Have we discussed EVERYTHING ?

[Flubber]

Hmmm

I know its summer and this is an "older" game but it seems like this is the fewest threads I have ever seen in this forum. Since it appears that an inactive forum gets "consolidated", we may have to "use it or lose it".

Have we discussed everything in so much depth that there is little left to say? I can hardly believe that.

There continue to be newbs and I cannot believe they are picking up everything from the archives. Or is it the very inactivity that makes people less likely to post a thread?

[Sarxis]

I know for me it is because I don't play the game anymore. Moved on. Been playing Ages of Man mod for CTP2 lately. Tried out cIV for a bit when it came out, but it just hasn't captivated me, and the latest xpack for it (Warlords) isn't worth $30 imo.

I miss the game for sure, but I like going onto new things.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Sarxis
I know for me it is because I don't play the game anymore. Moved on. Been playing Ages of Man mod for CTP2 lately. Tried out cIV for a bit when it came out, but it just hasn't captivated me, and the latest xpack for it (Warlords) isn't worth $30 imo.

I miss the game for sure, but I like going onto new things.

and yet you were the first response ( and is that avatar a transcendi???)

Come back to us -- (although frankly I don't remember you in the AC forums at all)

[vyeh]

An observation from my current game:

From this forum, I learned that one can space boreholes on a grid (a borehole two spaces above, below and to the sides of each borehole; use terraform down everytime the game says you're building on a slope) and that a river will terminate on a borehole.

So for an additional enery unit from a borehole, drill aquifer on a borehole. Since the river terminates at a borehole, you have a one square water patch and there is no problem drilling to aquifer on every borehole (subject to the original rivers).

Obviously, a very intensive use of former time. I'm sure that there are those who will say that formers are better used creating new base sites or that it is more efficient to have condensor farms and create specialists ...

Re the original post: while the possibilities for discussion on the general strategy forum might become limited (there are just so many possible moves in AC and with each discovery there is one less discovery), what has happened to the creation forum?

[Illuminatus]

My main concern with Creatioin is that C4:AC has apparently died.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Illuminatus
My main concern with Creatioin is that C4:AC has apparently died.

Thats too bad since Iwas looking forward to product as perhaps a reason to buy CIV4 -- and upgrade my computer to play it

It looked as if you had an impressive grouping of people interested but like many projects probably it is betetr to have 2-3 really dedicated folks than even dozens of slightly interested folks.

[CEO Aaron]

While I'm a great fan of the game and will make this forum a regular stop in my job-related timewasting activities, I kind of do feel as though there's a limited number of corner cases left to discuss as regards to strategy in the retail version of the game.

While my hopes for an official sequel or revision to this game have long since evaporated, I really do think that is what's required to revive interest in it. Unfortunately, Firaxis has pretty much given up on the SMAX franchise, due to SMAC's comparatively indifferent success on initial release. While the game's longevity is a testament to its innovative design, innovation doesn't necessarily wind up being more profitable than a tried and true product.

Also, I'm left with the distinct impression that Alpha Centauri was Brian Reynolds' baby, and with his departure to found Big Huge Games, any chance of creating a SMAC sequel has diminished into quantum levels of likelihood, which is just too bad for me.

[Flubber]

I agree-- I have never seen a smax sequel as that likely, but why couldn't they make a CIV that incorporated its best features like the workshop and the SE choices

[Verrucosus]

Having always been a rather quiet member of the forum, I'm intrigued by Flubber's concern, but I don't really share it.

When reading the comments about little being left to say about SMAC strategy, I remembered having read something like that before. I looked at my bookshelf and reached for Velociryx's SMAX Guide (that for some obscure reason was stuck between Dahrendorf's Homo Sociologicus and Samuelson's Economics textbook). Anyway, the first sentence reads:

"I'm not sure, but after this, the strategy guide's fourth revision, I think we may well be closing in on saying pretty much everything that can be said on the topic of our favorite game."

