blind research vs directed

[hellrazor]

I tend to be very resistant to change in my playing style. I've never played double blind...maybe I should. My problem is that this whole thing is an obsessive-compulsive exercise anyway and if I change my style I won't be able to properly compare my current game with the last one. Maybe I should get a life.

[ravagon]

I tend to enjoy playing double blind games more than any others both for the increased challenge and for the (IMHO) heightened realism. In fact I've played like this so many times that I have only a vague memory of how the tech tree is organized and am basically playing double-blind even when I'm only playing single.
I recently had a game as the pirates when I just couldn't get "Environmental Economics" and the energy restrictions lifted which is soooo frustrating when you have 3 energy in every square and are building thermocline transducers.
(And the only way I even knew that "EE" was the "Energy restrictions off" tech came from checking hydro's post ).
It also makes it much harder to beeline for those few ever so popular SP's.

[Capt Dizle]

If playing for fun, single play, blind is fine. Stupid for multi or compare challenges.

I used to use tech stag, blind, no tech goodies, and go into the alpha and adjust the research rate so that it would take forever to get anything.

Then I would play Miriam.

Or I would edit the alpha and increase armor ratings and play a conquest scenario. Anything for a challenge.

jt

[cbn]

Googlie

My first plan was to do exactly the same thing but I did NOT get the WP and have been regretting it ever since (in retrospect it would have even been worthwhile to disband formers and garrisons and even stockpile energy to get it). Things are looking up in my game now though (even though I am still 5th in the charts). Nutrient restrictions just got lifted but more importantly Zak landed on my island and after i gifted him some cash he pacted with me and traded techs-- giving me Doctrine : Flexibility. It was 2190 but I feel that I finally joined in the game. I have since stolen 3 techs from the Spartans and snagged the PTS. With sea formers to kelp sea energy specials and running Demo Planned with creches in place I am ready to boom. (couldn't boom earlier due to nut. restrictions and very few rainy squares and no nut. specials)

Also a nearby landmass has a large empty region (only 4 squares away by water but over 40 by land across the pole). I will ferry over some military and if it looks even marginally safe i will ferry over some CPs (instant size 3 cities). One last bonus -- One of the techs I stole was Ind. Auto so crawlers will start right after each city gets its sea former. Hopefully a come-from behind victory is possible.


Great news -- there is a blizzard here that is closing our office so I can actually go home and enjoy an afternoon of AC.


This double-blind stuff is great. I can't remember the last time I was actually behind the AI and the AI is even now building two SPs for which I do not have the tech. SEND MORE PROBES !!


cbn

[Aaron Burr]

quote: Originally posted by Hydro on 12-01-2000 12:59 PM HsFB, More realistic? The US and other governments have been funding fusion research for many years, and what do we have? Cold fusion (Oops! Didn’t work? Call back in 20 years, maybe…). By contrast, the internet (like Planetary Networks) was kind of an accident that has more or less created itself. Hydro

The Internet is the direct descendent of ARPANet, which was the result of directed research for the US Department of Defense.

IIRC, the original Cold Fusion "researchers" were not government-funded.

- Aaron Burr

[Hydro]

AB,

Point granted on cold fusion. Still, fusion is far in the future and stymies all efforts at a solution, and practical fusion power always seems to be a few decades in the future. As for the internet, did the originator(s) (Al Gore?) intend to create what we now know as the internet? Absolutely not. My understanding is that it was created as a rather limited data transfer and commutation tool between government institutions and some select institutions of higher learning, presumably as a backup in the case of nuclear war. It has evolved way beyond that, and bares no resemblance to what was originally foreseen. That is the point - what you want isn't always what you get. Another excellent example is the global positioning system (GPS, also a US military program), which has evolved from a closely guarded tool of the US military to an indispensable tool worldwide for knowing exactly where you are for everyone from 474s over India to hunters in the back 40 of the Montana.

Hydro

[N35t0r]

I've only played two games, none of them finished, but did't think of turning blind research off. IMHO, it's more realistic.

[Hydro]

HsFB,

More realistic? The US and other governments have been funding fusion research for many years, and what do we have? Cold fusion (Oops! Didn’t work? Call back in 20 years, maybe…). By contrast, the internet (like Planetary Networks) was kind of an accident that has more or less created itself.

For game play directed is terrific since it helps you understand what techs lead where, and what they do. Starting off I can fully appreciate how the ‘tech lotto’ would be frustrating, and I used partially directed and then directed before double-blind tech assimilated me.

