.. (Greybeard).. 0 days.. 0
Jophur.......... Martuk.......... Spain, Barcelona.. (0).. 1 days.. 0
Nyran........... birt............ Ukraina, Kiev.. (0).. 4 days.. 52
Earth Alliance.. Ragnarok........ America,-.. (+).. 1 days.. 50
Thermoilans..... Thermodyne...... US, DC Burbs.. (0).. 0 days.. 0
Fire Geckos..... Gecko........... US, Pennsylvania.. (0).. 1 days.. 0
Argon........... Greybeard....... US, Kansas, Overl Park.. (Ruatha).. 1 days.. 0
Zax............. tbontob......... Canada, AB, Edmonton.. (0).. 1 days .. 0
Draven.......... CaptRR.......... US, Va, Norfolk.. (0).. 2 days.. 0

I and Greybeard had played in one Newbie game previous to this, in that game we where enemies
and I died http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
So in this game I hoped to win http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

One reply I’ve got from a siberian player stated that the alliances was made in-game but based on former CCCP countries,
that is not a decision based upon in-game events.

When the Terrans quit the game they surrendered to their in-game neighbour, the Nyrans while
not being at war with them. NGC2 game rules states no surrendering.

-------------------
So, from what has been stated above you may draw your own conclusions.
Some might belive that there are 7 empires currently controlled from Siberia but not 7 actual players, that is my current suspicion.

I have thought some during this Last week about what to do about the current situation.
As I see it there are several options.

1. I kick 7 players from the game which originally had 19 players. This will mean that those empires that are located in the west of the map will only have AI empires as neighbours, they might in that case be playing a single player game and will miss out of the multiplayer part of the game.

2. I split the game into two identical games with 9 players in one and 7 in another, the same problem as above.

3. I delete the game.

4. I withdraw from the game.

5. I quit hosting the game, transferring ownership of it to someone still playing.

6. We continue as we have so far.

7. We continue and make a great war of 7 vs 9 players, fun but not what I intended with the game.

Currently I'm not having very fun in this game due to these suspicions I'm having.
This saddens me some as I've been writing an in-game story and has really enjoyed the interaction with my co-authors.
So right now I'm thinking of taking the easiest way out and withdrawing from the game. If someone not from Siberia chooses to remain in the game and wishes me to stay on as host I will do that but otherwise I'll transfer that to someone else who wishes to be host.
Leaving the game will mean that I can concentrate on the other PBW games I'm participating in and perhaps spend even more time with my kids which they will appreciate http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Nothing of all this is written in stone!
Now I'm asking for your opinions and ideas;
What do you think we should do now?
I'm open to all ideas and input.
If you have something you don't wish to discuss openly my mailbox is as always open and your mails and my responses will not be public unless you state so.

To keep things in perspective; Remember that it's only a game, aaltough one that some of us has spent several months playing.

Your Host in NGC2

Ruatha (James)

You will all receive a mail with a link to this topic.

[ March 14, 2003, 11:55: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

For the record:
Ruatha has been, and remains, an impeccable PBW game host. For PBW to function, two elements are required: trust and fun. NGC2 has ceased to have either attribute for me, for exactly the same reasons Ruatha has stated. At this point, I believe the game is irretrievably bollixed and not worth a recovery effort.

The only reasons I have not withdrawn from the game before now is:
I wanted to provide every possible courtesy to an excellent host and my fellow, honest, players.
I wish to build a reputation in the PBW community as a consistently reliable player.

Ruatha, thank you for all your fine efforts in NGC2. I look forward to participating in any future game where you will be a host or a player.

Gecko

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

I may not always be the swiftest nail in the drawer, but 7 people in one game, who all live in the same, very remote part of Russia, sounds awfully wrong.

The game is still relatively new (just above 60+ turns), so I say boot 'em out. I'm willing to come in as a replacement, and i'm sure others are too.