That was in 2001. With a somewhat unreliable archive search it's hard to give specific examples, but if I remember just some of the threads I've read here in the past five years, I'd say that in retrospect the term "pretty much everything" was a bit too bold. The 2001 Guide is still the most comprehensive document about SMAC strategy, not to mention a contagious revelation of the enthusiasm this game can inspire. However, I have a feeling that if Velociryx were suddenly overcome by SMAC nostalgia and decided to publish a 5th edition, it would be about thirty pages thicker.

We would have been done discussing SMAC strategy ages ago, if it were only a question of how to win. Those only interested in "beating the game" were probably disappointed as soon as they found how ignorant the AI appears to be of some of the most powerful tools in the game. I suppose those who are still here are those who got hooked by the game's unique atmosphere before they had a chance to move away. Their challenge is to find ways of playing the game so that its mechanic flaws become irrelevant (multiplayer, roleplaying, self-imposed restrictions, etc.). That's why sound advice like "you need more crawlers" (almost always true) gets often rejected or even preempted by the statement of some crawler limitation the player subjects himself to.

All of this is not to say that the bulk of SMAC strategy has not yet been thoroughly discussed. It has been (and had been in 2001), but different ways of playing the game require different strategies and in that sense SMAC may still have hidden secrets. If a comparison is permitted, solo's Early Landing Guide for Civ2 was published (according to the posting date in the Civ2 strategy forum) only three years ago and Civ2 is about three years older than SMAC.

Another topic that is hard to exhaust should be operational strategy. It's very difficult to discuss it in general terms and much more rewarding to do it with a specific situation, perhaps even a savegame and a screenshot, at hand.

Finally, there are the new players. I don't know about you, but it's heart-warming to read the posts of the new players who just discovered the game. It brings back the memories of my own first few games and the time when the SMAC universe took shape in my mind. Not being a SMAC expert by any definition, I only respond when I feel I have something useful to say and the time to put it on paper, but I always enjoy reading those threads. They are an opportunity to revive the knowledge about the game mechanics and to take another look at old strategies and in this context, there's nothing wrong with reinventing the Wheel (or Organic Superlubricant if that fits better).

So, why is it so quiet then?

As Flubber said when he started the discussion, it's summer and SMAC is an "older game". Its age probably means that we don't play it as intensively as we did during the early days. There are other good games around, but most of us seem to revisit Alpha Centauri every few months or so. As long as we do, there's no danger to losing this forum.

While I don't think a SMAC remake is particularly likely, I think it will happen eventually. (After all, someone at Firaxis must have been responsible for including a "Map of Planet" in Civ4.) Until it happens - and maybe even afterwards - there is still the original to be enjoyed and discussed.

(edited spelling)

[Googlie]

Originally posted by Flubber


Thats too bad since Iwas looking forward to product as perhaps a reason to buy CIV4 -- and upgrade my computer to play it

It looked as if you had an impressive grouping of people interested but like many projects probably it is betetr to have 2-3 really dedicated folks than even dozens of slightly interested folks.

I was one of the leaders in getting an AC team for Civ4, but after getting and playing a few iterations of the game, it just didn't grab my interest the way SMAC/X does, even now

In fact, I still play the odd game of Civ2 in preference to firing up Civ4

[Lazerus]

Somebody still needs to teach me how to play something other then a Hive ICS !

[CEO Aaron]

You're kidding, right? Laz, you're like a legend, don't tell me you've never messed around with any of the builder factions.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by CEO Aaron
You're kidding, right? Laz, you're like a legend, don't tell me you've never messed around with any of the builder factions.

hey you are going to make Laz blush

How can us normal duffers compete with a legend?

[MariOne]

hi guys, please drop me a note before you let this forum get discontinued...

getting senile allowed me to forget many of the bugs, er... "features" and tricks we found out, and better enjoy some solo game when I can't get to sleep in the evenings...


I still have that old 1998 rig, and can't run any new game anyway, although I see that yin praised Civ4

[Lazerus]

You've been listening to too much hype

I've messed around with them and failed quite miserably I can transcend quicker using Yang then doing something normal like Uni\PKs\Drones actually using FM and being able to pull off a controlled popboom then back to FM :\

Hey Marione been awhile since seen you on here