Are you tough enough to be the "King of the Hill"? - Page 241

Phoenix-D · #**2401** February 23rd, 2004, 05:10 AM

Email him and see what happens..its not unreasonable to expect a decent pace. Otherwise you end up with something like this..

Phoenix-D def. Chocolatefro
49 turns
start Dec 23,2002
end May 7,2003

taterbill · #**2402** February 23rd, 2004, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by parabolize:
My tesco map looks the same lots and lots of medium none atmosphere

Parabolize,

Yes, it looks that way on my side of the map too. I'm a gas race, are you? I figure as long as we are both gas, then the map is balanced. If you are not, I'm probably screwed.

taterbill

parabolize · #**2403** February 23rd, 2004, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by taterbill:

quote:
Originally posted by parabolize:
My tesco map looks the same lots and lots of medium none atmosphere

Parabolize,

Yes, it looks that way on my side of the map too. I'm a gas race, are you? I figure as long as we are both gas, then the map is balanced. If you are not, I'm probably screwed.

taterbill

H2 rock

but I will restart if you want

Slynky · #**2404** February 23rd, 2004, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Electrum:

quote:
Originally posted by Slynky:
Electrum vs Slynky: 2401.3

Slynky surrenders.

I suggest a restart w/ a reqular map . But it's up to you.

FYI I didn't notice you Posts until now.

Thanks, Electrum, but I've already computed the scores and made the adjustments. Now go kick some butt!

DavidG · #**2405** February 23rd, 2004, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Slynky:
Ratings aren't so important to me as time. And I don't want to invest time in a game just to learn that my opponent has twice everything that I do because of the map.

'investing time' Gees you make it sound like a chore. Isn't investing time supposed to be the fun part? win or lose.

Phoenix-D · #**2406** February 23rd, 2004, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidG:

quote:
Originally posted by Slynky:
Ratings aren't so important to me as time. And I don't want to invest time in a game just to learn that my opponent has twice everything that I do because of the map.

'investing time' Gees you make it sound like a chore. Isn't investing time supposed to be the fun part? win or lose.

Loosing because of the map is rarely fun.

Slynky · #**2407** February 23rd, 2004, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidG:

quote:
Originally posted by Slynky:
Ratings aren't so important to me as time. And I don't want to invest time in a game just to learn that my opponent has twice everything that I do because of the map.

'investing time' Gees you make it sound like a chore. Isn't investing time supposed to be the fun part? win or lose.

I DO have fun playing, win or lose. When I make my own mistakes and lose, I have only myself to blame and yet, I will most assuredly have had fun. I've posted before about games I was currently playing in about the amount of fun I was having, win or lose. However, when I perceive their is a balance problem in the map, I think my time would be spent better doing other things instead of trying to overcome (what appears to be) an insurmountable problem.

By time being better spent...I mean with my wife (who most assuredly agrees ANY time I walk away from a game and do something with her

).

DavidG · #**2408** February 23rd, 2004, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:

quote:
Originally posted by DavidG:

quote:
Originally posted by Slynky:
Ratings aren't so important to me as time. And I don't want to invest time in a game just to learn that my opponent has twice everything that I do because of the map.

'investing time' Gees you make it sound like a chore. Isn't investing time supposed to be the fun part? win or lose.
Loosing because of the map is rarely fun.

That was my point IMO Yes it is. And Winning on a map unbalanced against you is loads of fun.

DavidG · #**2409** February 23rd, 2004, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Slynky:
However, when I perceive their is a balance problem in the map, I think my time would be spent better doing other things instead of trying to overcome (what appears to be) an insurmountable problem.

Try this and see how much fun it is when you win.

geoschmo · #**2410** February 23rd, 2004, 07:37 PM

For all intents and purposes David, it's imposible to do. And I'm not talking about the average run of the mill start where one player has a huge breathable in his homesystem, and the other guy doesn't and that's the only difference. But the really bad ones where one guy 2 or three times as many usable planets within colonizer range of his homeworld. That kind of a lead is flatly insurmountable unless the player is quite a bit more skilled at the teqhniques of expansion then the other guy. You could play 50 games against similerly skilled opponents with that kind of a disadvantage and win none of them.

But if that is your idea of fun, we could accomodate you. I am sure we could design some maps that would be quite sufficently painful for you.

Not all Se4 has to be competative. You can have fun role playing or whatever. But the idea of Koth and the Se4 Ratings systems are for competition. Testing one anothers skill against each other. If the players cannot be given at least semi-equal playing fields, it's not test of skill any longer but who gets the luckier start.