So what [I]exactly[/I] is everyone's problem with FM?

MrWhereItsAt · January 8, 2003, 06:18

OK. Here I go.

Disclaimer: I am not a member of the new party, nor have I ever been a member of any party. I have no agenda beyond having fun and playing this game successfully. Those who know me here will agree that I am open-minded and amenable to any well reasoned idea. Disclaimer ends. I hate how I feel I have to say this.

For quite a while the idea has existed to change to FM and experience dramatic energy and tech increases whilst our bases are small enough to cause little environmental damage and it is easy enough to control drones. This idea has been promoted largely by Archaic, who for some reason seems to be rather unpopular amongst many SMAC forum regulars. I listened to Archaic's arguments some time ago with an unbiased mind, engaged him in discussion about it and have since concluded that a switch to FM whilst we are small enough to for it to be practical could bring about enormous benefits to our faction. Yet time and again the idea has been defeated in polls, and more so, openly rubbished.

This is my question to all those who disagree with attempting this strategy for even a few turns trial: why? I have never used FM much before, but Archaic has convinced me and others that it is more than worth a try. And why not try it? The most we have to lose is a couple of turns of riots in bases (which can largely be circumvented if paid proper attention) and a few EC from changing back. Surely this possibility warrants serious consideration.

It is this consideration that I think is sadly lacking from some posters' minds when they see ideas posted that may not be their own personal preferred strategy. I ask everyone to think about it: would you rather just ignore what may be a very good idea, or try it out? If it fails, at least we tried, and it shows that we are all the more willing to work together and do our damnedest for faction and unity. And we lose so little from trying.

Perhaps there are some excellent reasons against even trying FM - please post them here. In Game reasons only please - none of that RL discussion which has no bearing on how we play the game itself. I don't give a flying monkeys whether FM causes pain and misery and gender imbalance in RL - what will the SE choice do for our faction in the game? Please, everyone think hard - is it really worth abandoning this idea without due consideration?

Maniac · January 8, 2003, 06:34

This game is RP for a great part. So while the game mechanics may say FM is best, RL reasons are against it.

Archaic · January 8, 2003, 07:43

http://www.capitalism.com

A biased site perhaps, but a valid resource nevertheless. Perhaps you might be interested in the flip side of how these RL issues are percieved.

To put it simply......do you want to be able to choose what you want to do when you want to do it within the strictures of what you'd consider to be normal society (ie. The FM's pretty much everyone here would've grown up with)?
(Oh, I'm sorry, but you're only allowed to go on holidays when we tell you, to the place we tell you to go to. And you HAVE to go there during your designated vacation period. You can't stay at home.)

I think though the problem comes from this....
When you're a poor student, communism sounds idealistic and tempting. Once you're actually in the work force however......everything changes.

Main_Brain · January 8, 2003, 14:38

-No attacking Aircrafts possible w/o Punsihment Base
-Need Psych for Drones
-Possible need of Police Units
-Harder to Popboom
-More Micro-managment needed
-Some SP wastly more inefficent
-Dependency on Some Bases
-Tends to slow expansion

Quote:

I have never used FM much before

I humbly suggest you try it.. its easy to talk about it but to actually play it the whole game.. for some Factions yes but for Peacekeeper I prefer Planned/Green

Method · January 8, 2003, 18:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Main_Brain
-No attacking Aircrafts possible w/o Punsihment Base
-Need Psych for Drones
-Possible need of Police Units
-Harder to Popboom
-More Micro-managment needed
-Some SP wastly more inefficent
-Dependency on Some Bases
-Tends to slow expansion

-meh...you can use specialists. but why, i ask, does the pacifist CCCP-ist need attack aircraft?

-you still make more energy/labs
-police units are useless with negative police. below -2 police, you don't get a police effect. police units double police effect 2*0=?
-switch to planned for periods, or use psych and get GAs (actually, that's broken in SMAC iirc. damn bugs

)
-not really...
-you mean the longevity vaccine? true, but who cares?
-what?
-i don't see how...

lucky22 · January 8, 2003, 18:09

Quote:

Originally posted by TKG

but why, i ask, does the pacifist CCCP-ist need attack aircraft?

Main_Brain is our resident hardcore Stalinist...

MrWhereItsAt · January 8, 2003, 18:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
This game is RP for a great part. So while the game mechanics may say FM is best, RL reasons are against it.

I don't understand. Does this mean our own RL predispositions have to dictate the game? Wouldn't it be more interesting to, say, change to FM for a bit because it is good for our game and roleplay within that? The RP PtW game team is using Spain, and currently (of course) Despotism. Togas is our almighty leader. Just because that's what we're doing now, do we have to stick to that? Surely it makes for a more interesting RP if we change every now and again? Quite aside from the game benefits of changing to Monarchy, I expect it will be a helluva lot more fun after all that time in Despotism to suddenly have new RP to do. Do we really have to be stuck with our RP to... whatever we have now?