Trust your gut, Ruatha.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

I also have the utmost respect for Ruatha and he has done a great job hosting this game.

I agree with all of the remarks made by Geckomlis.

This game seems to be too far gone to be viable. It was really fun early, but not any longer. I have made partnerships with almost everyone except the "soviet block players" to fend off intel attacks every turn, and have still lost 4-5 ships to mutiny every turn. I expect that several of the players who quit did so because of the "tone" the game was taking. Even if the offenders are removed, I already have seen most of the map and know everyone's position. Most of the exploration aspect is gone.

Personally, it would be better to start a similar game with the clean players and others who would like to join. The game concept is great.

Finally, have you discussed this with Geoschmo? IIRC, it is against PBW rules for a person to have more than one account. The offenders should be Banned from PBW.

Looking forward to starting a new game...Greybeard

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

So much for Perestroika. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif
It may be the cold war all over again!!!

But, if I may suggest:

Make lemonade out of lemons, people. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif What do you think of setting up another PBW game in good will, allowing a Russia vs. the US scenario, 8 vs. 8?

Kind of like when Rocky fought Ivan Drago? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

I'm interested in playing either the new game or existing.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Actually I'll prefer to remain neutral, I'm from Spain and I have not been affected by this alliances ... (crossing fingers) But I admit that after that accusations the game have lost most of it's interest, that is not war, but diplomacy. Martuk

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Hi all.
If I don't get any information or ideas to change my mind before tomorrow sunday I will delete the game.

This discussion hasn't come up with any viable alternatives.

I'm sorry about all this and I can understand if you feel a bit upset that a game that you have played for months is cancelled, still, I see no alternatives.

I hope to see some of you in other PBW games in the future.
I'm not sure I'll start another Galactic Combat game, but as I like big maps and many players I just might. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

James (Ruatha)

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

It's sad to see this game go down the drain, so to speak. As a replacment I had a fun time trying to figure out the empire I was running and basically start from scratch.

It's really a shame that a couple people who can't stand losing, or love cheating, can bring the game to its end with hardly any effort.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

I'm not totally convinced all of them where aware of what they where doing.
Take Stalin who runs the CCCP for example. I don't see anything pointing to him playing more than one empire.
To build an alliance based upon out of game considerations might be considered bad style but that's not cheating. Still the end of this game will be the same, together they are unstoppable and it's just a matter of time.
In any other game I host I'll be more clear in stating what is allowed and what is not before the game starts.
And I'll be checking up on all replacements after this.

Still, it was good having the chance to host a game. And it was fun interactioning with you all, you too Rags, you fitted in well in your role as the Earth Alliance.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Hmmmm.

I am not usually suspicious of things, but the fact that 7 players come from a small local in Russian is exceedingly suspicious.

Complicating matters is the fact that the 7 players took so long to reply to Ruatha's e-mail. Most of the other players answered within a day or two.

Worse, all 7 players seem to share the same local IP provider.

Worse still, all 7 players are in either Novosibirsk or Tomsk. Even more damaging is that they are sister cities.

And from what I can see, none of the seven players have stepped up to explain what has happened.

It can be argued that some of the evidence is circumstantial. But circumstantial or not, it is damaging.

Ruatha, up till now, this game was fun. A lot of fun.

And I loved being a participant in the in-game story. That was new, unique and challenging.

But now it isn't. Even if Ruatha should decide to continue as the host, I am not sure I would want to continue playing.

IMO, Ruatha has done an excellant job as the host of this game.

And yes, I am disappointed the game likely to be over. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif But much better to abort the game than to encourage this type of behaviour. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Even a face off between the East and the West would be a partial encouragement.

Similarly, IMO separate games would also be a partial encouragement.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Ok, now I understand what is happening, I must have missed the original explanation.

