Author Topic: Pravin Lal's Runner-up Science Fair Runoff  (Read 10558 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mart

Re: New game?
« Reply #30 on: January 18, 2019, 01:20:59 PM »
And yet another thing. Re, if we were starting already with this map.

I will write more details today evening about how we could start with some additional feature.
But meanwhile, to test, everyone can do it. the best way is to start single game with all actions as in our game. In turn 2101, enable scenario editor and see, if all 7 factions are in ok places, distributed sufficiently away. It may be, that Pirates would be most problematic, but rather less than more.

sometimes smax was giving a faction 1 colony pod instead of 2, so this is also to look for. If something like that happens to us, we will have make start agai. If AI gets it - we wouldn't know, bad for them...
I mean that starting on Librarian we should get 2 (two) colony pods.

Offline roninscg

Re: New game?
« Reply #31 on: January 18, 2019, 02:29:13 PM »
i tried a map, a few turns, with seven factions and everything works right, pirates have always got a good starting  position. and 2 pods

Re: New game?
« Reply #32 on: January 18, 2019, 06:50:26 PM »
That is really high sea level. O_O  Very scarce sites for bases.  And no elevation variation.

I'll be giving it a test, though I wouldn't be the best judge of a fair start.
The same HorseshoeHermit on civfanatics

Offline Mart

Re: New game?
« Reply #33 on: January 18, 2019, 08:00:39 PM »
It is in fact average land mass and average erosion. I decided to go both average, since the map would be corrected. Some more land was added, it was rather smaller land there.
Average erosion, so we could engineer to higher elevations during the game, if someone wants to do it.
As for small number of good tiles for bases, this is side-effect of preventing game placing factions too close to each other. Some other arrangements would work also, but this one, although making map more difficult to play, would make the game more interesting and maybe directing players more towards strategies for such maps - more fungus.
Morganites were starting rather well in my tests. There is no guarantees though anyway.

Offline roninscg

Re: New game?
« Reply #34 on: January 19, 2019, 10:07:21 AM »
i can create map i.e setup a map for play but then i can t play in that game. mebu is best to finde on CMN (T_ras or somon else) bicus of password and that staf.

and of course, as for me , you can do everything, but
still we need someone who does not take part in game because of passwords, the eventual resignation of the player, ad simlar stuf
« Last Edit: January 19, 2019, 10:37:26 AM by roninscg »

Offline Mart

Re: New game?
« Reply #35 on: January 19, 2019, 01:39:09 PM »
Another way to start is to try how specific game instal (on someone computer) setups a game. So for example, trying 5-10 times with given settings. And in 2101 enabling scenario editor and review what game did. If results are satisfactory, then a game could be started in this way without scenario editor. We would not know the map and exploration element would be as in a regular multiplayer game.

As for the game starting, I was to write about it:

In multiplayer game, one can have monuments and interludes. The trick is to save a game like intending a .sav file, but giving it .sc extension. Then starting from such .sc file a multiplayer scenario. Otherwise, game does not have monuments and interludes, as a scenario maybe about something different than official planet story. This is why I think they turned this OFF when a player save a scenario in a regular way.

So steps to start such multiplayer:
1) Start a single game with all factions in intended slots, all settings, etc. Choose the first faction, which is human faction in the game.
2) When 2101 starts, do no moves, use CTRL+S, or MENU > GAME > Save Game , then save it with some name, but add .sc at the end of file name so it is seen as scenario file. Folder can be any, but it may be from where the scenario will be started, so we do not have to move the file.
3) Quit the game, or ESC to game main menu, where select: MULTIPLAYER > Hot seat/pbem > MULTIPLAYER SCENARIO, then choose the .sc file from (2). The folder from which we start is important, that it does not have any other alphax.txt file, so it does not interfere with regular/official Yitzi patch alphax.txt file. And we al will be playing with this regular ruleset.
4) Further steps are like normal multiplayer game, add all needed human factions and start the game.
5) Start game entering password for the first human player, play 2101, and then save the file after turn end.
6) When opening the game, second human player is prompted for password, and so on.

That's it. The trick is not to save in any step of the process the .sc file from "Save Scenario" option, which turns off monuments and interludes.

