KOTH: Attack of the Clones

Ragnarok · #1 February 1st, 2003, 05:23 PM

Quote:

If both players agree, there are ways to force hard choices and make empires different.
a) play with 0 race points
b) play with 2000 race points, players must take one racial tech
c) play with 3000 race points, players must take two racial techs

I like this idea. Making it so that players must take at least 1 or 2 racial techs. I think that would prove to be interesting in 1 on 1 games. Maybe Geo could take that into consideration and making it mandatory that you select at least 1 racil tech. But that would be pushing it probably.

geoschmo · #2 February 1st, 2003, 06:29 PM

I have no intention of making any such choices mandatory. But cetainly if anyone wants to agree to mandate it for their game that is doable.

Geoschmo

DavidG · #3 February 2nd, 2003, 05:05 PM

Well the numbers are in. Races that take 100% or less in both attack and defense win 100% of the time. This highly statistically relevent fact based on my two KOTH games. So there are ways to do it.

Stone Mill · #4 February 2nd, 2003, 07:03 PM

Ok, ok DavidG, thanks for the proof!

No one is disputing that you can win on PBW or in KOTH without combat stacked settings...

What does matter is what settings your opponent is using.

Let us know the outcome after you have faced a 125/125/berserker, and I'm sure you will eventually. You may be surprised!

DavidG · #5 February 2nd, 2003, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stone Mill:
Let us know the outcome after you have faced a 125/125/berserker, and I'm sure you will eventually. You may be surprised!

Ha not likely!! I already got enough surprises Last game. After this discussion I'll be taking that too. Maybe when I get smacked down to the bottom of the hill I'll try that.

I think you are probably right in this thread. I haven't played enough one on one games to know. I do know that not choosing 125/125 etc does not absolutly guarantee a loss as so many seem to be implying.

geoschmo · #6 February 2nd, 2003, 07:22 PM

For what it's worth, David G's Last game he was a 100/100 scientist, and his opponnent was a 120/110/worker. Not 125/125 to be sure, but pretty compelling evidence that a deficency in those two stats is not a guarantee of defeat.

Of course if your mind is already made up on the basis of numerical comparisons then real world experience is not likely to influence your opinion much. But that's ok too.

Geoschmo

spoon · #7 February 2nd, 2003, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by geoschmo:
For what it's worth, David G's Last game he was a 100/100 scientist, and his opponnent was a 120/110/worker. Not 125/125 to be sure, but pretty compelling evidence that a deficency in those two stats is not a guarantee of defeat.
Geoschmo

That's like saying playing blackjack once you hit on a 19, drew a 2, and won. Compelling evidence that hitting on a 19 doesn't guarantee a loss. Of course it doesn't guarantee a loss, but it still isn't a very good idea.