Hegemony Argument Thread

[archimage_a]

Dungeonal:

Hmmm ok.

 

Mather:

What are you talking about? It makes no sense...

 

Earth:

In layman terms you take planets, you build buildings to build ships and train soliders. Then you attack other people with your ships and soliders. Those are the lowest layman terms I can put it in.

 

Rocco:

What is the problem?

 

Dungonal:

1) Maybe... :unsure:

2) Well, if we colonise a planet with 25,000 people then it will take 107 years(at 20%) to reach 1 billion people. Which is 3 and a half months in real life time. Also planets are limited to producing 2.5 Battleships per year due to the cost, in metal ore, verses the replenishment rate. I think population should be a 'fire and forget' thing...important in the first 5 years and then becomes redundant.

3) I will add it in

4) NP, I trust I can rely on you to add it all to the wiki, with the correct links. :thumbsup:

 

Hex:

If I had posted instructions for making scrambled eggs you would have said it was too complicated because it included instructions for what to do if your mum won't make them for you

[Seraphi]

I like it.

[Earth]

okay. thats MUCH better. thanks arch. ill get the finer details as we go along.

[a_bert]

2) Oops. Totally forgot about resource rate! Sorry, feel sheepish now :P And yeah, I take your point about population.

4) Yeah.. I'll do that-...

 

Ross, good :D

[archimage_a]

Rocco, not really.

A ) The Planet looks like it is losing its Grids.

B ) Ships don't need updating very often.

C ) If we were using a planet grid then its not like you need to update it every time you build something, (a 100 by 100 grid has 10,000 slots, after all) It just means that if someone wanted to build 20,000 missile towers or something then they couldn't. Rather than letting people build whatever the hell they liked, resulting in 40 years of peace and then planets which were unattackable, the system is 'Build whatever the hell you like, but if you build too much then you risk having your buildings removed by the moderator.'

 

 

Rocco I do understand what you mean...I am constantly thinking 'This game is far too complicated, I just want to be able to say 'I outfit my ships with phasers' and then send them off to colonise the entire map and destroy everyone else.'

 

But, oddly enough, when everyone has the same idea, but with different weapons, then there are problems...

Which is stronger a phaser or a pulse laser? A neutron beam or a particle cannon? A Fusion Torpedo or a Pulstar Missile?

I don't want to build 500 ships, only to find out phasers are weak as hell and my whole fleet can be destroyed with 10 ships armed with torpedos.

And if we make all the weapons the same then what is the point of researching new weapons or ships?

I mean I could just set up a computer to do it....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_Quest

It is loosely considered a zero-player game, in the sense that once the player has set up his artificial character, there is no user interaction at all; the game "plays" itself, with the human player as spectator.

 

Instructions- Build ships, fight wars, colonise worlds.

The only real strategy is choosing who to fight, because obvouisly you build the highest level ship you can build with the best weapon you can build.

There is no skill in it at all.

[Nero]

Well, if I wanted to have a grid and build buildings like you're proposing, I'd play AoEIII. This is Hegemony. A grid is just not how I'd (or anyone else, I assume) would like to play this game, because it will be tedious to update every time we build a structure and cause annoying arguments while effectively not helping at all.

 

Can't we have one system that isn't so highly regulated? Forget gridded planets, I'm not playing that way.

 

Actually, in retrospect, this entire system seems like something I don't want to play at all. For christ's sake, you've set up a text based AoE with spaceships.

Yep...

[Retech]

Fourty years of peace isn't that bad. What's worse is if you have ten days of war before it ends. :rolleyes:

[a_bert]

Technically, the previous Hegemony under Archi's rule was - I expect - very much the same. I doubt he just said "500,000 people vs 500,000 people with bigger guns", I award victory to one side..

 

This is just a more open way for you to measure yourself against your opponents.

[archimage_a]

Actually Hegemony V2 was pretty much number of troops, times the modifer, adding whatever other factors people told me about.

Then adding my own randomness to it...like blowing up part of Japan and Paris and such...

Suffice to say people argued over the number of troops, I didn't tell anyone the modifers(or give them a frame of referance) so they couldn't argue about that, and people argued that the factors they had should have done this, this and this instead, and my random element went down like a lead ballon, most of the time.

 

Retech, I think I meant 40 years of peace and then everyone gave up.

