Cold turkey - I can handle it

Hydro · September 19, 2003, 22:32

I’ve been cut off from PBEM for FIVE WHOLE DAYS!

****shudder****

My PBEM partner has the whiny excuse that his XP/Linus computer completely melted down. PalEEEESE!

CAN’T HE GET HIS PRIORITIES STRAIGHT!???

I….I HAVE TO HAVE MY SMAC!

(but can give it up any time I want to)

Nubclear · September 19, 2003, 23:03

Two words:

Single Player

Archaic · September 20, 2003, 00:33

Single Player's not that fun anymore unless it's modded up the wazoo simply so that the AI becomes a challenge.

Aramis · September 20, 2003, 01:17

Oh, come on. Try new strategies rather than mods. Let yourself have an early golden age; don't use your UU; play as a civ w/ attributes you don't like.
I used to mod--went back to playing the game "out of the box" to experiment. Damn glad I did. --Rob

Nubclear · September 20, 2003, 01:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Archaic
Single Player's not that fun anymore unless it's modded up the wazoo simply so that the AI becomes a challenge.

Whats wrong with mericlessly conquering bases?

Alinestra Covelia · September 20, 2003, 10:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Two words:

Single Player

Yes, but that's only satisfying for SMAC virgins. Once you've enjoyed the beauty of SMAC with a willing and consensual (and overage) partner, single player just isn't fulfilling enough. Sure, it'll keep you going for a few hours but then you find yourself needing something more solid - something you can sink your claws into and ride all the way to transcendence.

...

Sort of thing.

Hydro · September 21, 2003, 01:19

I still play single player now and then, but playing with a partner is more fun than playing alone. There is still delight in playing by yourself, but the interactions are more complex, as befits a game like SMAC. This is particularly true when both parties are into it, participating with their heart and soul.

(AC – did that continue your metaphor in an appropriate manner?)

Alinestra Covelia · September 22, 2003, 01:11

The only difference is that when I'm getting stuck in multiplayer, whether it's something nice and cozy in a hotseat love match, or brazen and exhibitionist in an online free-for-all, I usually end up beelining for the organic superlubricant.

lord of the mark · September 22, 2003, 09:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
The only difference is that when I'm getting stuck in multiplayer, whether it's something nice and cozy in a hotseat love match, or brazen and exhibitionist in an online free-for-all, I usually end up beelining for the organic superlubricant.

Hydro · September 22, 2003, 12:48

OK. You win...

Marid Audran · September 22, 2003, 18:46

My PBEM experience wasn't pleasant. Dilitory and tedious; one turn a day isn't enough. Of course, should you be so lucky...the .sav train may delay things so it is more like a turn every three days at times. Early game is especially insufferable when there's little to do. And of course if one player goes on vacation or whatnot which necessitates (X) amount of days away from a computer with SMAC you're f*cked.

The only way I could fathom returning it is in an accelerated start/time warp game with maybe two or three other players who are very expedient with their turns. Though even that may get tiresome. It's not that the nuance of human player strategy is unwelcome, far from it, it's just the prolixity of the thing. Too much like correspondence chess of the stripe played in the old days, via snail mail before internet servers.

For that reason single-player SMAC/X remains an outlet for me. Simple things like banning personal crawler use and calculated pop booms increases the difficulty, and there are still novelties like Switch Faction challenge and the cheeky Lazy Governer challenge.

Also, if you're used to using a modified alphax.txt of the rules that govern play (as I do) it's difficult to regress back to a virgin ruleset, or otherwise sell the other players on your innovations.

However, one of Hydro's prose-styled PBEM games is something I'd be very interested in, with a like-minded partner of a verbose bent. Those are the quintessence of the living SMAC/X game, instead of just pushing formers around. Gives one a chance to be creative in a context larger than the game itself.

Hydro · September 22, 2003, 20:14

MA - verbose is right. Our 6th PBEM ended with 450 pages of 'prose' (to use the term very loosely), and a Word file that was 1.6 MB. So it is much more than pushing formers around; the story is the objective. Since, in my opinion, that is SMAC’s strength then a dialog-oriented PBEM seems natural. What is odd is that it isn't (always) competitive, either. We cooperated if it is in character, which is the point. So far I’ve been Dee (most of the time), Morgan, and Zak. Masterbuilder has been more adventurous: PK (his favorite), Cult, Spartans, and Hive. If I get my butt in gear I’ll finish posting the 6th PBEM, and then start posting our 7th.