I suggest experimenting with all three and see which you like best.

Hydro

[Christantine The Great]

Well Fusion can't be too far off. Al Gore still has to invent it. I think that Fusion reactors that may have to take up alot of space will be comming sometime next century (2001-2099). By that time fission reactors might become much more compact (Maybe not small enough to fit on a Unity Rover but we can hope)



------------------
"Freedom, Trade, Christantine!"

The Viking Archives

[Christantine The Great]

Back on topic...

I love blind research because I used to use directed research like a warm blanket to hide under. Now I find it fun to not know what will come next (I use double blind.) It usually doesn't effect Zak too much though because if he pulls a good lead in tech than it doesn't matter what he researches, he will probably know all what the other factions know by then.

------------------
"Freedom, Trade, Christantine!"

The Viking Archives

[Horus]

Double blind is my choice when doing SP.

And about the realistic or not issue, this is one of _the_ main issues of debate among historians of sciences. Sure it happens that the gov. points out some Vodoo-features they want in production line soon (WW II was full of such examples), and sometimes they got it too. Often enough they didn't get it but got something else instead (simulated by blind research IMO). Sometimes they got IT and the little extra unexpected discovery.

NASA, as an example, is actually organised as a project, when finished it should dissolve. The thing with NASA is that they invent new causes for their existence and is doing it rather well. It is a centre for blind research one could say, the goals (directed) they put up for themselfs is not the sole prime objective (some say that it is not prime at all). It is the spin off products you get which is the real prime goal.

On the other hand many of the great discoverys were made by people who was completely undirected and on the vegre of being considered dropouts. Newton for example was mostly keen om mystic and arcane litterature, his great discoverys on ligth and gravitation were all made when he was young.

Just my two dimes.

[cbn]

Double blind rocks

I lost the first time I played double-blind (game mentioned in other posts) opening my eyes to my reliance on specific beelines. This has revived SP play for me since its a whole new way to play when you can't just routinely win the same way.

Now on my second double-b attempt and this time should be a win. While many early special projects were lost to tech unavailability this simply is part of the challenge. This game is heading into the 2300s and the top parts of the tech tree, places not visited in many games. I hadn't looked at the relative merits of those future values SE choices inquite some time.

So a convert here-- love double blind for SP for the added challenge. For MP I would think that directed is the way to go since otherwise the luck of the tech tree could dominate the result between similarly skilled players

cbn

[Sikander]

I think SMAC tries to simulate the effects of a simple scientific breakthrough by giving many of the techs multiple features (MMI really rocks!) and often numerous new tech possibilities. The somewhat unrealistic aspect of this is that usually many of these ancillary benefits are unknown before the fact. (Not to mention the whole tech tree!)

Technology is really as much an art as a science, because much if not most of what is produced is not due to a brand new scientific discovery, but instead the marriage of previously discovered ideas and methods in a new way. Thus technology is more dependent upon communication than on pure science, as one breakthrough can spawn an enormous number of related techs.

Getting back on topic a bit more, which sort of game do you think lasts longer (in real time), blind tech or directed? I am having real trouble finishing any of my games (unless I get wiped out immediately ) because of the immense amount of real time necessary to complete one. I have only played directed research thus far, but if a blind tech game lasts the same amount of time there is no reason why I wouldn't give it a try. My belief has been that blind tech would last longer.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Is it just me or does Double Blind refine your warring skills?

Seems to me every time I give double blind a go I'm either on a defensive front fighting to stay alive and once thats past looking to those bases that have stolen out from under me my rightful SPs.

The AI might as well just relabel each of those bases as Primary target 1, Primary target 2 etc.

[cbn]

Skiander

I believe you are right since Double blind is taking me far longer in terms of years than directed ever did. It can be a matter of luck but generally the fact that it takes much longer to:

1.get to Ind. Auto. and start crawlering
2. Lift restrictions (really limits terraforming advantages)
3 get airpower or MMI to begin conquest

In each case you may get the needed tech dozens of techs later than when playing directed. Add to that the fact that the AI has completed some of my favorite SPs before I even got the tech. "WHAT-- Someone else built the Virtual World?? how did that happen and what the heck is a holotheatre??"

My recommendation is to play directed until you can win routinely with any faction. Once thats done, you will ned something to keep single player interesting and double blind is an effective handicap. its not a killing handicap (I am winning a double-blind game on my second try using it)but it does make you think about other methods than your favorite beelines.

cbn