 

 

If people are decidedly against this then we can talk in circles for a couple more days.

[Retech]

Oh yah, 40 years of peace and giving up isn't fun either. But there should at least be a chance for peace, instead of having the game be just about war. We're Hegemony players, we're going to go to war anyways.

[archimage_a]

Oh yes, peace is good, I like peace because I am a pacifist at heart... but peace tends to create a rather dull game...its good to have other people fight so you can watch.

[Retech]

The thing is, Hegemony players are always going to go to war, no matter what. The problem is when you're trying to force war on an already warlike peoples, so you're making a game which is entirely war, instead of conflict rising up to war.

 

It's much more interesting when people fight each other for a reason, rather than the game being designed in a way that war was the only way to do things.

[archimage_a]

I agree, but you don't design a game so that, if you spend the next 40 years at peace, you will be in a position to massacre everyone at the end of it.

 

 

Anywho we are not making the game 'about war'(to my mind). There is a lot written about war because its a major part of the gameplay, but so is research and we have only written a small amount about that because we want everyone to be creative with it...With war we just want people accept convention and choose from a wide range of options. Otherwise we face all kinds of problems since people will have different view points about things...After all everyone was sure that wars would end in a year before the start of World War 1 and the allies were sure that France wouldn't fall in World War 2...

Times change and the different weapons, different tactics, different numbers or whatever might influence the moderator to decide a different outcome to what people were expecting...and then people scream 'Unfair' and start ignoring the moderator.

[Retech]

I was referring to the fact that we have 6 systems and a resource system which forces conflict, since the game is limited in scope, so you have to get that resource planet. That still remains my only objection to this entire thing. I know Dungeonal was saying that this was empire, not Hegemony, but shouldn't we be talking about this as if it was a new game rather than the successor of Hegemony?

[The_Mather1]

Mather:

What are you talking about? It makes no sense...

They're planets, they need a large grid.

[archimage_a]

Well there are 36 planets...Assuming Ross, I, you, Grim, Sere, Nex, Ico and Doom join, thats 8 players...which is 4 and a half planets each. Assuming Dusty, Rocco, Posiden and Earth join as well thats 12 and we get 3 planets each...

 

There are 4 other systems, with 6 planets each, waiting to be discovered, so thats another 24, with 60 planets as a total. So there is at least 5 planets each avalible.

This is against the one and a half usually found in Hegemony V2, sometimes down to just 1 planet.

 

I am already negotatiating a system pact with someone, so I get three planets, they get 3 planets and we work together to invade other systems and protect our system...So

[The_Mather1]

[bleep] you Archi, this was no trolling or indiscriminite language to be edited as a necessity.

[archimage_a]

Mather, you just abitrarly picked a larger number than I had.

 

Firstly, Buildings are larger than modules, therefore the grid is larger, relatively speaking.

Secondly, 10,000 slots is more than enough when buildings are usually less than 10 slots...

 

I didn't forget, oddly enough I am typing before I actually respond, so why don't you give people more than 5 seconds to respond.

[Earth]

archi. you put the wrong first person name for it. its suposed to be ME. when you say Ross, i(needs to be ME), you.

[Retech]

Interesting Unrelated Scenario:

 

One thousand of my finest archers and their support spearmen face off against ten thousand assorted baddies. If they succeed in destroying the enemy force, my soldiers have access to the rich lands west of the mountains, ready for the plunder. If they fail, then the assorted baddies will sweep over the mountain and reclaim what was theirs.

 

Meanwhile, I am sneaking in five thousand soldiers in two armies around the southern end of the mountain to strike at their capital, which just happens to be where most of their soldiers are coming from.

 

Then after assasins are sent to pick off their royal family, their armies shall be ambushed in the forest and decimated by a hail of arrows. :thumbsup:

[archimage_a]

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutgrammar/meandi

[Earth]

sorreh. im not good withelongated sentences. english classes from yonder years are comingling in ym minds.

[Retech]

http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutgrammar/meandi

 

Never argue with an Englishman on grammar...especially not one that goes to college.

[archimage_a]

Or University...as seemingly nobody, bar me, calls it.

Why Collage? I ask you!

[Earth]

collage? isnt that a peice of art? ant anywyas, we call it college because its easier to say, and less stuffy.