Comparison game for testing different strategies

[Minute Mirage]

When I play SP, it's mostly for trying out different strategies and trying to improve my game. However, the conditions may vary wildly from game to game making comparisons between different games very hard. Additionally, I'd like to compare my games to others', since that's how you really can learn new things and improve your game.

For this reason, I played a game from the starting save of Sikander's builder game and posted a thread about my experiences here. I had a lot of fun playing the game, since a lot of people had played the game from the same starting position and I could compare my progress to theirs. In essence, the game stayed fun because I wasn't competing against the lousy AI, but against myself and the other people who had played the game before.

However, there were a few things that made comparisons difficult with Sikander's game. First off, the unity pods provide a great deal of randomness, especially in the form of Alien Artifacts. Secondly, the AI's behaviour is unpredictable and it can lead to huge differences between games, mostly because of trading or stealing techs.

Now, what I propose is creating a podless map that could be used for comparisons between different players and playing styles. Since the focus would be on building, there should be ample room for expansion and no AIs nearby. I would also prohibit trading or stealing techs with the AI, but otherwise it should be acceptable to enter a pact or treaty with them in order to gain commerce income. The specifics of the map can be decided later if there's any interest in this type of thing.

[Archaic]

Why should trading or stealing techs from the AI be prohibited? Diplomatic skill with the AI is still an important part of the SP game. It's unpredictable, yes, but it's an acceptable variation in my mind.

[Minute Mirage]

Originally posted by Archaic
Why should trading or stealing techs from the AI be prohibited? Diplomatic skill with the AI is still an important part of the SP game. It's unpredictable, yes, but it's an acceptable variation in my mind.

You could just as well say that knowing when and where to pop pods and going hunting for them is an important part of the game, even though it is unpredictable. And I fully agree with that and your comment about the diplomatic skills.

However, allowing these things makes comparing the differences between various strategies and players a lot harder, at least as far as pure building is concerned. If the first player produces 10% more labs per turn in his game, but the second player manages to probe three techs in one turn from an AI, the second one is far ahead in the game, even though the first one might have played a better game otherwise. And this doesn't even mean that the first player doesn't understand the importance of probes -- it might just be that the AI didn't research those techs in his game for some reason.

[Googlie]

A variation on the comparison game that I've played with several players is a reverse faction matched pair. By that I mean, eg, MM and I would play a game with, say, MM as the Gaians and me as Morgan, then a parallel game (different map, but same AI) with MM as Morgan and me as the Gaians.

It's a really neat way of comparing playing skills, and I learned oodles through this (my partners were Vel, in maybe the first parallel game, big_canuck, RedFred, Darius, from all of whom I learned much, as I said.)

We didn't disable pods, or ban tech trading (it's a good way to learn how to play the aliens, too - play two games, one as Marr and t'other as H'minee - they play very differently when you're against another human player in permanent vendetta)

Just a thought

G.

[Minute Mirage]

That's sounds like an interesting idea, Googlie, and it's probably a good way to learn to play other factions. However, if I understood correctly it's a PBEM, which is really not what I'm looking for. Don't get me wrong, I think multiplayer is the real SMAC(X), but I'd like to test the strategies in single player first.