Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Battlefield Earth - Turn Reporting Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I hate to jump in here on a turn reporting thread, but this is where you were pointing me, googlie... supposedly there's a need for a player? It doesn't look like it to me...
    I'm not conceited, conceit is a fault and I have no faults...

    Civ and WoW are my crack... just one... more... turn...

    Comment


    • #17
      FlameFlash, no worries on jumping in. I think a couple of players have expressed interest in getting in on a second game of this scenario.

      Perhaps you can try this thread over at CGN:



      Sorry to keep bouncing you around.

      Comment


      • #18
        FF:

        I did point you here (for the game set-up - I guess it might not be everyone's cup of tea)

        There is a similar game waiting in the wings, with Hobbes and knowhow2 signed up - you'd make a third, so we just need another to make it happen.

        G.

        Comment


        • #19
          My 2113 on to Q.

          Comment


          • #20
            2114 to Flubber.

            Comment


            • #21
              2114 to archaic

              10 minute turn around
              You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo

              Comment


              • #22
                Turn to Mongoose.

                Seeing as that we're supposed to work together (At least for now) to rid Earth of the Alien menace, what say you all to a mutual exchange and co-ordination of knowledge and research? Together we can accomplish far more than we can alone.
                Veni Vidi Castravi Illegitimos

                Comment


                • #23
                  I'm game for that. I am currently researching centauri ecology and would trade/give it to any others if I could get some tech back-- I'm assuming that no one is crying out to get Doc Loyalty? If someone already has cent ec. they could gift it to me and I could use the research points toward some other discovery to speed us all along our way. By leapfrogging up the tree, we can all get to good tech faster
                  You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    MY 2114 to Q.

                    I agree. BUT, we need to coordinate closely. Indiscriminate proliferation of techs will drive up the tech cost for all of us. If we all shared our starting techs, for instance, none of us might get a new tech for another 30 years. The leapfrogging concept is excellent, and should be our primary tool.

                    I have proposed and preaccepted pacts to all of you. I suggest you each do likewise with each other. We'll all be better able to track our combined tech efforts once mutually pacted. There will eventually be additional commerce energy to fuel our research, as well.

                    We ought to give some mutual consideration to our intermediate tech goals...guess Vel would call it selecting a beeline.

                    Will we have time, do you think, to lift energy restrictions before pursuing D:AP?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      2115 has been sent to Flubber.

                      I should have read Mongoose's post before I played the turn, but 'Poly wouldn't load for me and the turn was "burning a hole" in my e-mails in-box.

                      I have accepted Mongoose's pact. I offered Flubber and Archaic treaties, but I will gladly accept a pact from them, too.

                      Mongoose, if we coordinate wisely, I think we should have the time to get to EnvEcon before going for D:AP. Should we run for IndAuto first and then EnvEcon?

                      I am currently working on CentEco, too. Perhaps Archaic already has that one. If he can send that one to Flubber and I, we can switch over to a new tech and take a small hit (but well worth it for the crawlers).

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        As I recall, you don't lose any accumulated research when you acquire your current research goal by other means. Is that what you meant by "...we can switch over to a new tech and take a small hit..." ?

                        Only 'loss' I think happens is that the tech goal selected will have a higher cost than the one just acwquired, but that's mostly a function of # of techs already known.

                        edit for clarity.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Mongoose, you are correct. What I should have said is that we will only take a small hit on the tech discovery rate of the NEXT tech we choose. You are right that it does not affect the current tech discovery time at all.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I'm pretty sure that Qantaga was referring to the fact that acquiring techs, before finishing the research on the first tech researched, WILL adjust the tech cost of that tech. After you have researched one tech, the regular rules apply in that being gifted the tech you are researching means that you can shift to another tech with no change in accumulated research or tech cost.
                            You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Well now, Flubber, you have enlightened me. I was unaware that the FIRST tech rate could be affected before discovery since I rarely make tech trades before I discover my first tech (mainly because most games I play do not allow contact before obtaining commlinks by in-game methods). I was aware of the hit for the next tech, but not for the very first one.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                What about SPs? Disagreement over projects is one quick way to kill tech sharing agreements, in my experience.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X