Save the Environment Party (STEP) or The Green Party (GP)

[lucky22]

OK, quick question- I run original SMAC and the only way I have figured out how to "re-home" crawlers is to place one crawler on the desired resource and to place a second crawler in the base where one wants to funnel the resources. Not too efficient, and I get the feeling not what folks are talking about here.

[Maniac]

Just move into the base you want to rehome the crawler (or any unit for that matter) to and select "rehome" or something from the right-click menu. Other method is to press Ctrl+H.

[lucky22]

Thanks. I think I have been looking at the "action" menu for individual units. I'll see if I've been overlooking the option as soon as I get home.

[Maniac]

Do you have "detailed right-click menus" on?

[lucky22]

yes, but I didn't do it inside the base where I wanted to re-home. I'll know for sure in about 3.5 hours.

[Hercules]

Kirov:

Herc, are you just against FM and extensive terraforming, or you will also vote for Green, Xeno Dome, breeding
Mind Worms and the like?

No, will definitely, circumstances permitting. vote green, Xeno dome and breeding.
You must know how useful the Locusts are in the middle to late game. So many of these games have such large percentage land/sea ratio that the full capability of the Isle of the Deep hasn't been sufficiently acknowledged.

But as Drogue says we are loyal to the peacekeepers, if needs be we will support what is necessary to develop/maintain the peacekeepers as a leading (ultimately the leading) faction.

[Hercules]

General Tacticus and Voltaire: Are you quite properly just being devil's advocates or are you just being awkward,

BTW in SP games I take it Deirdre or Dawn aren't your all time favourite factions. If not why not and what are your favourites and why.

Say the Peacekeepers decides to adopt a 'green ' agenda forthe future, in your opinion how could that be best achieved? Discuss and compare

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Hercules
General Tacticus and Voltaire: Are you quite properly just being devil's advocates or are you just being awkward,

For the most part I agree with your agenda, so if you will I’m just being a devil’s advocate.

[Drogue]

I think GT just genuinly disagrees with us. I can understand that for the. But I ask myself not just what is best for the game, but if I was living on Planet, as a Citizen, what would I want? What I would want is a safe Planet and a healthy eco-system, and that is what I will campaign for.

[Aaron Blackwell]

I have to disagree on the fact that running FM can help reduce the pollution on the planet.

Well, in theory it does have an impact in the sense that it increase the number of clean minerals ....

BUUUUTTTTTTTT ..... to work properly, the eco-damage and the number of fungal blooming due to pollution must be kept in check ===> Something that it is nearly impossible to do in FM.

Okay, I'll try to be more explicit :

Due the mineral output of our bases with all those crawlers, switching to FM mean that the eco-damage will SKYROCKET !!

Also:

*** We do not have a lot of eco-damage reducing facilities (at least not to my knowledge) ==> Less way to keep eco-damage in check.

*** We still need to do a lot of terraforming and this work will imply a lot of work toward removing fungus. This in turn imply additional risk for our workers and the need to protect them => Additional cost for our faction running FM than if we do not run it.

*** Trance will not be enough to protect those worker. Psi combat is much erratic and random compared to conventional combat. With maluses to planet, we will have to stick to a defensive posture. Worms will get 3 to 2 ratio combat ( 3 to 3 with trance). Not enough to garantee absolute security.

So I would have to ask to all you are in favor of a FM, if they agree to take personal risks by joining those people who will have to work in the fungus or protecting our cities against mindworms boils.

*** Also, more fungal blooming implies more unecessary work for our formers as they will have to repair the damage.

*** A small detail but which can have its importance, Planet Pearls are only collectible when you attack mindworms not when you successfully defend against them. Again, running FM will not allow us to do it.


Now, I am not saying that we should go crazy over every single small point of eco-damage and that it could be beneficial to both us and planet to allow some eco-damage to favor fungal blooming and clean minerals.

Besides there is a BIG difference between allowing some eco-damage to reduce the ecologic problem in the future rather than using this argument to support wanton ecologic disruption just to fill the energy wallet of a minority at the cost of the majority of the citizens.

End of rant

[lucky22]

Originally posted by lucky22
yes, but I didn't do it inside the base where I wanted to re-home. I'll know for sure in about 3.5 hours.

Kitchen plumbing disaster!!
With environmental issues "coming home", I guess I'll know for sure tonight instead. I'm sure it's due to trying it outside the base.

[Drogue]

Nicely put Aaron, I like you're thinking. I agree with most of what you said, bar the last paragraph.

Originally posted by Aaron Blackwell
Besides there is a BIG difference between allowing some eco-damage to reduce the ecologic problem in the future rather than using this argument to support wanton ecologic disruption just to fill the energy wallet of a minority at the cost of the majority of the citizens.

Since I think we will win either way, I put it to you: Would you rather win easily, harming the Planet slightly or live in harmony with Planet, taking a longer and more difficult path to victory, but ultimatly a much more rewarding one, with the goal of being one with Planet and Transcending?

