Fixing ICS

[Curiosity]

Laz,

Hmm, raising land is a pretty interesting idea. I guess as the Hive, given you might well have 2 formers/base, you could make a good go of it. You'd pretty much have to have the WP to do it early. I'll have to try it out.

Sea bases, though, uck! Only your coastal bases are going to be able to build them, and until fusion is available they're going to take their sweet time about it. I would have said building sea bases would favour a standard strategy more, since they're so easy to boom up and use as specialist centres.

[Lazerus]

its easy to get a coastal base to 25 minerals with crawlers and a borehole, then producing a pod takes (at a guess 4 turns) after that if you want to help speed up the bases growth (poor Hive cant pop boom) build a few sea crawlers and rehome them to that base and have them work nuts, once the sea base has a childrens creche thats +5 growth and plenty of nutrients. 3nuts/4energy (i think?) per square while they're growing means they're not far behind a specialist base, and once the pop is high enough you can easily switch. If you've got alot of coastal bases doing this (you will with small land) then it can be quite useful.

I know what you mean with sea bases though, i hate them aswell, nowhere near enough minerals for my liking.

If im playing the Hive ill pull all stops to get the WP >2135 and if somebody else gets it that still doesnt stop me trying to get it

[Gufnork]

Originally posted by Lazerus


Not true for Yang and he is the main ICS'er...

I know. Fighting Hive early =

Then again, you should reach D:AP before the hive, meaning you could strike then.

[Lazerus]

Yes i said above, a decent tech player has the advantage for about 10years (maybe more) where they need to press home the early air power. Once the Hive gets its hands on that tech then industrial power takes the front seat again.

I love starting next to morgan/zak/aki great for removing the no1 tech players from the game or even forcing them into a pact.

[CEO Aaron]

Originally posted by dmm1285
I'm almost positive crawlers dont need any support, so upgrading them to clean is pretty pointless

You upgrade your FORMERS to clean, not your crawlers. The only reason to upgrade crawlers to clean is to turn cash into shields more efficiently for rush-building SPs.

[Archaic]

and have the cash to upgrade every crawler you've built to clean

You might want to go back and change this line of yours then, before it confuses a few other people.

[Lazerus]

I'm worried that ICS dominates other styles because I've seen the flexibility in the way I play decrease as I get better. Every time I learn a trick, everyone I play with learns it (because I tell them), and we all become dependent on it.

Isn't this a reason why people enjoy the challenge of thinking up new ways to beat each other rather then playing the AI ?

[CEO Aaron]

Originally posted by Archaic
You might want to go back and change this line of yours then, before it confuses a few other people.

Oops. Fixed.

[Chaos Theory]

If one strategy is dominant, everyone is pressed to use it, and the game is monotonous. Somewhat better is if three strategies exist in a rock-paper-scissors configuration, but that still gets boring quickly. Some very basic games don't fall into these traps, such as Go. I wonder if SMACX has enough material variation to allow for that kind of endless variety in strategies...

[Lazerus]

Whats Go ?

[CEO Aaron]

Google is your friend:

http://www.mindsports.net/Arena/Go/AboutGo.html

[CEO Aaron]

CT, in a simple game like Go, it's very easy to balance factors such as opportunity cost, position, turn advantage, etc, to make a dynamic and balanced game, but as the game increases in complexity, it becomes nearly futile to attempt to achieve this kind of balance.

SMAX is a wildly unbalanced game, in that respect, since an infinitessimal advantage early on, even one based purely on circumstance, can translate into huge advantages later in the game. For a simple example, two factions start out with more or less equal terrain, but one pops an early pod to discover a monolith, while the other finds worms. Due to the increased alacrity with which the now monolith-blessed faction can plant new bases, their research, production and population growth will be commensurately larger throughout the majority of the game, provided both factions follow the exact same strategy.

I'll post a couple of games to illustrate my point as soon as I get the chance.

[Chaos Theory]

Certain factors act to counter this, however, such as the slow growth of large bases, and the increased tech cost for being in the lead. Drones are intended to hinder both vertical and horizontal expansion. With enough checks, in principle, "noise" variations in the strength of a faction would damp out, and only constant effects, such as quality of play, would have a lasting effect.

I wonder if making "super drones" act in every respect like two drones would help hinder excessive expansion... not that it's easy to implement that. Also, all-specialist bases would need special costs.

[Curiosity]

I would have to say that I don't find my strategy converging, as such. For example, in my game with Flubber I'm playing 3 factions in 3 distinctively different styles. Each style is a reaction to both the faction's innate bonuses and the terrain I've been given.

Maybe I'm just not good enough, to play one style regardless.

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by CEO Aaron
For a simple example, two factions start out with more or less equal terrain, but one pops an early pod to discover a monolith, while the other finds worms. Due to the increased alacrity with which the now monolith-blessed faction can plant new bases, their research, production and population growth will be commensurately larger throughout the majority of the game, provided both factions follow the exact same strategy.

Oh yes, that's exactly what happened in my very first PBEM. I popped two pods one within base radias one one square farther only to find worms and my first base is now sitting in a bare land with nothing.