It sounds like the same guy, then again, it could be 7 friends. To be honest though, I think we could take them. Rutha, you and I have been in an alliance, and we always knew that a conflict with the CCCP was coming, some day, thats one of the reasons we were trying to court Greaybeard into the alliance, and also why we have been trying to take on the Terrens, while the CCCP is powerful, I think the Central Powers is just as good, even if we don't quite have the membership they do, however now that many people know whats going on, I'm sure that the Central Powers will be getting many more Allies http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . At least tempararally.

I say continue the game as it stands, and together with other players we can drive though the CCCP like a hot knife through butter. Imagine possibilities of a war that big.

Besides I need story material!!!

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

How I think game must be save. Hwo want to play -must play hwo not - must withdraw from game.
In this situation Game must be in fully avtomation turns.
If this game will delete that means your alliance to lose.
If not play and win to stronge.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

CaptRR.
I've thought about that.
For me, I could continue just to get story material.
But for the Geckos and the Zax it would be hard. They are pinned down surroudned by the enemy alliance.
The Argons are constantly being hit by 10+ intel attacks per turn, some ships lost every turn to crew conVersion. I calculated some turns ago that his enemies had approximately 1 million intel points per turn, most of which goes into intel attacks against him.

I do belive that we might have a very small chance of winning against them, but as Tbontob says, that would be condoning this kind of behaviour.
And I don't think we can get the kind of cooperation that they have developed.

As to them being friends? I've asked them and they deny knowledge of eachothers.
One option is to continue the game as small multiplayer (1-3 players) for the stories.

I'm sorry. But I just don't see the game surviving.
If you wish you can take over as host and then I'll continue as long as you do. But I can't accept the responsibility of allowing this situation to continue as present. I can as I said continue so that all effort you have put into the stories wont be lost.

Another option is to continue writing the stories freely from the game, spinning from the interaction between our stories.
If for example one of us writes of deafeat the other must follow that.
The CP might even go to war against the Zax in the future if the Zax wins against the FMA. Then we will have two sides of a war.
Or the CP might split up!

From what we've written I think that this would be a viable option.
I found it hard initially to cancel the game but then I've had a week to ponder the issue.

Now in retroperspective I see alot of settings that should have been different in this game and that will be changed in a next Galactic combat.
(No gifts or tech trade, no surrendering, show only own points, max alliance 2 players, 0 starting race points, win condition, player 1 300% more than player 2, huge universe, high tech cost)

[ March 16, 2003, 05:51: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ruatha, I can be naive at times, but I just don't buy their not knowing each other.

They don't know each other and seven players are from the same two sister cities?

What are the odds of that?

While not impossible, the odds of that happening by chance are very close to it.

So what are they hiding? If they will not explain what has happened, I can only conclude they are lying. And if they are lying, then why are they lying?

Worse case scenario. One player is playing seven races.

But it doesn't have to be seven. It need only be two.

One player playing 2 races (however disguised) is illegal.

For me, the game is hopelessly contaminated.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Hi Tbontob.
I essentially agree with you that the game is dead.
It's just hard letting go of the first game I've hosted, the first game where I've written an in-game story and the second game I've entered into in PBW.

I'll hear whith CaptRR first before I'll do anything else.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

CaptRR. You and I could continue against the AI to get story material?

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Well, it was fun. That was my first PBW game, but I must state that I want to play again ... But not with that suspicious situation. I know that we may ally ourselves against the CCCPs, and we may win, but ... I like diplomacy relations, not the war, war is necessary for the game but I think that the great thing of playing against other humans is to negotiate with them, without that, the game loses a whole dimension, and war is the only thing that is left in the game. I will play another game if it is hosted for you, Ruatha, you have been a great host and I like the idea of a inner game story, so warn me if you start another one like this.

Greetings from Barcelona to everyone

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Ok. If we do restart a new game. What settings should we have.
I'm thinking about these:
(It's alot (28 points) but I've learned to be specific)

1. No tech trading, No gifts/tributes. Only trading of materials. (This way we don't get high tech immediatly. It will be disabled)

2. Max alliances two players. (Military alliance or partnership), research and trade with how many tou like (This way we won't get superalliances, making it impossible to be a lone wolf. Now you still have achance on your own).

