Tower of Babel (on topic only PLEASE)

[MrWhereItsAt]

Well the two reasons I wanted it were preety much my own.

1. To have something to do in the game to tide me over when I get those urges to be in a SMACDG.

2. In order to see how the factions turn out so I could determine which (if any) I wanted to join when the game was rolling, which is I think the time when we will REALLY see how they will eventuate. After all the initial idea was that anyone could be a member of the ToB as well as another 'real' faction.

[Snowflake]

A question regarding Googlie's idea. Will this mean that they are the 5th team, just as the rest of us? They can do whatever they want. If they want more than one base later they can do that, etc... Or will they get some kind of a special treatment, for example they weren't be attacked and things like that? Will they be involved in trading and other diplomatic relations? This needs to be carefully discussed to avoid any unwanted influence and unbalancing on the game.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Their are clearly not enough people to form a 5th faction that would remain viable for the whole game (as all the people your listing are the ones so unintered in the game that they havent joined any faction yet). Further more it adds another 48 hours to EVERY turn and we would need to poll such for it to be included. Just drop this 5th faction nonsese it aint going to happen.

As an 8th "virtual" faction this idea still has a chance but not as a 5th Human faction.

[Kody]

There's now the possibilty of a partially team controlled AI faction.

It won't take an AI slot, it will rarely cause turn delays (turn will only be opened every 5-10 turns maybe), will allow for prizes and such to be given away and also allows for people to have a faction to centre themselves around.

In addition I thought it might be an interested study into how a CMN can tweak AI during a game every 5-10 turns. So game strategy discussion will have the added dimension of trying to lead a unwieldly AI faction with minimal input.

There might need to be restrictions so this team doesn't win the game, as it can be considered unfair with a team having the AI bonuses, even if they're only only adjusting the AI every 5-10 turns.

Instead of having Babel as a single city have it based AI faction. In case anyone has forgotten the original reasons for Babel.....

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113170&pagenumber=1

That's where it's explained.

The main reason for having some kind of game presence is mainly because it's difficult to get people to work together in a fake faction. It breeds a certain sense of fruitility in everything that people do. Also having partial control of the AI means prizes can be given out.

There's another problem with this in that the part AI/part human faction would require the CMN or a game moderator to run the turns due to security issues. Both in the program being used, and also to keep the freedom of membership as originally outlined. This shouldn't be too bad as it will might need to occur every 1 month assuming a fast pace for other factions playing. Maybe as much as 2 months between when turn will be adjusted.

The idea can't be called Babel anymore, because it's nolonger 1 city....

Anyway throwing these new abilities into the mix of this arguement and seeing what comes out. Again this is idea. So it's up to other people to figure out if they want to reject it completely, or adjust it to suit what they would like to happen.

[Kody]

Oh I guess most people wouldn't want to read that whole long thread from before.

Here's the original goals that I was hoping would be fostered with the original Babel.
* Fostering a friendly environment where members from different teams can meet and not have to discuss their own faction.
* Fostering roleplay between teams via, competitions, debates, story writing, and keeping a history of Chiron world events.
* Fostering activity, by allowing more interaction between players of different teams, an netural starting point for new players, bringing in new people in the game, and maybe distributing players according to factions that are suffering from lack of membership.

Additional goal someone else wanted.
* more political intrigue. (political interaction is currently pretty limited by the way ACDG is set up)

[Maniac]

Editing the AI mid-game? I wouldn't want to be planning a war against an AI, but a few turns before the war noticing that someone just gave them a sudden and unexpected boost.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Shurly the CMN wont just make stuff apear out of thin air, they would simply be using the resorces already their in a more inteligent way.

[Kody]

Boosting factions mindlessly with resources is more a CMN thing.

I thinking more along the lines of adjusting what certain cities can build, fixing up terraforming, adjusting the design workshop to retro-engineer designs and maybe changing the currently researched tech. Also with diplomancy possibly forcing the AI to end a war, do some tech trades with humans.

So yes every couple of turns the faction would be boosted by suddenly getting smart like a human player.

Anyway I wonder if there could be a place in PBEMs for half AI players. They let the AI play the turn most of the time, but every now and again come along to make adjustments. It would require a whole different way of approaching strategy in the game and wouldn't be as time consuming to play.

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by Kody
Anyway I wonder if there could be a place in PBEMs for half AI players. They let the AI play the turn most of the time, but every now and again come along to make adjustments. It would require a whole different way of approaching strategy in the game and wouldn't be as time consuming to play.

Could be a way of 'replacing' a human player untill he can follow his faction up again. (vacations and the stuff).

[Googlie]

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
Shurly the CMN wont just make stuff apear out of thin air, they would simply be using the resorces already their in a more inteligent way.

If I understand Kody correctly, his program won't let the player (CMN) open the scenario editor, it just lets him take control of an AI faction for a turn and do the things any human player could do in a turn. Upon "turn complete" (saving and sending to the next player in the rota) next time round it's the AI again unless the same program is applied to "humanize" it for a turn.

