Tweet
Hmmm....now this feels familiar somehow....writing a new thread in the strategy section for SMAC/X...
This is an old game.
Positively ancient by the time-standards computer games are measured by....practically a....dinosaur (gentle poke at Master Sid).
Because of that, we have seen a gravitation toward the mathematical pinnacle/extreme of the game, and by that I mean, Uber ICS, precise mathimatical gridded layouts of landmasses in order to provide the maximum possible gain in terms of land use, etc.
And that's a good thing.
We've done that.
We know what is maxially possible in terms of milking the utmost out of every scrap and shard of land and sea in-game, and that's an awesome thing to know.
(can you almost FEEL the "but" coming??)
But....
then there's the Metagame.
I have often said that the heart and soul of the metagame revolves around noting prevailing trends and then striking off in a radically new direction.
Crawlers....mass produced to create silly kinds of per turn energy, giant crawler parks, bases spaced one tile apart, continents pocked with scores and perhaps hundreds of boreholes, mathematics tell us that all of these things are good and right and proper, and that they lead to optimal in-game outputs, and my intellectual brain understands and accepts that. I have DONE that, and participated ardently in hammering out the strategies now in wide spread use (after all, bases 3-apart is a limited-form ICS, and I too, have totally abused crawlers, worked out hyper-fast beelines, etc).
My intuitive brain, however, rebels against the notion that such vast, meticulous micromanagement is necessary, or even (necessarily) desirable, and so...a new direction for me.
A....minimalist approach to playing.
As a place of beginning, I think my next game will be one of base-spacing with no overlap. Absolute heretical thinking, I realize, but truly, it's just simply not necessary for that Nth degree style of playing to one-up the AI (this can be clearly illustrated by a review of the games of those who have taken and beaten the One City Challenge).
At the cornerstone of this new approach will be the following paradigms:
* Each base shall be an island unto itself - any crawlers used will be used exclusively INSIDE the base radius, to work "unused" tiles until the population grows sufficiently, and then, some will be retired until I strike the desired balance between workers and specialists.
* My former reliance on token garrisons backed by rover-based prototypes will need rethinking and enhancing, as rovers will be more critical than ever in terms of defense with the wider spacing.
* No more directed research games for me. All done with that. Been there, done it, got the tee-shirt, and am so familiar with my beelines of choice that it has become a mechanical exercise. Further, the beelines have become so tight that there's a diminishing marginal utility in terms of making them faster yet. I cal already get to game-breaking crawlers in the early 20's....how much faster do I NEED them? Is finding a way of shaving 1-2 turns off of that really necessary? Blind or Double Blind, often with TechStag enabled to slow me down and to present greater challenges.
And probably several others that have not yet revealed themselves to me.
Now, I fully realize that NONE of this will ever become game-standard in MP....MP is all about maximization and optimization, and as such, this idea in an MP arena would be the purest form of folly, but that's not what it's about. Mostly, it's about picking a new direction and creating a new paradigm, because we long ago reached that point of diminishing returns in discussing the optimal, mathematically driven approach, and in the closed system that SMAC/X represents (granted, a very large, robust closed system, but closed nonetheless), there's just not much in the way of new frontiers left.
And when that happens, it's time to break out the pioneer gear, and head into uncharted (for me) territory.
-=Vel=-
This is an old game.
Positively ancient by the time-standards computer games are measured by....practically a....dinosaur (gentle poke at Master Sid).
Because of that, we have seen a gravitation toward the mathematical pinnacle/extreme of the game, and by that I mean, Uber ICS, precise mathimatical gridded layouts of landmasses in order to provide the maximum possible gain in terms of land use, etc.
And that's a good thing.
We've done that.
We know what is maxially possible in terms of milking the utmost out of every scrap and shard of land and sea in-game, and that's an awesome thing to know.
(can you almost FEEL the "but" coming??)
But....
then there's the Metagame.
I have often said that the heart and soul of the metagame revolves around noting prevailing trends and then striking off in a radically new direction.
Crawlers....mass produced to create silly kinds of per turn energy, giant crawler parks, bases spaced one tile apart, continents pocked with scores and perhaps hundreds of boreholes, mathematics tell us that all of these things are good and right and proper, and that they lead to optimal in-game outputs, and my intellectual brain understands and accepts that. I have DONE that, and participated ardently in hammering out the strategies now in wide spread use (after all, bases 3-apart is a limited-form ICS, and I too, have totally abused crawlers, worked out hyper-fast beelines, etc).
My intuitive brain, however, rebels against the notion that such vast, meticulous micromanagement is necessary, or even (necessarily) desirable, and so...a new direction for me.
A....minimalist approach to playing.
As a place of beginning, I think my next game will be one of base-spacing with no overlap. Absolute heretical thinking, I realize, but truly, it's just simply not necessary for that Nth degree style of playing to one-up the AI (this can be clearly illustrated by a review of the games of those who have taken and beaten the One City Challenge).
At the cornerstone of this new approach will be the following paradigms:
* Each base shall be an island unto itself - any crawlers used will be used exclusively INSIDE the base radius, to work "unused" tiles until the population grows sufficiently, and then, some will be retired until I strike the desired balance between workers and specialists.
* My former reliance on token garrisons backed by rover-based prototypes will need rethinking and enhancing, as rovers will be more critical than ever in terms of defense with the wider spacing.
* No more directed research games for me. All done with that. Been there, done it, got the tee-shirt, and am so familiar with my beelines of choice that it has become a mechanical exercise. Further, the beelines have become so tight that there's a diminishing marginal utility in terms of making them faster yet. I cal already get to game-breaking crawlers in the early 20's....how much faster do I NEED them? Is finding a way of shaving 1-2 turns off of that really necessary? Blind or Double Blind, often with TechStag enabled to slow me down and to present greater challenges.
And probably several others that have not yet revealed themselves to me.
Now, I fully realize that NONE of this will ever become game-standard in MP....MP is all about maximization and optimization, and as such, this idea in an MP arena would be the purest form of folly, but that's not what it's about. Mostly, it's about picking a new direction and creating a new paradigm, because we long ago reached that point of diminishing returns in discussing the optimal, mathematically driven approach, and in the closed system that SMAC/X represents (granted, a very large, robust closed system, but closed nonetheless), there's just not much in the way of new frontiers left.
And when that happens, it's time to break out the pioneer gear, and head into uncharted (for me) territory.
-=Vel=-
Thank ya, Geo!
Comment