But this is optional stuff.

Offline roninscg

Re: New game?
« Reply #36 on: January 19, 2019, 02:13:58 PM »
ok, create game, asap  :danc:  :D

 when you have time,  if you hawe all parameters, preper game  :) and tanks

Offline Mart

Re: New game?
« Reply #37 on: January 19, 2019, 03:38:18 PM »
Morganites are the first human faction, so this task belongs to Horseshoe_Hermit.

Offline roninscg

Re: New game?
« Reply #38 on: January 20, 2019, 07:18:04 PM »
i prepered game, we can start if you all agree.

Offline Mart

Re: New game?
« Reply #39 on: January 20, 2019, 08:23:15 PM »
I will follow what Horseshoe_Hermit decides, since he started the game.

Re: New game?
« Reply #40 on: January 20, 2019, 11:11:30 PM »
Sorry for the lull.  I had a bit of a scare with my computer hardware.  In truth it still needs testing, but it's graphics, and boy do we know this game don't need that.

I'm bout to eat and then I'll generate a scenario file as Mart said.  With the cloud cover statistics and others, as Mart said.
The same HorseshoeHermit on civfanatics

Offline roninscg

Re: New game?
« Reply #41 on: January 20, 2019, 11:35:33 PM »

'm bout to eat and then I'll generate a scenario file as Mart said.  With the cloud cover statistics and others, as Mart said.


Re: New game?
« Reply #42 on: January 21, 2019, 01:50:05 AM »
I did a kind of rehearsal, but I forgot to roll dice for the AI factions, so this is some information to come back with.

I started in site without any 2/1 tiles, but with a 2/0/1 and a 1/1/1.  There were 5 unity pods within base limits, and I had one colony pod.  I'm supposed to get two?

Also, let me know what you want your faction styles to be.  What title to give you, etc.  But I tried to change the gender of Mart and wasn't able to, it would go to a text field and whatever I typed, would just go back to Female.

Opening post was updated with the setting information, but I am missing what to put for the orbital distance.  100 million miles?  I also intend to put a link to the ruleset rules, so we don't go setting any 4-point patrols; but is there some resource for which of these exploits are fixed by Yitzi?

Here are the die rolls for our three AI competitors: (rolling in progress)

Hive, Peacekeepers, and the Cybernetic Consciousness.

(click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: January 21, 2019, 02:05:21 AM by Horseshoe_Hermit »
The same HorseshoeHermit on civfanatics

Offline Mart

Re: New game?
« Reply #43 on: January 21, 2019, 01:57:00 AM »
Yes, there should be 2 colony pods per player, so it looks like the bug kicked in.

I am ok with playing Miriam, it can be not modified there.

Orbital distance, I usually take the medium one. This feature was enabled by Yitzi, normally it is turned off and unvisible in the game. I do not remember what was there about it.

Re: New game?
« Reply #44 on: January 21, 2019, 04:00:10 AM »
I have an image of Chiron as being a hot planet.  But let's just go with 90 million miles.  Like Earth.

I suppose we just keep rolling maps until everybody gets two pods, then.  Okay.

Let's talk about rules!  This is the etiquette that applies to all games hosted on this site:

Rules for the fully patched game (including the unofficial patch):
1. A player is not permitted to establish contact with another player prior to having met them in-game.
2. A player may not use build queue manipulation or other loopholes to hurry production at a cost that would be lower than directly hurrying the item that one intends to build.
3. A player may not use build queue manipulation or other loopholes to build something you could not directly add to the build queue.
4. A player may not upgrade a particular type of unit using the design workshop, and then attack with that unit in the same turn.
5. A player is not permitted to make more than one social engineering change per line, per turn. For instance, one is not permitted to start the turn in wealth, switch to power mid-turn for the extra disbanded minerals, and then switch back to wealth that same turn, getting the refund.
6. Stockpiling in build queue allowed when building units. (of course when building sp/facility too, but it's not needed to do anything to gain those bonuses too)
7. Upgrading crawlers before adding them to hurry secret project allowed.
8. Reverse-engineering allowed.
9. Exchanging bases with AI forbidden. (It is not possible to do this in random tcp/ip anyway; this is obvious exploit cause AI trades everything; lets say I take over base level 2 with probe and then exchange this base for a base level 6 that has SP, more over I exchange it with my enemy's pact-friend so that to liberate this base my enemy would have to mess with his friend)
10. Additional move after former builds something and his flag is gray is not allowed.

