Gamey tactics discussion thread

Rasorow · #1 October 25th, 2004, 01:58 PM

It sounds nice that you have these space trading stations and etc outside your mine field but to use a modern day analogy warships do infact go into harbors, past the mine fields, past all harbor mid and long range defenses and dock. Not to mention the possibllity of Q-ships.

It is reasonable that you could escort ships past a changing minefield - See Red Storm Rising for one method of implementation (Tom Clancy) but I think have trade stations when a space station is as expensive as it is (least early on) is stretching it.

Personal opinion is I think the game works as is and it is not a gamey tatic. Its not a nice tactic, your allies and your enemies will remember the tactic and wonder about ever trusting you, (and personally I would come after you with everything I had to take you down as much as possible even if I had no hope of winning, nor would I surrender to you)

Which touches on other things on the list

- surrendering to a preferred enemy or ally instead of a hated enemy, - not gamey - plenty of Real World happenings - WWII Germany preferred to surrender to US/British Forces instead of Russia

Rasorow

Fyron · #2 October 25th, 2004, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Rasorow said:
Which touches on other things on the list

- surrendering to a preferred enemy or ally instead of a hated enemy, - not gamey - plenty of Real World happenings - WWII Germany preferred to surrender to US/British Forces instead of Russia

The US/British forces were part of the invasion force of Germany, you know. That example is not relevant.

It would be like Germany surrendering to Japan. Or even some country like Spain.

Rasorow · #3 October 25th, 2004, 02:36 PM

Actually it is relevant, German forces went out of their way to surrender to US/British forces instead of being captured by the Russians. This is the exactly the same senario as me surrendering to Narf because I do not want to surrender my forces to Cyclops who detonated the sun in a remote but heavily populated system killing trillions in a murderous sneak attack.

Rasorow

PS - just throwing people out there that I have met on the Boards, not saying they would or would not do any of this.

Fyron · #4 October 25th, 2004, 02:49 PM

No, it is not relevant, because they were still surrendering to an _enemy_ involved in their conquest, not a random 3rd party.

douglas · #5 October 26th, 2004, 04:54 PM

Exactly his point.

Captain Kwok · #6 October 26th, 2004, 08:23 PM

...and often when a player surrenders, all his planets are rioting and you have to spend who knowns how many turns to end them, so that could be turmoil.

spoon · #7 October 25th, 2004, 02:52 PM

What is or is not gamey is hard to define, because there is no definition of "gamey". That said, I only play in games where surrender is Banned (or restricted to surrendering to the person stomping you (though I prefer a strict ban)). The reason? Because of the way surrender works in the game, it can completely ruin the fun. I've been in at least two games that were scrapped as soon as one player surrendered...

Gandalf Parker · #8 October 25th, 2004, 03:42 PM

Quote:

spoon said: The reason? Because of the way surrender works in the game, it can completely ruin the fun. I've been in at least two games that were scrapped as soon as one player surrendered...

I wondered about that because to me it seemed worse to not surrender when you should. But your reason makes sense.

sachmo · #9 October 25th, 2004, 03:52 PM

Quote:

spoon said:
What is or is not gamey is hard to define, because there is no definition of "gamey". That said, I only play in games where surrender is Banned (or restricted to surrendering to the person stomping you (though I prefer a strict ban)). The reason? Because of the way surrender works in the game, it can completely ruin the fun. I've been in at least two games that were scrapped as soon as one player surrendered...

Agreed. Since surrender is instant, it can be a major problem in a game.
There should be AT LEAST a few months of chaos while supply lines are reformed, diehards refuse to surrender, planets rebel, etc.

Tanus · #10 October 25th, 2004, 06:57 PM

Quote:

spoon said:The reason? Because of the way surrender works in the game, it can completely ruin the fun. I've been in at least two games that were scrapped as soon as one player surrendered...

I totally agree. I was in one game where me and my ally were about to take over 2 seperate enemies, and they both 'surrendered' to our largest foe, who was their ally. That wasn't even the first time that happend that game, so we both left. (was about the 4th empire that surrendered to him just prior to being conquered/attacked in force)

I won't play in any game that surrender is allowed.