3. No Ai-mod (you don't have to worry that the AI will mes things up, the Ai has limited capacity, check bottom of this post)

4. Low tech start.

5. No surrendering.

6. Don't share comm channels or system maps.(More focus on individual exploration).

7. Always have a valid e-mail adress where the host can reach you.

8. Only own score is shown. (Use intel if you need more info on your neighbours)

9. 0 Starting race points. (harder to maximize and minimize racial traits.

10. Max.min of racial traits is allowed (if you want to do it you'll have to pay the prize by lowering something else)

11. Win condition 300% higher score than second player, starts after 80 turns. (Last man standing can take years, 300% then you're practicly set on the path to becoming Last man anyway)

12. High tech cost.

13. Intel allowed. (with max 1 partner we won't get ridicilus high intel points)

14. Max 100 mines/sector.

15. No omnipresent view. (explore)

16. Huge Galaxy (~255 systems, 1900+ planets) (I like it)

17. 20 players at start.

18. Retroseries are allowed. (If you want to pay for it use it)

19 . Roleplaying is encouraged as is in-game stories.

20. Absolutely no e-mail diplomacy prior to in-game contact.

21. Alliances are to be based upon in-game events and considerations only, no external friendship or such may come into play when deciding alliances.

22. Breaking the rules may result in a warning, or being kicked from the game. Depending on the nature and severity of the transgression. Decided by the host.

23. When uploading your empire mark wich shipset you are using. No duplicate shipsets allowed.

24. I will need an e-mail from each player before you are allowed to join.
(Please state wich players you know who has already entered the game and where you live.
It's ok to be friends with other players and to live near them. But be open with it so it won't rise questions later.)

25. When an empire becomes without player the host will go in and check that empire every fifth turn until a replacement i sfound. he will then see to it that the empire builds defences. He will not start or continue offensive actions.
in the case of a conflict between the hosts empire and the playerless empire the host must accept peace with that empire until a replacement has been found. (This is becouse of the No-Ai Mod)

26. The aim of this game is to have FUN.
If you see a fellow player making an obvious fatal mistake, alert them instead of taking advantage of it.

27. Total turtelling is forbidden!
(You may shut down worm-holes and build system gravitational shields but there must always be atleast one way to enter a system. If it doesn't have any worm-holes it can't have a system gravitational shield.
This goes for individual systems aswell as your entire empire.
You may shutdown all wormholes into your empire, then you may build system gravitational shields in all systems but one!)

28. Anything I've forgotten?



.No-Ai mod
One of the most frustrating things about playing Space Empires IV PBW, or any PBEM for that matter, is in the event you miss a turn, or if your turn file gets scrambled somehow, the ai will take your turn for you. As we all know the ai does a particularly awful job of handling things.

We all have horror stories I am sure. I was in a game once where the AI, broke several trade and research treaties, declared war on my closest neighbor, took control of my fleets in that system and wiped out three of his planets, not to mention filling my construction queues with worthless junk, and obsoleting and replacing all of my carefully thought out ship designs.

All his dirty work was done in one turn. But it took me 7 or 8 turns to undo the damage. Particularly because I was close to the limit on maintenance anyway, and loosing all that treaty income meant several ships being abandoned.

There is a setting in empire options "AI should not make changes during simultaneous games." As we all know, that does little or nothing to help the problem. Jimbob and I have come up with a solution. It involves replacing the files that control what the ministers do during your turn. More on how it does it later.