I don't understand what 2 or 6 are actually telling me to do.  I assume that 9 means "Don't offer or accept any deals with an AI where they give you a base".  And we may not sell nor gift our bases to AI factions either, because they can't value or repudiate them properly.  Also, this says "the unofficial patch", like there's not three of them.

Apart from these standard ones, is also the linked page of exploits, to discuss anything we want to houserule.  I want to keep this simple and not presume too much, but my concerns are as follows:

"9-5: If an truce/treaty/pact is being negotiated with another human player and that player has accepted the deal, it is possible to perform an action that causes vendetta and then accept the deal to erase the vendetta before the other player has had a chance to respond to the vendetta. (MoSe)"
  • Taking one turn of war actions and then accepting a blood truce is something that we put up with in Civilization 5 hotseat.  But if a treaty offer can open anyone up to a zing attack that erases the war with a treaty term, that's some B*S*.  We must ban.  If you declare vendetta, and you have a treaty/pact offer on that turn, you must refuse the treaty/pact offer.

"9-4: When engaging in a probe team operation against another human faction, a window appears asking whether the victim wants to "declare vendetta" or "let off with a stern warning." This window is appearing during the wrong player's turn since the victim should decide and not the prober. Etiquette dictates that the prober should choose "declare vendetta" unless prior approval has been received from the victim to choose something else. (MoSe)"
  • This is a clear bug, but accommodating it is not mentioned in the etiquette.  If the patch hasn't fixed this, then we must do as this says.  "Prior approval" will mean messages received before you opened the turn file.

"9-3: Selecting "Demand Withdrawal" from the commlinks menu for another human faction causes the AI to decide for that faction whether to comply with the request or declare vendetta based on the AI attitude of the faction. The human player who actually controls that faction will not make the decision. (LoD)"
  • We must not issue the 'Demand Withdrawal' action via the commlinks menu on our Human opponents.

"6-17: It is possible to set home base (Control-h) for a unit to be the base of another faction when the diplomatic stance is pact. The unit will then require no support from either faction. (MoSe)"
  • Setting the home base of a unit to be another faction's base is not permitted.

"9-1: When voting in the Planetary Council, it is possible to click on the portrait of the faction for a human player and be offered a chance by the AI to pay a bribe for the vote of that faction. The AI decides the bribe rather than the human player whose faction it is.
9-2: When voting in the Planetary Council, the AI will take on the role of a human-controlled faction and offer a bribe to the person currently voting. The player whose faction is offering the bribe is not offering the bribe - the AI is doing it for them without their knowledge."
  • Of course we must take care not to credit the AI controller to usurp the authority of Human players.

And of course, no peeking at the communications log with a text editor! :P

I have scrutinized the exploit list (3 pages) carefully and everything I haven't mentioned, you can assume I am fine with.  Just for clarity, the terraforming exploits are allowed EXCEPT the illicit movement point from etiquette #10, and the transportation/drop pod exploits are allowed.  Giving missiles to the AI factions is also allowed, just because I guess there's a reason it's not forbidden in the etiquette.
The same HorseshoeHermit on civfanatics


* User

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Select language:

* Community poll

SMAC v.4 SMAX v.2 (or previous versions)
18 (6%)
XP Compatibility patch
9 (3%)
Gog version for Windows
77 (29%)
Scient (unofficial) patch
28 (10%)
Kyrub's latest patch
14 (5%)
Yitzi's latest patch
85 (32%)
AC for Mac
2 (0%)
AC for Linux
5 (1%)
Gog version for Mac
10 (3%)
No patch
13 (4%)
Total Members Voted: 261
AC2 Wiki Logo

* Random quote

Air power rests at the apex of the first triad of victory, for it combines Mobility, Flexibility, and Initiative.
~Spartan Battle Manual

* Select your theme