I have had the privelege of testing it for him, and it would have allowed me to deploy those roaming Believer Colony Pods as well as doing a better job of co-ordinating the A's and B's research. (While Miriam was submissive to Roze, and gave her evereything she had, Roze didn't share much with Miriam. That too could be rectified with the Kody Codicil)

G.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Kody
I thinking more along the lines of adjusting what certain cities can build,

I wouldn't want to be playing the Angels and planning a probe rape against an AI, but then from one turn to another suddenly notice a change in production from facilities to probe defences, as the CMN felt that would benefit the AI... Or the Spartans planning an invasion, thinking the AI is a juicy weak defended target, but then one turn notice the CMN switched all production to military units.

fixing up terraforming,

Replacing say a farm/mine combo with more or less equivalent terraformations like two forests or so seems a good thing to do, but I wouldn't like to see boreholes suddenly appearing without the AI even having the former potential to do so. Edit: Scrath that. Seems ti be impossible according to Googlie's post.

maybe changing the currently researched tech.

Again, I wouldn't want to be the Angels planning to steal a tech the AI will research in 3 turns, but then notice the tech under research is suddenly changed to something I don't want.

Also with diplomancy possibly forcing the AI to end a war, do some tech trades with humans.

Other human players could find it unfair a war was just like that ended between an AI and a human rival. Similar with techs: other human teams could find it unfair that a human rival has been able to trade a tech with an AI due to CMN interference, and they got nothing.

My point is it's almost impossible to make "neutral" boosting changes that won't benefit one human faction more than another, or that won't suddenly and unexpectedly disrupt plans a human had towards that AI. This would be even more impossible if the CMN who does the editing also has access to the private fora and plans of all human teams.

So to prevent sudden and unexplainable changes in behaviour of the non-human-team factions, they should be either fully AI, or fully human-single-player. But that last option was voted down due to not wanting to lengthen the time between turns, and not wanting to risk single human players winning a democracy game, etcetera.

[Kody]

You've missed the point I brought up completely.

Edit:

Sorry I was annoyed because you took the conversation completely off the topic. I didn't want to discuss about the CMN balancing the game that's something I'm letting the CMNs discuss amongst themselves (I'm sure they'll figure that out what is fair and what isn't, they're pretty smart and they really do care about making sure things are fair).


This is about a human team that could be involved in ACDG without adding the full burden of having an complete human faction. If your arguments you've stated are for rejecting that idea then they don't make sense, because you're saying other factions shouldn't make sensible decisions.

Edit2:
Oh yeah, in response to you comments about CMNs editing the AI mid-game. I have a lot of faith that a CMN would be far more careful with the editing. They don't get respected for what they do while being careless.

From what I've heard from listening and talking to Googlie. I see him using it to stop an AI from running away with the game because of a unbalanced starting boost. Or stop the AI from screwing itself over with dumb decisions like... building too many colony pods... building too much military that it runs out of minerals and gets literally stuck in development (I've seen an AI do that in one of my games).

[Snowflake]

RE controling AI mid turn. If this is possible this is certainly a great revolution to how the game can be played. I would be a little hesitated to test this concept out in a demo game. This game involves too many people. It is not a good venue to test new ideas like this which might bring great impact on the game. A pbem might be a better place for testing.

If this is proved to be possible, then I can see the CMNs using it. Not frequently to completely alter the AI's behavior, and causing troubles for other human teams such as what Maniac is concerned. But rather the CMNs can use it as a tool to correct stupid AI mistakes. This could only happen say a couple times during the entire game. And the CMN would also be required to preannounce his actions.

As for the partial AI partial human idea, I'm still leaning toward opposing it. Although Kody's idea now can be accomodated so that it won't cost an AI slot, there are still other concerns that would prevent an in game half human controled faction being practical. My main concern is that it will definitely bring new influences to the game and will tilt the balance of the game. Even with what an AI can have using their limited intelligence, the half human team could still do a lot to change the balance of the game.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Kody
This is about a human team that could be involved in ACDG without adding the full burden of having an complete human faction.

In that case the old position still stands: the IIRC two Spartans who've spoken about this subject (Jamski and I) simply don't like a fifth human team under any form in-game that IMO removes a normal AI faction slot and which can give in-game prizes (credits, techs, etc) to certain factions as a consequence of out-game competitions. One base is already bad, but a whole faction (with human guidance but also with AI bonuses ) taking up space is even worse IMO. Your new idea doesn't change anything to Jamski's and my previous position as far as I can see.

Originally posted by HongHu

I agree.

[Kody]

I guess I didn't resolve all the issues with the modified idea.

Honghu:
Fair enough.

Maniac:

With human guidance but also with AI bonuses.

You're worrying a little too much, it'll still do worse than a human. Because human guidance and AI bonuses are mutually exclusive. If the human intervenes for a turn the faction loses the AI bonuses the turn the human intervenes.