Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

For topics that do not fit in another sub-forum.

Moderators: Oberlus, Oberlus

Message
Author
User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1941
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#91 Post by Oberlus » Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:36 am

o01eg wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:05 am
OK :mrgreen:
So it is possible to disable "propose alliance", right?
I think that's the best way to get "only one player can get victory". It disables all of the more OP allied stuff (gifting), and it certainly disables victory for multi-empire alliances.
Peace could also be disabled, but I think that restricts too much gameplay.
With or without peace allowed, players could get into agreements (I don't attack you, you don't attack me, I take this and that planet, you take those, you can focus on conquering John Doe, I will focus on Jane Doe, etc.). But the fact that supply won't be propagated between supply groups if differents empires entangle their spaces will discourage close cooperation: each one will prefer to have their planets on their space (except for research-focused colonies), and to fight their own battles because no repairs and no fuel when you are at your partner's space sucks balls.

An alternative way could be to allow alliances but dissallow victory for alliances of more than 1 player (if that's been implemented). Thus, people could play alliances during the early stages of the game but always keeping in mind that your current ally will necessarily be your foe later on. This would make concessions to your ally more risky for you, forcing you to ponder if helping him out now (supposedly benefical for your immediate goals) will take a toll on you later on if your ally grows stronger than you in the process. Therefore, the diplomatic decisions would be harder (instead of an undoubtable win-win when allied victory is allowed). Going for a solo victory from start could be an option, but (very likely) those that choose to enter alliances will be able to grow faster.

So, if what we want is to promote the solo-playing at it's full potential and not give unnecessary advantages to diplimatic players, the first option (disable "propose alliance") is the best one IMO.
If we don't mind temporal alliances early-mid game (which could force all players to enter into alliances for survival, including L29Ah :twisted:), the second option (victory allowed to alliances of maximum one player) could be funnier.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#92 Post by Ophiuchus » Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:00 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:36 am
So, if what we want is to promote the solo-playing at it's full potential and not give unnecessary advantages to diplomatic players, the first option (disable "propose alliance") is the best one IMO..
If you are going minimal diplomacy i might be in for the next game (no time for talking :lol: ).
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1158
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#93 Post by Ophiuchus » Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:03 pm

Oh, can anybody tell me what kind of hulls were used in this game?
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1941
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#94 Post by Oberlus » Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:20 pm

Ophiuchus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:03 pm
Oh, can anybody tell me what kind of hulls were used in this game?
o01eg and JonCST went robos. Hyperant also, but don't know what he did end game.
L29Ah went organics (multistatic, symbiotic). I too (made it to bioadaptive).
swaq I think mostly used robos at start and later also organics, and maybe self-gravs were in the way or were actually built?
Magnate conceded early for various reasons.

I'll gladly ask any other question related to ship designs, fleet compositions and tactics (which I would elaborate on now if I hadn't to go out).

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1941
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#95 Post by Oberlus » Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:21 pm

Ophiuchus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:00 pm
Oberlus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:36 am
So, if what we want is to promote the solo-playing at it's full potential and not give unnecessary advantages to diplomatic players, the first option (disable "propose alliance") is the best one IMO..
If you are going minimal diplomacy i might be in for the next game (no time for talking :lol: ).
MINIMAL DIPLOMACY IT IS!!!!

o01eg, make it happen!

User avatar
swaq
Space Kraken
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#96 Post by swaq » Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:17 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:20 pm
Ophiuchus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:03 pm
Oh, can anybody tell me what kind of hulls were used in this game?
o01eg and JonCST went robos. Hyperant also, but don't know what he did end game.
L29Ah went organics (multistatic, symbiotic). I too (made it to bioadaptive).
swaq I think mostly used robos at start and later also organics, and maybe self-gravs were in the way or were actually built?
Magnate conceded early for various reasons.

I'll gladly ask any other question related to ship designs, fleet compositions and tactics (which I would elaborate on now if I hadn't to go out).
I was about 40/60 on Robos/Organics for pretty much the whole game. I was putting out some self-gravs at the end (and was about to start building Titans with neutronium armor) but the game ended before they could see any action. Hyperant had some self-gravs in service. JonCST also researched self-grav very early but I steamrolled him before he could finish the geo-integration facility.

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 666
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#97 Post by o01eg » Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:17 pm

Ophiuchus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:00 pm
Oberlus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:36 am
So, if what we want is to promote the solo-playing at it's full potential and not give unnecessary advantages to diplomatic players, the first option (disable "propose alliance") is the best one IMO..
If you are going minimal diplomacy i might be in for the next game (no time for talking :lol: ).
Nice, because I'm going to test https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/2665 next game :D
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-9.2, boost-1.72.0
Ubuntu Server 18.04 x64, gcc-7.4, boost-1.65.1
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io. Version 0.4.9.
Donations are welcome: BTC:14XLekD9ifwqLtZX4iteepvbLQNYVG87zK

User avatar
swaq
Space Kraken
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#98 Post by swaq » Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:20 pm

Oh, and I just remembered that I saw some asteroid hulls too in the late game. I think Hyperant built some.

User avatar
swaq
Space Kraken
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#99 Post by swaq » Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:22 pm

o01eg wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:17 pm
Ophiuchus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:00 pm
Oberlus wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:36 am
So, if what we want is to promote the solo-playing at it's full potential and not give unnecessary advantages to diplomatic players, the first option (disable "propose alliance") is the best one IMO..
If you are going minimal diplomacy i might be in for the next game (no time for talking :lol: ).
Nice, because I'm going to test https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/2665 next game :D
Ooh, nice! This will definitely change the fighter doomstack meta. :D

User avatar
swaq
Space Kraken
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#100 Post by swaq » Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:25 pm

JonCST missed a bunch of turns this game which was both frustrating for pace of game and also for his ally who was counting on him. Can we exclude him from future games?

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 666
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Seventh game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)

#101 Post by o01eg » Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:33 pm

swaq wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:25 pm
JonCST missed a bunch of turns this game which was both frustrating for pace of game and also for his ally who was counting on him. Can we exclude him from future games?
This game I'm won't add anyone by default, because player need to check if he can play with altered content.
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-9.2, boost-1.72.0
Ubuntu Server 18.04 x64, gcc-7.4, boost-1.65.1
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io. Version 0.4.9.
Donations are welcome: BTC:14XLekD9ifwqLtZX4iteepvbLQNYVG87zK

Post Reply