These files, will eliminate the problem as much as is possible. By using these files, the ai will NOT:
1. Obsolete your designs
2. Design new ships or units
3. Put ANYTHING in your construction queue
4. Become angry at other races, for ANY reason
5. Break existing treaties
6. Offer or accept new treaties
7. Declare war
8. Attack colonies of empires you are not at war with

Using these files the AI still MIGHT:
1. Fill your research queue if empty (I figured this is about the only thing it does decently)
2. Reply to Messages from other empires, but only to refuse any requests. (But I have modified the speech.txt file so that it is clear the refusals are coming from the AI and not the player)
3. Move your ships around somewhat
4. Attack colonies of Empires you are at war with.
5. Attack ships of Empires you are at war with.
6. Send colony ships that do not have previous orders.

It is very important that if that player leaves the game a human replacement is found. Turning them over to the ai will result in a useless do-nothing empire.

Do not use AI or Neutral players with this mod. It is not recommended that you allow the AI to take several turns for you using this mod. Basically it is for short term absences. It will continue doing nothing during a long term absence, and that could be worse than letteing the normal Ai run things for you.

Geoschmo


I will mail all of you who have shown interest when this game comes closer to reality.
(All non russians in NGC2)

Ruatha

[ March 16, 2003, 15:05: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Well, It looks like I've been overrulled. With so many people dropping, the game just wouldn't be fun anymore, which is a real shame since we all put alot of work into it.

A new game would be interesting, but then again I don't think we should go overboard imposing alot of new rules. Part of the fun of PBW is the openness to make alliances, share tech to work for a common interest, basiclly all the things you could do in the real world.

I will continue to submit to the story, I guess without the restrictions of the game I could get some pretty interesting concepts going. The story people will have to keep in contact with each other so we don't step on each others shoes. Maybee make a long term plan, for say the life of our chracters. I'm even thinking of starting a story prequal to the game, I hinted in my stories that there were some incidents between the Dravens and Weyrlings before the alliance was formed, but I never went into much detail. It would make a pretty good story.

I guess I'll start looking for a new game too, maybee a proportions game, been playing the mod for a while and it looks like it would be fun in PBW.

Once again I hate to see the game get screwed up it was alot of fun, and my first PBW game, I loved the deplomacy part of the game, even If I wasn't that good of a player.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

well. I thought you where a good player, we where all newbies!

As to alot of rules. I belive that we got advanced tech way to early in NGC2. And I really like the exploring and diplomacy parts. I belive that our Central Powers alliance would have been to powerful if it hadn't been for the FMA allaince. I do belive we worked to good together and would have dominated (bragging a bit) and that wouldn't have been as fun as struggling to the top!
I lost my only completed PBW game but it was real fun anyway.

I'll mail you my future synopsis later tonight, what I have planned etc. I was thinking of posting it as the end to my story but if you'll continue writing so will I http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .
Now we only have to trick Tbontob into it aswell.
Should I continue running the turns with the Ai controlling ALL empires, and then mail you the the turn?
Then we will just have the events to write about but no way to actually control them, might be interesting!

[ March 16, 2003, 16:10: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

So I need to be tricked into playing? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I’ll take that as it was intended…a complement. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

I really would like to play another game hosted by Ruatha. From what I can gather, it has been a learning experience for him. It certainly has been for me.

I like the specific description of the settings. And while I may prefer some of them be set differently, I could live with most of them.

But one I do have a problem with.

At the beginning of the NGC game, I established a good relationship with Winters. We established a T & R treaty and traded numerous tech until just prior to turn 2402.0, at which time he abruptly quit the game. Our arrangement up till then was to trade tech of equal value.

He was a very inexperienced player and I kind of took him under my wing. Talk of the blind leading the blind! I had just entered the PBW scene myself.

My impression is that he was very young and susceptible to harassment. I suspect, Stalin saw/felt that too. Even though I suggested to Winters to take mines as a trade, he choose something else from my inventory and this would haunt him a few turns later when Stalin would rummage through his systems.

Just previously, Stalin tried to rummage through my systems. Asking him to get out didn’t work. Telling him in no uncertain terms did. I was prepared to go to war if he continued. And he knew it.

