Ok, 8 players it is then. After dinner I will have a bit of time, set up the game, and then propose a few victory conditions for you to review. After that we can have a go.
Have a nice dinner sir, that sounds good. I almost forgot, keep in mind that if we spawn too close to either the Humans or the Lemurians, we may find ideal worlds early on, defeating the purpose of playing on Emperor.
I assumed that under emperor/impossible we get unfavourable starting conditions while the AI get favourable ones. I.e. we would automatically be pitted against the Moltar, while the Humans would tend to be far away.
That's actually a good suggestion but it doesn't work that way, our immediate neighbors are totally random. Therefore, if we spawn next to a race with the same biome preference as ours, we benefit from them having very favorable worlds nearby. It's happened to me a few times already, usually I restart when that occurs as a second productive world early on makes the game even easier to beat.
Here it is. I hope the races will give you a few surprises, as they are optimized quite a bit differently. The start looks like this: As victory condition I suggest the following: Ownership and colonization of a star system All colonizable planets in the system need to be settled, i.e. only gas giants and asteroid belts are excluded Barren planets need to be terraformed to terran biome Vault built on each planet Population on each planet maxed Victory requires to fulfil the above settlement criteria for all designated star systems The designated star systems are as follows: white star in sector A,0 yellow star in sector A,11 red star in sector O,0 orange star in sector O,10 If a designated star system has no planets, it is replaced by: the nearest star with planets if the distance of two possible replacement systems is equal, the more westward system is selected only major star systems visible on the starting map are valid The idea behind this victory condition is that you are required to develop your logistics and empire far enough to reach these systems and possibly wrest these from other empires. All means are allowed. The galactic council victory is ignored, i.e. you play on. Elimination of all other empires is a failure. The first player who fulfils the victory condition wins. Turns count, not real time. Speed and efficiency matters. Exploration and intelligence may as well. AAR documentation requires screenshots of all events, galactic, colony, survey, failed or otherwise. All other documentation is voluntary. You find the savegame attached. Anyone who wants to join us is welcome. The difficulty is the max what the game currently offers.
My question is: would increasing the difficulty level via AI bonuses actually make the game more fun? If the bonuses make the game end the same, but on turn 387 instead of turn 243, with the final battle between fleets of 42 vessels instead of 19 vessels, is that really more fun, or just more tedium? I've encountered that with modding other games, succeeding in making them take longer, but not ultimately more fun or more satisfying. AI bonuses can increase the chance of losing, but even that is unsatisfying 'because it's just the bonuses'. In another game forum (sword of the stars maybe), someone made a really perceptive observation: increasing the difficulty level just increases the exploits you feel justified in using. Options for setting personal difficulty levels (AI bonuses) are a good idea, since players have different tastes. However, I think a better path to increasing fun is to offer more options for winning aside from 'invade someone, then use the spoils to become more powerful and take over someone else; repeat until you get bored'. The AARs so far have all been the same: explore/build a bit, take over this neighbour, then take over that neighbour, and hmmm, I guess the game is effectively over. I'd like to see more non-war treaties and interactions, where you have to decide whether the benefits from a trade deal are worth the benefits that the other nation receives towards their winning conditions. Ideally it would have some depth, so that you could effectively 'fight' a rival by making strategic treaties with other nations. I'd like to see more chances to provide military assistance to a partner, and have it actually mean something, rather than just a minor plus to relations. I'd like to see an AAR that is more than just the blob of one colour that eats all the other blobs.
@Excited Photon I was responding to his complaint about difficulty. There is the Galactic Council victory condition, which is the way I've won, but I agree in a future expansion--if we can get enough people buying the game to Adam doesn't starve--science and cultural victories would be nice, and maybe eventually quests. But the blob thing is partly on the player. I play 4x's in turtle mode because I enjoy focusing on my own empire and maximizing research and culture internally. If I attack other factions it's because I've already won by maxing out the culture and tech trees, and really want that victory screen--usually I just quit at that point, satisfied I won on my terms. Just because you could get an easy but empty win by conquest doesn't mean you have to do so--especially since you don't find it fun. In general in any single player game if there's a cheesy but unfun way to win, the simple solution is to just not do it, rather than demanding the devs find ways to prevent you from doing what you can decide yourself not to do. It's like the guy that went to the doctor saying "It hurts when I do X", and the doctor replied, "Well, don't do X."
Bingo! Give Excited Photon a cigar, he totally gets it. Existing bonuses would be adequate if AI behaviour were tweaked. More bonuses to the existing AI, means I have to slaughter more helpless ships, or deal with an AI making questionable decisions that much longer. Not fun. The answer is elsewhere in my opinion, giving additional cheats will just make me play with a more buffed custom race to counter the cheats. It will make me ignore sections of the game, as I optimise research and builds to strike quick, hard and fast. That's fine sometimes, but this game has so much more to offer. If the AI were able to build a credible military, with better designs, and spread out in a way that it could actually defend itself, while not leaving valuable assets such as support ships and assault ships undefended... well, things would be quite different. Mind you, I haven't even touched on AI aggression and who it is directed against. I'll digest this when I get home and respond accordingly
I'm sorry, I looked at these victory conditions and they don't hold much interest for me. I would prefer something simpler and more natural You have 8 players total yes? that means 7 AIs Domination, the following have to be met, (not either/or) Full territorial conquest of 3 AI factions, you may destroy colonies/outposts to achieve this The conquest and control of 5 AI Capitols (with original occupants, no razing the planet and re-colonizing) Galactic council, not allowed to accept outcome, meaning that if a winner is declared,(even if it is the Terrans), you decline to accept the vote and are now at war with everyone. Also, some house rules Cannot accept any treaties with the AIs, (no trade, research etc), we are xenophobic and homicidal.
Negative. I understand your sentiment, but your suggestion doesn't hold much interest for me either. Conquering AI factions with the military skills they displayed is just busy work for me. The idea behind my suggestion is that we have to play intelligently. The challenge is to be faster. Certainly there is a lot of unpredictability involved in how the map is layed out, maybe there are wormholes leading straight from your empire to the objectives, but it could just as well be that one of the remote objectives will be part of the biggest and meanest computer empire on the map sitting in a far away corner. Also the AI factions are optimized. I don't think you will have an easy time in this scenario.
Well that's just it, If you have the factions optimised, and we are repulsive, unable to enter treaties... we should be hated by all the AIs. If under those circumstances, the AIs still pose no problem or threat... than we have a very serious problem and I am quite interested in seeing the severity of it. Now it is understood, that even though I do not know you well, it is safe to say that neither one of us is an "average" player. Still, if ISG can come close to posing a challenge for either of us, that would be valuable information. So let us then play our own separate victory conditions, You attempt yours and see how it unfolds and I will attempt mine. My interest is still more on game research rather than competing directly against you. For that, I have some excellent games we could try as PBEM should you ever want to go one on one.
Ok, so let's have a go at it, assymetrically, and see what happens. I am pretty sure that the Draguul in my last AAR wouldn't have presented any threat even if I hadn't sent out a survey ship at all, e.g. without all the assets that netted me. Let's leave other games for later. I am normally playing Heroes III (plenty of great handcrafted maps) or Heroes V (with my own AI enhancements). If someone else is interested to take up the challenge, please feel free to download the starting savegame and post your own AAR in the subforum here.
