|  | 
| 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
    
 |  | 
 
 
	
		|  |  |  
	
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 19th, 2004, 09:29 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Southern CA, USA 
						Posts: 18,394
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 Isn't Google wonderful Tesco?     |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 19th, 2004, 09:54 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 General |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Canada 
						Posts: 4,603
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 google i am alittle more refined than that cookie cutter search engine.  
 Yea I was being funny....  I was laughing the whole time i was making that post...
 
				__________________ 
				RRRRRRRRRRAAAAAGGGGGGGGGHHHHH 
old avatar =          http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...1051567998.jpg 
    Hey GUTB where did you go...???
 
He is still driving his mighty armada at 3 miles per month along the interstellar highway bypass and will be arriving shortly 
			 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 19th, 2004, 09:59 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Southern CA, USA 
						Posts: 18,394
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 We all know you used Google Tesco.    |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 19th, 2004, 10:06 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Colorado 
						Posts: 1,727
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 Hmm... for the sake of readablilty it would probably be better to represent the tetrahedrons differently.  Like this. code:Oh yeah, sure.  That's more readable...
   ---------------#-------------\/                \ /---------\ \
 | ----------------#---------\ \ \
 |/ ------------\ / \ /-----\ \ \ \
 ||/ ------------#---#-----\ \ \ \ \
 |||/ --------\ / \ / \ /-\ \ \ \ \ \
 ||||/ --------#---#---#-\ \ \ \ \ \ \
 |||||/ ----\ / \ / \ / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
 ||||||/ #---#---#---#---#| | | | | | |
 |||||\|/ \ / \ / \ / \ / | / / / / / /
 ||||| #---#---#---#---#--// / / / / /
 |||\|/ \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / / / / / /
 ||| #---#---#---#---#---#-/ / / / /
 |\|/ \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / / / /
 \-#---#---#---#---#---#---#-/ / /
 \  |\  |\  |\ / \ / \ / \ / /
 \ \ \ \ \ \ #---#---#---#-/
 \ \ \ \ \ \---/|  /|  /|
 \ \ \ \ \-----/ / / / /
 \ \ \ \-------/ / / /
 \ \ \---------/ / /
 \ \-----------/ /
 \-------------/
 
  
 [ January 19, 2004, 20:54: Message edited by: Loser ]
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 19th, 2004, 11:03 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Colorado 
						Posts: 1,727
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 19th, 2004, 11:24 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 National Security Advisor |  | 
					Join Date: Dec 1999 
						Posts: 8,806
					 Thanks: 54 
		
			
				Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 Neat ideas. 
I think for a competetive "fair" game, it makes a lot of sense to just show both players the map to start with. Otherwise, even without Ancient being used, there is a lot dependent on discovery, which is a shot in the dark.
 
The economics of the unmodded game favor the fastest, most massive expansion so much that rapid planet grabbing is the most important factor between skilled competetive players.
 
You guys are gonna make all these maps right?
    
The "Fair" map used in the Universe Cup tourney was, I thought, about as fair as could be. It is completely symmetrical (lozenge- or football- shaped), and players were allowed to study the map before play. It did get a bit dull playing on the same map after a while, though. Maybe someone could make some more maps that are completely symmetrical. 
 
On the other hand, I tend to like randomized maps even if they aren't as fair.
 
Has anyone made any mods that have expansion economies half-way between Proportions and unmodded?
 
PvK |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 19th, 2004, 11:40 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Southern CA, USA 
						Posts: 18,394
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 Check out the B5 Mod. Or P&N PBW. Both of those have slowed down economic expansion, but certainly not as far as Proportions.
 And for the record, even Proportions favors he who can expand the fastest. It is diluted, but fast expansion is still important.
 
 [ January 19, 2004, 21:43: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 20th, 2004, 12:53 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Colorado 
						Posts: 1,727
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 I've never used the map editor.  Is it possible to set up a static arrangement of systems and randomly populate them? |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 20th, 2004, 02:17 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Colorado 
						Posts: 1,727
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 Alright, here it comes. code:Whoa, that one's messy.
         /---------------\|/-------------\ \
 #-------------\ \ \
 /-\ /|\ /---------\ \ \ \
 / /-# | #---------\ \ \ \|
 / / /|\|/|\ /-----\ \ \ \||
 / /  || # | #-----\ \ \ \|||
 |/   || |\|/|\ /-\ \ \ \||||
 ||   |\ | # | #-\ \ \ \|||||
 ||   | \|/|\|/|\ \ \ \||||||
 ||   |  # | # ||  \ \|||||||
 ||   \ /|\|/| ||   \||||||||
 ||  /-# | # | /|   |||||||||
 || / /|\|/|\|/ |   |||||||||
 ||/  || # | #  |   |||||||||
 |||  || |\|/|\ /   |||||||||
 |||  |\ | # | #-\  |||||||||
 |||  | \|/|\|/|\ \ |||||||||
 |||  |  # | # ||  \|||||||||
 |||  \ /|\|/| ||  ||||||||||
 ||| /-# | # | /|  ||||||||||
 |||/ /|\|/|\|/ |  ||||||||||
 |||| || # | #  |  ||||||||||
 |||| || |\|/|\ /  ||||||||||
 |||| |\ | # | #-\ ||||||||||
 |||| | \|/|\|/|\ \||||||||||
 |||| |  # | # || |||||||||||
 |||| \ /|\|/| || |||||||||||
 ||||/-# | # | /| |||||||||||
 |||||/|\|/|\|/ | |||||||||||
 ||||||| # | #  | |||||||||||
 ||||||| |\|/|\ / |||||||||||
 ||||||\ | # | #-\|||||||||||
 |||\|\ \|/|\|/|\||||||||||||
 \\\-# \ # | # ||||||||||||||
 \\/ \|/|\|/| ||||||||||||||
 \---# | # | /|||||||||||||
 |\|/|\|/ /|/||||||||||
 | # | # / #-/|||||||||
 | |\|/|\|/ \-/////////
 | | # | #----////////
 | |/|\|/ \---///////
 \ ||| #------//////
 \\\\  \-----/////
 \\\\-------////
 \\\-------///
 \\-------//
 \-------/
 
 
 I think there's an error.
 
 Can you find it!?!?
 
 [edit: by the way, that's an icosahedron with an extra system midway along each edge.  you might be more liekyl to recognize an icosahedron if I called it a D20]
 
 [ January 20, 2004, 00:28: Message edited by: Loser ]
			
			
			
			
				  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 20th, 2004, 02:49 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Corporal |  | 
					Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Toronto 
						Posts: 68
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Maps, theory discussion 
 You could try for HyperCubes, which are one of the models minimizing the connectivity between multiprocessor systems.  Ones with LOTS of processors.        
Remember, the perfectly predicable map is, ummm, BORING!     |  
	
		
	
	
	
	
	
	
	| 
	|  Posting Rules |  
	| 
		
		You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts 
 HTML code is On 
 |  |  |  |  |