Do you consider ICS to be a problem?

[Kataphraktoi]

i was joking senethro. i aprreciate any and all opinions i can get.

see,i interpret some of you saying ICS is unstoppable.i impassiontly view all strategies as have strengths and weaknesses,and it can be defeated. i dont see whats wrong with that. in fact people seem to support ICS when it is trashed, and attack it when its uplifted.(see Koriand'r post)

[Ka Plewy]

Planetbusters can make mean work of ICS.
Cooperative play between two non ICS'ers can negate the technology edge an ICS'er might have.
I've currently taken over a game from someone who apparently never used ICS, and in fact placed his bases for optimal growth (w/ habdomes).
It's interesting. It's similar to how I first placed SMAC.

[binTravkin]

see Koriand'r post

[Kataphraktoi]

since i havnt responded(on the forums) to your challange bT i wonder if it still stands in light of our ICQ convo's? i was looking foreward to your personal demonstration. and if this is in spirit of western duels do i get to pick our weapons?[factions] for you i would say the results of your poll.

edit; for anyone interested on what happaned bT will be DA and i university. shame on you bT for not replying on here,you missed a +1

[Kataphraktoi]

here you are senethro.my .02$ early in the morning on why not to ICS 1x1

to use a common example,you have a choice between 1$ now or 2% tomorrow.unless you have a investment that can return 101% by 1day it would clearly be better to pick the 2$. but what about 7 days? or 10? at some point the single dollar would be clearly better.

if a base makes a crawler,as opposed to a CP,it can get a return of 2 mins(forest).assuming the base had 6 mins from say base tile[2]+2 forest it could now make a crawler every 5 turns.whereas if it made CP it would be down to 4 mins,or even less if you put it on a high food tile to regrow asap. by putting crawlers on forest till optimal mins are reached[whatever you desire] you can then rapidly expand on other projects,say SP with your fast crawlers per turn. or crawl food and make new CP. you would have a significant edge as your base would not be damaged by pop loss nearly so much. whereas if you built crawlers after the CP you would be playing catchup and at less mins. of course a new base gets more return than a single crawler,but each crawler speeds the next and creates turn advanatage.you could also make crawlers and rehome to new bases.

by focusing on a good base then using it to expand strongly,that seems imho better than pure CP production.of course you could still ICS but at 1x1 you leave less room for forests and later condensers and boreholes. i hear you know, boreholes wouldt be blocked and just fill with condensers. but then b-drones would prevent psych\golden ages( like in cgn 23 where i didnt even pay attention ) and with 2x2 spacing you can still have forest crawlers getting mins as opposed to food\specialists. of course more ec and more produce\turn lets clean formers(or formers) come off the line asap,equaling more turn advanatage in forming

i see this all as focusing and turn advanatage.of course at some point 100 bases are going to be better than 20 or 40. but the far in the lead smaller player should end it before the bigger one can get going. you say 100 at 1 chopper per turn is better than 20 at 1 turn, but then,i would have captured bases and destroyed multitudes of crawlers and formers

this mathmatical playing of a game where vertical growth for once is so awesome makes no sense imho\ i could see your arguments in a civ game,and i ICS there. but those do not support vertical growth will all sorts of juicy builds available

if any of that made sense let me know

[binTravkin]

You want challenge Cata?

How about 8pm this eve behind Fred's Bakery?!

Come online on ICQ you heathen, so we can arrange it!

[Kataphraktoi]

the heathen is on ICQ but i see no bT

[Mart]

In Celix Factus I started 1x1 ICS Cataphract, just after you left.

Sorry to say that. But my colony pod drivers rioted when I asked them to drive larger distances...