He then turned his attentions to Winters and his incursions severely unhinged Winters. He had no protection at all (no military ships, WP’s etc), having directed his resources towards the growth of his Empire. My giving him mines, his producing the mines and launching them would have taken a number of turns which he felt he didn’t have.

Stalin also pressured him to agree to a military alliance (I only had a T & R). He also pressured Winters to give him some of his colonists. I know all this this because Winters and I had a flurry of e-mails about his problem (about 30).

I couldn’t help Winters as I didn’t have the ships to contest Stalin who was maxed out on aggressiveness and defensiveness (with Berzerker) and mine was set at 100%/Scientists.

Suddenly Winters just quit. And although he claimed another reason, I feel certain the real reason was he was not able to cope with Stalin demands.

Now I find out that Stalin and the replacement for Winters are friends with both living in Russia.

It is most likely that Stalin would ask a player to join who was sympathetic to him. That being the case, there was probably nothing I could do to convince the replacement player to prefer an alliance with me in preference to Stalin. And I did try.

The result was, I was blockaded for something like 40 turns (give or take a turn or two). A horrible situation but I stuck it out.

What did I learn? Beg, bribe, do anything to get a friend of mine to replace a player who leaves. Maybe undertake to reciprocate to help the friend when a player leaves one of his games. Better that than to risk being blockaded
again. Or risk having a powerful alliance on my flank.

Not a good thing, I think you will agree. Because then my friend and I can harass other players.

So, IMO there is a major difference between a new player and replacement players.

New players take the luck of the draw and friends can be scattered all over the map leaving them vulnerable to attack. Replacement players are able to group themselves and as a group can harass other players to quit and if they refuse to quit (like me), co-ordinate their resources to attack that player.

This is a potential area of abuse and I feel I was on the receiving end of it with Stalin. I made numerous attempts to communicate with Winters replacement but only received silence as a response.

How to solve it? One way is to have the AI play the replacement player, maxed out to its best ability. Definitely not as interesting as a human replacement player, but it will avoid this type of abuse.

If I had a choice between selecting having an AI who may or may not be antagonist towards me and an antagonistic player allied with another antagonistic player, I would definitely select the former.

If I hadn’t been attacked and then blockaded from the other players for 40 turns by a powerful alliance, I wouldn’t feel so strongly about the potential abuse.

However, I don’t want to ask a friend to take over an empire on my flank just so I can feel more secure. That doesn’t seem right or ethical. But not doing so means I am exposed to the very real risk of having a powerful alliance on my flank.

I would rather play a game where if a player leaves, the empire is taken over by an AI. Then it is up to the AI to decide whether I be friend or foe.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Well I started a new PBW game, its a smaller Quadrant so the pace should be faster. Its also using the Proportions mod, so when people assult those planets it should get quite interesting.

I invite everyone who was in NGC2 to join, except the ones from the CCCP http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I also want to ask for a backup host, just in case somthing happens and I'm unable continue play (hint... rutha...hint..hint).

None the less, the name of the game is NGC: Proportions

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Hmm. Proportions mod... Need to look into that.
The only mod I've used is FQM DL and SEIV Committe mods.

What does proportions do?

[ March 16, 2003, 20:45: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">From what I can tell it adds some Newtion physiscs of a sort. Basicly you can load up a ship with Engines to make it really fast, but every weapon you add slows it down.

Also it looks like planets are alot harder to kill in proportions, and home worlds play a much bigger part. Plus you can't transport insanely huge amounts of population, and population grows much slower. So you will tend to have your home worlds, and then Colonies that could not survive without the Home Worlds. Then again killing a home world is like attacking fortress. Plan to loose alot of ships in planetary assults.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Count me in then.

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

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

CaptRR

I'd be interested in joining too.

Always wanted to try proportions.

Need to ask: What is the policy on replacement players? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well the AI sucks with Proportions(at least from what I heard and seen). Dropping players is almost a given considering the length of the game. If someone drops for say personal reasons I'll search for a replacement player.

