"Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races

[1FSTCAT]

What does everyone think about players that use Rock, none? To me, it seems like an obvious advantage. So much so, that it almost seems like cheating, or "unsportsman-like".

What does everyone else think?

--Ed

[ December 20, 2002, 04:45: Message edited by: 1FSTCAT ]

[Krsqk]

Nah, the real advantage is taking tiny no-atmosphere gas giants.

I assume you mean rock/None combination. I haven't seen it used to great advantage yet. That doesn't mean it couldn't be, just that I haven't run into it.

[PvK]

I think we need a better explanation of the supposed abuse.

Assuming there is one atmosphere and planet type that offers more opportunities, it would be self-correcting if players know about it, because presumably more players would tend to pick that combination, resulting in more competition for it.

PvK

[1FSTCAT]

I wouldn't go so far as to call it an "abuse", and I did say "seems" like cheating..

It seems to me like there's always moons floating around, and they're absolutely perfect for a race that can use them... (I'm stating the obvious aren't I?)

--Ed

[Quikngruvn]

I don't, because Rock/None has two distinct disadvantages: fewer large and huge planets, and no breathable gas giants. Heck, I consider Ice/None almost a handicap....

Quikngruvn

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by PvK:
I think we need a better explanation of the supposed abuse.

Assuming there is one atmosphere and planet type that offers more opportunities, it would be self-correcting if players know about it, because presumably more players would tend to pick that combination, resulting in more competition for it.

PvK

Rock/None has the most facility slots of its type, but is worse off in the long run because you can't get gas/none.

This thread describes this in more detail.

[spoon]

The main "gamey" reason I consider taking rock/none (or ice/none) is the ability to find a planet with two moons, and build 3 spaceyards, 3 Fleet Training Facilities, and 3 Ship Training facilities in that sector.

The disadvantage is that you have to rely on capturing/trading other pop types to maximize Gas Giant colonization (when you get that tech). This can be a hefty disadvantage, depending on the game setup and the disposition of your neighbors.

-spoon

[Taera]

rock/none can be dismissed as "gamey" tactic only because people seem to like it and more unique combinations (ice/methane was my Last one in single games) are very rare, thus you can get the most of these planets for your own while the rest will be fighting over the same none/rock moons.

[PvK]

Yeah, it seems self-balancing due to popularity, and of dubious advantage even if you have that combo all to yourself. There are pros and cons of moons versus larger planets, maps are randomized, etc.

I can see some people choosing it with gamey thoughts in mind, but they're probably wrong if they think it's a big (or any) advantage, except that if it helps them develop a strategy, it might help focus them on a plan.

However, building multiple training facilities in the same sector does seem to me like an obvious bug exploit.

PvK

[spoon]

Originally posted by PvK:

However, building multiple training facilities in the same sector does seem to me like an obvious bug exploit.
PvK

Really? The facility text says, "only one effective per planet." If it was a bug exploit, I would think that text would read, "Only one facility effective per sector."

Definitely "gamey", though...