Quote:

-No attacking Aircrafts possible w/o Punsihment Base
-Need Psych for Drones
-Possible need of Police Units
-Harder to Popboom
-More Micro-managment needed
-Some SP wastly more inefficent
-Dependency on Some Bases
-Tends to slow expansion

Sure, fine. I'm not however advocating FM forever, just for short periods of time when we don't need to worry about these disadvantages. Say when we need money and tech to get what we need for popbooming built up in bases faster. Surely a period of FM with intensive rushing due to the extra EC gained will greatly benefit us, especially when we change back to Planned and use those new facilities to popboom?

Main_Brain · January 8, 2003, 20:12

When constantly Popbooming the Drone Problem clears itself..
there are only so much workable Tiles arround a Base.
Thats why I prefer closer Basebuilding but who listens when teh Drones protest :P

Archaic · January 8, 2003, 20:47

What is the problem of spending a little Psych for Drones Main_Brain? Consider that under FM, you actually *HAVE* the cash flow to spend, and you still have a higher research and/or cash flow rate after spending that Psych. Furthermore, with Psych Spending, you get GA's. An extra +1 Economy (Improving Energy in the base square AND commerce under FM/Wealth) anyone?

And what's this about "constantly popbooming"? You should need no more than 7 turns in any pop boom if you actually bother to plan ahead a little.

Main_Brain · January 9, 2003, 13:33

Sorry Pal im a Constant Booming Guy :P
It seems that unlike your Playing Style I never stop Expanding which is quite hard/impossibel to do under FM.

As its quite Possible to subdue all Drones by facilities in a Normal Game I refrain from Psych.. Psych is Baaad!
it even sounds like some Kind of PsychPolice.. urrggh
No I would never waste resources on such a Thing.

Start Thinking BIG!!!

GeneralTacticus · January 9, 2003, 19:35

Psych is hardly a waste of resources, as it can also induce Golden Ages, which, when you have an Economy of either 1, 3 or higher, are definitely worthwhile.

Main_Brain · January 9, 2003, 19:54

Psych is needed to continue exploring, military patrolling etc.
under Planned/green you dont need psych and still can get GA's.

Fm attracts Mindworms so rushbuildings of protective Units is frequently needed. Its also leads to more Drones so rushing Infrastructure is also needed.

bah let it rest ppl have spoken for Planned so why bother.

GeneralTacticus · January 9, 2003, 20:00

Quote:

Psych is needed to continue exploring, military patrolling etc.

There's nothing to stop us from using probes for that purpose, so it isn't necessary for that.

Quote:

under Planned/green you dont need psych and still can get GA's.

And how, pray tell, would you do that? Even with our factional bonus for talents, that's still only 1 in every four, or at most, two in every five. Remember, we don't have the HGP, so there's no way to have more than 40% Talents in a base without Psych or specialists.

[quote]Fm attracts Mindworms so rushbuildings of protective Units is frequently needed. [/qupte]

Hardly. FM increases ED, but this doesn't mean that we need to 'freqently rushbuild protective units'. We just need to be ready to kill the worms when they appear, which isn't exactly a difficult task.

Quote:

Its also leads to more Drones so rushing Infrastructure is also needed

*YAWN* With Psych, there's no more need for infrastructure than under Planned - especially when FM equips us to do a lot of rushing and the infrastructure is stuff that we need to build anyway.

Quote:

bah let it rest ppl have spoken for Planned so why bother.

Because you still haven't won the argument, that's why.

Pandemoniak · January 10, 2003, 05:02

You cant deny that you can win the game with Deirdre, meaning without FM. All the pro and cons you state for FM or Planned are just different playstyles, so for the fun of RP, I prefer to be totally opposed to FM.

GeneralTacticus · January 10, 2003, 05:16

Of course it's possible to win with Deirdre without FM, and we COULD win as the PKs without FM, but why would we want to? It would be significantly harder, and would not benefit us at all, least of all by making the game more 'fun'.

Lemmy · January 10, 2003, 05:54

Quote:

It would be significantly harder, and would not benefit us at all, least of all by making the game more 'fun'.

What!?
You like easy games?...wuss

GeneralTacticus · January 10, 2003, 05:56

We're here to win, are we not? Nobody likes losing, and while I've got no problem with difficult games, I see no reason to be deliberately inept in order to make matters more challenging.

Pandemoniak · January 10, 2003, 06:04

Not switching to FM doesnt make the game harder. It gives it another style.

GeneralTacticus · January 10, 2003, 06:08

I'm baffled as to how you can believe that the enormous reduction in energy production that results from not picking FM will not make the game harder.

Archaic · January 10, 2003, 09:59

And I'm baffled as to how he can believe that not switching to FM w/ 20% Psych and therefore denying us the enormous decrease in drones and the enormous increase in research thanks to the energy production of FM will not make the game harder.

Main_Brain · January 10, 2003, 11:38

-Exploring with Probe Teams=Worm Fodder
-Less Drones under FM= In a War????
-easy Game= I dont see any Difference, I win my Games under
Planned too?