If they leave becouse of in game reasons, I think we should let the AI finish it off. Basicly we will have to take it on a case by case basis, and I'll put it before all the players to decide the course of action when it happens.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Been itching to try Proportions on PBW. I am in too - if CaptRR will turn events off? I really hate events.

I am sad to see NGC2 go down also. It was my first PBW game. RIP.

Gecko

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well the AI sucks with Proportions(at least from what I heard and seen). Dropping players is almost a given considering the length of the game. If someone drops for say personal reasons I'll search for a replacement player.

If they leave becouse of in game reasons, I think we should let the AI finish it off. Basicly we will have to take it on a case by case basis, and I'll put it before all the players to decide the course of action when it happens.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I am still wrestling whether to join or not.

On the plus side. I admire Ruatha's courage to call what was happening in the game. And to take what must have been a very hard step of cancelling it. It would have been easy to let things slide and nobody would have been the wiser.

So, IMO, the fact that Ruatha is a co-host or subsidiary host is a definite plus. If things are not right, I feel confident he will call it.

Secondly, a part of my storyline of the in-game stories can still continue...the escapades of Eston. Basically, that storyline was not dependant on what happened in the game. One or two details may have to be changed, but that can be declared at the beginning of the next installment.

That does, of course, assume we are going to have in-game stories.

What do you guys think?

Finally we come to replacement players.

I understand the TDM mod is a very good mod for AI's. I am guessing there is no easy way to combine the TDM mod and Proportions in the game.

Historically, replacement players are not easy to get. I have the impression that most if not all hosts will accept any warm body or what appears to be a warm body. This is understandable since asking for more details takes time. And time is not what the host has since traditionally the game must go on. And the more game turns, the more injury to the abandoned empire and the empires around it.

So, maybe it would be appropriate to have an understanding that the game would be "held" until a suitable replacement player is found.

This way appropriate questions can be asked to have some assurance that
a) cheating will not take place (such as 1 player playing two or more empires)
b) abuse will not take place (such as a player and a replacement player are close friends with an understanding of mutual support to the exclusion of others).

My feeling is if a person must cheat to win, the game is not worth playing.

Also, my feeling is if the rules are used in such a way to give a player an unnatural advantage (abuse), then the game is not worth playing.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">NP, I'm not too fond of events either, I hate to see my star go NOVA just before a major campaign.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well I hate to hold the game for long perioids of time, I think we should continue playing until a new player is found, if the AI does something stupid while playing and gets itself wipped out, oh well so much the better for the humans http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

There will be a NGC3.
It will be put up on the PBW in about two weeks.
What I'm thinking about is turntimes and alliances.
I can live with a turntime of 72 turns, but then combined with the NO-AI mod it will mean virtually no pauses in the timed turns.
As to alliances I only want to allow one partnership, should there be unlimited military allainces?

Alliance victories allowed, i e partners, meaning max 2 players winning the game.

Why am I restarting the game? I wanna play in a huge universe and I'm stubborn!

I'll mail you who shown interest when the game is put up on the PBW site.

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

You know, with all the talk about cheating problems I wonder if it isn't time for PBW to introduce some sort of 'credibility system' comparable to eBay's feedback. Every time you finish a game the host could leave 'feedback' giving you a vote/credit for having played one 'good' game, or give you a 'minus' for having violated game rules or misbehaved some other way, or even flag you as a cheater if you cheated. Over time, it would be less and less necessary to have the admins intervene over cheating. People could open their games conditionally to people with 'X' amount of positive feedback, and newbie games could be run by people willing to do the extra screening to watch for cheaters.

The tough question of course is how much extra code work this would be for PBW. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ March 22, 2003, 20:13: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Re: PBW - Newbie Galactic Combat II Crisis Forum.
 

Baron, that is one hell of a good idea. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

It would be like a credit report.

A credit report is only as good as the participants reporting on the person's credit.

Again, a good idea.