Cede Base Control to Another Player?

duMa · April 5, 2002, 10:30

I was wondering, is it possible to cede control of a base to another player in a PBEM/Hotseat game?

Seems silly if one couldn't... but I can't find it in-game. Thx all.

Mongoose · April 5, 2002, 10:58

Nope. Needs vendetta/occupation.

Flubber · April 5, 2002, 14:21

It probably was considered to be too much of an opportunity for exploitation. Mongoose is correct as the only way to get a base in another human's hands is through conquest or probe actions.

You can still give bases to the AI in PBEM though

johndmuller · April 5, 2002, 19:34

There are sometimes unpleasant side effects when acquiring a base from another human player in PBEM. Notably, any AI pactmates of the original owner will declare vendeta when the new owner makes their move. This can probably be utilized by a cagey player to complicate matters for another human player while at the same time seeming to be quite friendly. Also, your reputation also takes a hit for what the game perceives as an unprovoked attack, which will also impact ones AI relationships.

Shai-Hulud · April 7, 2002, 09:30

Quote:

It probably was considered to be too much of an opportunity for exploitation

I don't know...maybe. But who would trade bases which details s/he wouldn't be familiar with? It just doesn't make sense. And it makes alliance a little less useful.

...by the way. Can you give your units to human player? No?

big_canuk · April 7, 2002, 09:46

Yes, I transfer units to other humans all the time. Really makes sense to transfer to say Sparta, with their lousy industry, and great morale, or from The Drones or Hive with their good industry.

Use cntl-shift-u. Its also somewhere on the right click menu, near the bottom, I think. Only works when you are in your pactmates territory.

Mongoose · April 7, 2002, 10:37

WARNING!! Sometimes, it doesn't work. In these cases, the shortcut command doesn't function and the menu option on the pull down either doesn't appear or produces no effect. To the best of my knowledge, this occurs when the two parties in question aren't both at war with the same third party. After much study, I was never able to determine exactly what conditions are necessary to cause this. Seems to be as I said before, but YMMV. I have experienced this (in the distant past, I must add

)only in SMAC Classic, both in PBEM and in IP play. Maybe it was 'fixed' in SMAX, maybe not, maybe it's an intended feature. (I haven't played near as much MP SMAX as I have SMAC, nor have I tested it in SMAX.)

MariOne · April 7, 2002, 15:47

Mong, IIRC we were NOT conclusive about an in-game "cause" for that impossibility in the first place.

I remember it occurred me once in a game set up by Alex Pol (?) from Australia, called Archives, with Veracitas. After I fel a jet thru hlaf the world to give it to a Pactmate, it didn't work.
But in that game we got thru changing diplo stances, and thruout that entire game no faction was able to gift units to no other facion.
I think that everytime a possible combination of causes was proposed, someone came out with personal experience denying that theory.

I am still more inclined now to think that it's a random-hit bug, and that it hist a whole game (rarely) or it doesn't.
(also this could still be proved wrong tho...)

Capt Dizle · April 7, 2002, 16:56

Mong, when you refer to SMAC Classic are you refering to SMAC v4 or SMACX Classic v2?

Mongoose · April 7, 2002, 17:38

Hmmm...never heard Crossfire referred to as 'classic'. I meant Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. I do not recall if it ever happened with V4.0. And yes, MariOne, I know the exact cause was never pinpointed. I thought my other post conveyed that uncertainty.

I once posted an extensive history of my experiences with this phenomenon at ACOL, but that was before the great crash (and before AnnC took it over) I doubt that post is available anymore. Sadly, my memory of the circumstances fails.

Capt Dizle · April 7, 2002, 18:22

This terminology thing can be dangerous. In this CGN head to head tourney, Mark told me that we were playing SMAC Classic.

In SMAX, on the start up screen you can choose between Crossfire and Classic SMAC. So, I wonder which game Mark intended.

I am playing SMAX Classic SMAC, and MoSe may be playing his turns in SMAC v4.

mark13 · April 7, 2002, 18:27

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick
This terminology thing can be dangerous. In this CGN head to head tourney, Mark told me that we were playing SMAC Classic.

In SMAX, on the start up screen you can choose between Crossfire and Classic SMAC. So, I wonder which game Mark intended.

I am playing SMAX Classic SMAC, and MoSe may be playing his turns in SMAC v4.

SMAX Classic SMAC and SMAC v4 are one and the same.

AnnC · April 7, 2002, 18:35

I think they are different. We all know about the bug in SMAC, vers 4, where base-facility maintenance fees are not properly deducted when you play at Thinker and Transcend levels.