Flubber · January 10, 2003, 17:39

Interesting stuff here-- I'm not technically part of the democracy game and if you are choosing Planned forever for the purpose of roleplaying, well so be it

But I can tell you that for the purposes of playing the game of SMAC, you are remiss if you are not in FM as the PK at some points in the game for substantial periods

Personally I am most in favor of FM very early (unless the bulk of my tiles are bumping against energy restrictions) and again upon obtaining the lifting of energy restrictions. The building of a single artillery rover and a couple of empath scouts means that worms are good not bad. The increased labs and credits that flow in are substantial. Horde energy while in FM and then rush a bunch of high cost facilities when you switch to Planned. You can spend as many turns there as your pop boom extends.

In game terms, perpetual planned is a waste. Industry only matters on completion of a unit and you can time your rushes to get the benefit of large ticket items. Perpetual pop boom is nice but a more organized boom can gain the same results.

Just two cents from a "pundit" that is not even currently a citizen

Kirov · January 10, 2003, 20:06

Well, having persistently supported the cause of non-FM choices, I must say that FM is my favourite in SP games, after lifting energy restrictions. But anyway, I'm here to have a good time, as this game is won from the very beginning. Well, GT isn't right when he says we are here to win - I'm not.

GeneralTacticus · January 10, 2003, 20:08

Quote:

-Exploring with Probe Teams=Worm Fodder

1) Not if they're armoured (well, less so, anyway)

2) So what? They're not that hard to replace, and except up north, worms aren't all that common.

Quote:

-Less Drones under FM= In a War????

We should experience no drone problems in war if we use mainly probes and drop troops, and make sure we take an enemy base on the same turn that we attack.

Quote:

-easy Game= I dont see any Difference, I win my Games under
Planned too?

You could probably win if you didn't do any terraforming either, but does that mean we shouldn't terraform?

MrWhereItsAt · January 10, 2003, 21:51

For those who are using mainly RP arguments against FM; wouldn't a short time aunder FM benefit you too? You can become corporate stooges, or be the protestors that stage sit-ins and boycotts for the powerful corporations. And when we leave FM (unless we don't) you can always hark back to it as being a "dark time".

C'mon variety isn't boring - let's try this sh1t out, not stay in one place the whole time. THAT's when things get dull.

Pandemoniak · January 11, 2003, 08:36

Is playing with Deirdre harder than playing with Morgan ? Certainly not, she's actually the easiest to play, IMHO.

Drogue · January 11, 2003, 08:57

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
For those who are using mainly RP arguments against FM; wouldn't a short time aunder FM benefit you too? You can become corporate stooges, or be the protestors that stage sit-ins and boycotts for the powerful corporations. And when we leave FM (unless we don't) you can always hark back to it as being a "dark time".

C'mon variety isn't boring - let's try this sh1t out, not stay in one place the whole time. THAT's when things get dull.

It is harder to change than to stay the same however, because many people want to keep the staus quo. As such, if we change to FM, we may not change back. We do not want that, therefore voted against FM. Although it could be fun

Main_Brain · January 11, 2003, 12:52

Im not up to Date with our Research but I dont think we are anyway near Dropdroopers?

Win without Terraforming? mhh interesting
*goes to fire up a game*

GeneralTacticus · January 11, 2003, 17:51

Quote:

Is playing with Deirdre harder than playing with Morgan ? Certainly not, she's actually the easiest to play, IMHO.

Quite possibly, butn the point is WE'RE NOT DEIRDRE.

There, did I write it in big enough letters for you?

Quote:

Im not up to Date with our Research but I dont think we are anyway near Dropdroopers?

No, but it's not as if we're anywhere near needing them either.

Xian · January 11, 2003, 20:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Archaic
[To put it simply......do you want to be able to choose what you want to do when you want to do it within the strictures of what you'd consider to be normal society (ie. The FM's pretty much everyone here would've grown up with)?
(Oh, I'm sorry, but you're only allowed to go on holidays when we tell you, to the place we tell you to go to. And you HAVE to go there during your designated vacation period. You can't stay at home.)

BWHAHAHAH... Bullshite! WE live in a planned economy right now! Youve never heard of the pentagon? Every corporation is an *isolated command economy* just look up any economics textbook.

Have you every actually worked for a living? You DO know that holidays are decided by the manager in almost every case (if your lucky enough to get a job that lets you have them at ALL). Democratic planned economy means that the major descisions about production are put into the minds and votes of the PUBLIC, not a tiny group of bosses and investors

There has never been ANY example of economic development from a free market - huge public funding is the ONLY way any devolpent has ever happened in any country. FM has a 100% failure rate in Real Life and in my experienced has sucked brutally in the game (actually, interestingly enough, the game modles this well as you find yourself often "rush-building" facilities- equivalent to public funding

Quote:

I think though the problem comes from this....
When you're a poor student, communism sounds idealistic and tempting. Once you're actually in the work force however......everything changes.

No its quite the reverse, when your middle class trash, the idea of "freedom of choice" and "property" seem extremley tempting, you go to the mall, you buy stuff, your parents are taking care of you. Once you actually become a wage-slave, every thing changes. You realize just how humiliating it is to be owned by someone from 9-5, how tiered you are and how it strains your human relationships, and how all the truly GOOD things that matter in life come from either Real people or masive public cooperation (like for example technology)