There is the one part of standard PBEM that I don't like: if you don't rush to extermination (nerve gas, PBs) you are toast. It makes Planet a vicious place. Now, it very well might be, but with standard PBEM that is what it inevitably ends up (in my limited experience, and from frequent comments by PBEM veterans).

Having more than 2 people in PBEM seems to be a mistake, too. It takes waaaaaayyyy too long to do anything, and it is much more prone to critical failure when someone inevitably bails. Two of my best 7-way PBEM’s died that way, just after I was getting into them, too. That is like a bad batch of fungal gin.

Anyway, Masterbuilder's main computer is still toast (his wife decided to load XP and Linux and then play with the configuration - bad idea; the bios is crispy). Luckily he does have a laptop or I'D be toast and in terminal SMAC withdrawal.

Hydro

jtsisyoda · September 22, 2003, 21:56

The real drawback of SMAC/X is that two people can't build the Ascent to Transcendance at the same time.

Hydro · September 23, 2003, 08:06

Yes, but you can transcend as a de-facto cooperative victory - walking hand-in-hand to join with Planet. Masterbuilder and I have done this a few times.

jtsisyoda · September 23, 2003, 15:29

How lewd!

Marid Audran · September 23, 2003, 15:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Hydro
MA - verbose is right. Our 6th PBEM ended with 450 pages of 'prose' (to use the term very loosely), and a Word file that was 1.6 MB. So it is much more than pushing formers around; the story is the objective. Since, in my opinion, that is SMAC’s strength then a dialog-oriented PBEM seems natural. What is odd is that it isn't (always) competitive, either. We cooperated if it is in character, which is the point...there is the one part of standard PBEM that I don't like: if you don't rush to extermination (nerve gas, PBs) you are toast. It makes Planet a vicious place.

That is in fact the pith of the matter, isn't it? This varient of the "tank rush" MP strategy in the Command and Conquer lineage of RTS games is the particular wrinkle of the our beloved TBS one. Ironically, this may make the odd single-player game more novel because it doesn't necessitate a militaristic bum-rush. Kill of be killed is crude even by the most dogmatic Spartan standards; 'tis certainly not what the UN Charter had in mind for the mission (look at me, degenerating into Lal-isms, sheesh!).

A faction leader in the hypothetical framework of the game has more to worry about then what the flesh-and-blood player behind the screen concerns himself with; e.g. pushing formers and rovers around and b-lining to Industrial Automation. He/she must concern with the well-being of his citizens, cultural growth vs. "guns-and-butter" policy, tackling the problems and challenges of native life head-on as if encountering them for the first time (whereas us jaded SMACers barely blink at that first boil in the xenofungus), how much fraternizing with the enemy is acceptable, and if the faction leader is practicing what he/she preaches or is merely a hypocrite. In most "normal" games the player is absolved of this conscientious approach to play simply from the lack of checks and balances! Is the game code going to care if you're Morgan running Green or Lal running Fundamentalism?

That's why I've always enjoyed your published PBEM accounts for embodying all this. Coming off as genuine when facing problems you're dealt with time and time over requires creativity; after all, once a man has changed the relationship between himself and his environment, he cannot return to the blissful ignorance from whence he left. Motion, of necessity, requires...oh there I go again.

Quote:

Anyway, Masterbuilder's main computer is still toast (his wife decided to load XP and Linux and then play with the configuration - bad idea; the bios is crispy). Luckily he does have a laptop or I'D be toast and in terminal SMAC withdrawal.

Well, take heart Hydro; I'm sure when the comm-links are up and running again an interesting jape can be written into the story pertaining to the RL scenario. "Data Overload erases all research accumulated at U.N. Headquarters! Perhaps the node is malfunctioning?" ...of the sort.

Hydro · September 25, 2003, 20:35

MA - I finally got around to start posting to Masterbuilder and my PBEM dialog Paradigms. I'll continue as my pokey modem will allow!

Marid Audran · September 26, 2003, 13:27

I just spent some time digesting the latest updates to Paradigms. You just had to leave the story hanging after the first missive had been sent to Morgan from Santiago, eh?