As I recall, this bug is fixed in SMAX classic mode. I'm not sure how this affects PBEM games though. Has anybody looked into this?

mark13 · April 7, 2002, 18:39

Hmmm, now you come to mention it...though they didn't fix GA pop-booms for classic SMAC, that's only in SMAX (and Mac SMAC

). It's bloody confusing though, whatever...

...tell you what though, this would be grossly unfair for PBEM games if the maintenance costs are still skewed...

Mongoose · April 7, 2002, 18:49

I am fairly certain that the 'classic' moniker in Crossfire's game selection screen is merely a name differentiation. There was no change to the terran.exe made by the installation of Crossfire into the SMAC folder, nor by the Crossfire V2.0 patch.

I'm also fairly certain that the maintenece expense bug still exists in every Windows version of SMAC V4.0. I understand it was fixed in the other ports. (MAC & Linux)

Capt Dizle · April 7, 2002, 19:33

another can of worms, ack ack

Capt Dizle · April 7, 2002, 19:40

Terran.exe for both v4 and SMAX Classic has the same date stamp and size.

We do need to find out if we are having different maintenance costs across platforms.

buster · April 7, 2002, 21:15

The Smac executable is the same as the smac classic executable.

They are identical - there is just an initial screen in smacx that lets you choose between terran.exe & terranx.exe. (The smac & smacx executables).

There have been several reports that bugs that were fixed only in the smacx v2 patch (eg. inability to pop boom with golden age & multiple airdrops) were fixed in the mac version of smac.

My guess is that the game engine patches that were done in smacx version2 - were part of the code sent to the companies doing the platform ports and as it to them was a new product they took it seriously and applied them.

It would have been very easy for firaxis to apply the same fixes to smac as were applied to smacx but they just did not bother. They actually patched in the copy protection (CD requirement) and skipped the game patches.

Or maybe EA decided to do so. (From what I understand - Firaxis sends the code to the publisher who compiles it - including copy protection at compilation).

There was an earlier thread on it where there was a bit of joking about if you play Morgan you need a Mac etc.

MariOne · April 8, 2002, 04:39

Quote:

Originally posted by AnnC
I think they are different. We all know about the bug in SMAC, vers 4, where base-facility maintenance fees are not properly deducted when you play at Thinker and Transcend levels.

As I recall, this bug is fixed in SMAX classic mode. I'm not sure how this affects PBEM games though. Has anybody looked into this?

Ann, it's incredible how memories fade over time, ain't it?
This, or I should consider your "naiveté" almost provocatory (provocatvive? sp? in short, a provocation)

I didn't let pass the occasion hundred times I posted it with details over at ACOL, that my main reason for anger (yes, ANGER) and for my despise (yes, DESPISE) towards Firaxis, is exactly that despite they had written the code to fix many bugs present in SMAC, not only they didn't bother to distrubute that fix in a patch compatible with terran.exe in addition to terranx.exe, but also they commercialized in a bundle the new SMAX embedding the SMAC fixes and SMAC *without* the fixes they HAD written the code for!!!! (borrow machine-gun smiley from other forums)

As buster more calmly said, the terrran.exe you find in SMAX is the v4 patch for SMAC. You don't even find SMAC inside SMAX, you had to have it already, with the exception of the Planetary Pack edition, IIRC.

Only imagining that terran.exe includes ANY of the fixes introduced in SMAX, it's self-illusionary (sp?). More, I'd say it's voluntarily ignoring and forgetting tons of detailed and proved information read in *every forum* since SMAX got out.
SMAC is a DEAD game for Firaxis. They will not shell a dime of their sweat for it anymore, why should they? Any Classic SMAC you'll find anywhere can't be more advanced than SMACv4, and CAN'T BE DIFFERENT.
Correction: of course I am talking of PC platform, not considering Mac and Linux/Unix, for which I have no title of talking about.

MariOne · April 8, 2002, 04:50

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick I am playing SMAX Classic SMAC, and MoSe may be playing his turns in SMAC v4.

Then we're usuing the same identical game JT, don't worry and don't you let be influenced by ladies with lable memory, trust Mongoose & buster.

You shold beware tho to players who are using Mac or Linux, as I pointed out in a thread at ACOL which in turn linked back to info I got here in Apolyton.

mark13 · April 8, 2002, 08:30

Phew. I'd have looked a right idiot had I been wrong.

MariOne · April 8, 2002, 08:44

Have I such powers?

mark13 · April 8, 2002, 08:48

Depends whether you resign, I s'pose

AnnC · April 8, 2002, 13:16

MoSe, thanks for clarifying. I don't have SMAX installed on my computer (just SMAC) so I didn't have a way to check executables myself.