I know we're not the Gaians, but we have a responsibility to look after this Planet. While I know that having no eco-damage at all isn't going to happen (most people favour increased production and some eco-damage) I want to make sure that Ecological issues are on the agenda, that in every action that harms Planet, we've thought about the eco-damage and taken it into account.

And besides, being Green is good

[Aaron Blackwell]

Yes, being green is good !!!

Besides, one xeno-spliff a day,keep the doctor away

As to answer your question Drogue :

Yes, I would prefer a challenge for our faction. Trying to be as eco-sensitive as we can and aim for transcandance is a good one.

But I would rather have the other faction be more stronger, better and more importantly smarter !

Maybe if someone could volonteer to play some of the other faction, edit the savegame to beef them up or to modify the other faction to give them bonuses ....

Well, I guess that it could be important to discuss. After, people might lose interest in the game if it become to easy.

Just my two cents on the subject though

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Aaron Blackwell
Maybe if someone could volonteer to play some of the other faction, edit the savegame to beef them up or to modify the other faction to give them bonuses ....

That's a hell of an idea. Someone said before about doing a multi-faction PBEM Democracy Game (or even IP, done in turnchat). If we get bored, why not turn this into that? Bring back political parties, and give them each a faction (STEP get Gaians, Capitalists get Morganites, P4 keep Peacekeepers, Lemmy (TSA) gets Univ etc.) arty:

Has that ever been tried before?

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Drogue


That's a hell of an idea. Someone said before about doing a multi-faction PBEM Democracy Game (or even IP, done in turnchat). If we get bored, why not turn this into that? Bring back political parties, and give them each a faction (STEP get Gaians, Capitalists get Morganites, P4 keep Peacekeepers, Lemmy (TSA) gets Univ etc.) arty:

Has that ever been tried before?

Not a bad idea, but we’re short on people as it is to participate in this game, if we ever attempted that it would just degrade to a normal MP game.

[Drogue]

Possibly, but one where each faction could try and 'recruit' new members to their ideals, where discussion between factions is allowed on a central forum (this one) and one where each faction is run according to it's agenda. So the Hive only needs one person to run it (no democracy) and The leader of The Believers is elevated to the position of Messiah

If not doing it here (which is probably wise) does anyone want to start up a MP/Demo game where each faction is run according to it's ideals and by one or many people?

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Drogue
Possibly, but one where each faction could try and 'recruit' new members to their ideals, where discussion between factions is allowed on a central forum (this one) and one where each faction is run according to it's agenda. So the Hive only needs one person to run it (no democracy) and The leader of The Believers is elevated to the position of Messiah

If not doing it here (which is probably wise) does anyone want to start up a MP/Demo game where each faction is run according to it's ideals and by one or many people?

I see, it might work; count me in if we’re going to attempt this MP/Demo game.

[Aaron Blackwell]

Okay, but there are other ways to make a challenge of this game when it becomes too easy :

- Taking the role of another, weaker faction and trying to beat the powerful faction that the UN peacekeeping will have become.

- Editing the other faction and give them SE bonuses.

- Use the map editor to force technology breakthrough for the AI factions, enough to give them an edge. This can easily be done without spoiling our pleasure as only one person has to do it and it can do it without looking at the maps of the other factions.

- etc ...

If our game become hoplessly too easy or if we feel that none of the option above could help make the game more interesting, we have one more option:

Create a specific scenario for a AC Democracy game and make it very challenging !

In the AC strategy forums, there is a link the "RHYNN GALLERY SITE" or something like this which contains very difficult scenarios and where the AI is very strong.
The thread title is something like " Succesfull AI sharetech".

Or we could create one ourselves, give the AI faction more cities and tech than ours etc ... and create a very challenging scenarion.

For the moment, the game remains very interesting to play, but I think we should prepare ourselves in case this problem arise, so that we may keep playing without interruption

EDIT MODE :

What you have all suggested could also be working and be very intersting )

Beside, we don't need to make all the AI run by players, just one or two ( which would require only one or two players to do it). This way these faction would become more unpredictable.

I have heard that there is one mightily strong player in this community , whose name is Velocyrix. As he was the one who write a very good and complete guide, maybe he is the person to ask what we could do for a challenging game

[Drogue]

I like the ideas, but I think if the game becomes too easy it becomes boring, we'll simply win by being elected supreme governor (with our double votes, should be very easy). I think having a human take over one or 2 factions is a very good idea. I would happily (with Herc's agreement) take over the Gaian's with STEP. Possibly get some good player to take over the Hive on their own?

I think were getting a little ahead of ourselves, but I like the idea, for later in the game.

[Aaron Blackwell]

Sure, it is too soon to decide something for now, I totally agree with that

I am just doing this so that we will have enough idea prepared in case this situation occurs.

[Maniac]

I would keep these proposals for a next AC Demo game.

We could let all seven factions start near each other, to have diplomacy and tensions from the beginning. It also seems more realistic than having each of the seven pods land at the opposite side of the planet.

Perhaps we could start off as the real united UN mission, and factions would have to wage war to gain their independence from the UNPK. Everyone should then start as pacted to the PKs. It should also be common practice to exchange technology as written in the UN mission charter. When a faction doesn't comply, all the others have a reason to go at war.

To increase the roleplaying part, victory conditions could be amended a little. A proposal:

The PKs need to:
a) win a diplomatic victory, or
b) convince/force every faction to turn frontier or democratic and be pacted with them.

The UoP needs to:
a) win a transcendence victory, or
b) convince/force every faction to turn survival/knowledge. They should be pacted with those having survival as value.

The Morganites need to:
a) win an economic victory, or
b) convince/force every faction to turn simple/free market, and have a pact with those having simple economics.

The Gaians need to:
a) win a transcendence victory, or
b) convince/force every faction to turn survival/green, and have a pact with the simple economists.

The Spartans need to:
a) win a conquest victory, or
b) convince every faction to have survival/power values, and have a pact with the survival value-ers.

The Believers need to:
a) win a conquest victory, or
b) everyone fundy or frontier, and blah blah...

The Hive needs to:
a) conquest, or
b) everyone police state or frontier, and pact with blah blah...

These alternative victory conditions should add to the roleplaying part. It also wouldn't make it necessary to conquer everyone to win the game. Forcing them to adopt your SE setting, sign a submissive pact and make them pay 100 ec per turn would be a sufficient peace deal for example. It also leaves open cooperative victory. For example the PKs, Morganites and UoP could win together by having every faction adopt Demo/FM/Knowledge.

Perhaps we could also include the concept of a rebellion as to make sure a faction doesn't disappear for good the moment they are conquered. Eg if a conquered base has a drone riot, the old faction could rebel and reappear with controlling some of their old bases and some units. This allows members of a conquered faction to keep involved with the game and let them have a second chance.

When new players come into the game, or there is disagreement within a faction, the faction could perhaps split as well (provided there aren't already seven factions present in the game) and one of them becomes a SMAX faction.

Just some proposals...

[Voltaire]

All of these are great ideas, but there still is the problem of participation? If we’re low on representatives for the government in the normal democracy game, will we have enough people to play one with all 7 factions?

Just being pessimistic here.

[Maniac]

True, but I suppose in a PBEM-ACDG game, I guess we wouldn't have an official government and polling system as here where everyone is playing the same faction. I guess each faction would choose one leader who plays the game and all decisions are made in members chats or threads, without any further sibdivisions in directorates. No polls besides perhaps quickpolls in chats, so if you don't post your opinion, you aren't heard. Indeed, if too few people join, it could turn into a simple PBEM game. Let's wait and see how it evolves with Civ3, PtW I suppose...

[Drogue]

Sounds Great I think having an AT is useful aswell, one person might not be enough to control a faction in a DG. As per getting more people involved, is it possible to do one not just with Apolyton, but with other SMAC sites?

[Method]

having a PBEM DG is a cool idea. check out the PTWDG forum for their ideas, it seems pretty cool. each team has their own private forum

though with its bug fixes and what-not, i'd like to play SMAX (even if we just use the original 7 factions), though i'm not sure how many people have it

as for other sites, CFC's smac section is deserted (evil though they apparently are), though i don't know of any other sites (CGN? blah.)

we should, however discuss this elsewhere, and perhaps later, because having 2 DGs going on at once would be tough/time consuming/confusing

[Hercules]

I love the idea and like you guys have looked around. I am almost certain there was a multiplayer civ2 DG game between different Civ sites: like CFC. Apoly and CGN. Believe it or not it ended after 2/3 turns. As a couple of factions took chances to vacate bases (as you do ) Pirates wiped out two factions( two sites) leaving the surviving faction (ie not sure which Site ) the bemused winner.

So just as there are inter site tournaments, so there could be intersite MP DG game.

If one goes down this route (to increase overall participation), this raises questions but not necessarily insolvable ones.

Naturally each MP faction would need its own discussion/ strategy/tactic area .

Fine, but there is no way of contolling spying. For simplicity sake, most players in most forums use the same alias, but there is no easy method to stop players registering under different names and addresses: eg hotmail, yahoo, aol. and infiltrating another factions camp.

On the other hand this adds a real life spice to the game in trying to detect spies in the camp, using a lot of modern techniques, such as patterns of grammar usage and counter espionage.

As with this current game though the inter faction stuff won't happen normally until late 2170-2200.: so one still has that early phase to examine as to how to maintain interest.

I am in favour of both ideas: intra poly DG MP and Inter Site DG MP. In both game ideas the issue of spying needs addressed or maybe it doesn't. Let players have free reign and let others develop counter measures with regard to their discussion forums.

[Method]

in the PTWDG, new members have to be authorised by the team leader. DLs would be caught, so the chance of anyone spying is small

[Hercules]

TKG: could you elaborate on the PTWDG authorisation method

[Method]

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...71#post1438971

i guess someone tries to join, team leaders get a PM or something, they click a link, that person is authorised? PM Trip. that's all i could find (searched "authorize" in that forum)

[Method]

and try: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...54#post1443954