Dolgorukov

Members
  • Content count

    582
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dolgorukov

  1. Thanks, I'll give it a try!
  2. To my highly esteemed fellow SMACers, Please refresh my memory, how does one load GOTM scenario-specific graphics after resuming a save? I seem to lose all the cool base art after loading the game from a save. (Playing the November 2012 GOTM :))
  3. <p>Ah well I'm just being a content worker these days, with a craving for a little creative entertainment once in a while. That, coupled with fond memories of this place, has me making sporadic appearances once more. Well thanks for the warm reception as always! I won't ask what you've been up to, the forum threads will obviously speak for you. Some might even sing, being so fortunate (or in some cases unfortunate :)) as to be adorned by the fruits of your labour.</p>

  4. Anyone up for a quick Civ Game? Number of Human Players 3 AI Players: None Difficulty: Prince DLC Allowed: None CMN will set up world and passwords. Player Roster No code has to be inserted here. Pool of CMN Candidates No code has to be inserted here.
  5. Sorry to hear that Darsnan and thank you for letting us know about your anticipated absence.
  6. You can find some answers in a similar discussion taking place here
  7. one more player to join and then we're set. Is there anybody out there with enough courage, determination and dedication to take up the challenge?
  8. Hello Nikolai, Either random or specific civ choice is fine, as long as its not a DLC. Cheers!
  9. Thank you Darsnan! Hopefully this game will pick up some more players soon.
  10. Well I just discovered that the skipping of the first turn is unnecessary since the person setting up the game can set up the passwords by Editing the player details in the player roster. Pardon my newb-ishness!
  11. Hey Donald, by set up I simply meant that a 4th person who was not one of the players, we'll call him/her a CMN for practical purposes, would start a hot-seat game and set it up according to the screenshot provided in the first post. The game would generate the map and starting locations automatically, there would not be a manual set up phase by the CMN involving map editors and such. The CMN would play the first turn for all the players with the sole intention of setting up their passwords, during which no units would be moved, no cities established, no research selected, and so on. Then post the second Turn of the game for the first player on the roster within this thread. Quick and simple! The CMN would act as a referee to settle any future disputes in the game. I suppose once all three players announce themselves, a CMN will be chosen by them from the pool of volunteers through unanimous agreement. Does that answer your question Donald? And um yeah... the rest of you can come out of your hiding spots now, I promise that my Chaos-Gun shall remain holstered, regardless of how infuriated I become by your CIVilians antics. Surely it will be a difficult promise to keep but a necessary one for the sake of new friendships, at first anyways...
  12. Anybody up for a simple grid-paper and pencil game? My favourite such game from a very early age is a racing game. It uses 2 dimensional vectors to simulate movement Kind of like this. (sorry about the poor quality) Every turn you can modify (add -1, 0, or +1 to) your vector in terms of its x, y components. Draw a Track and agree on interference rules (when two or more players intersect paths during the same turn). Like all players affected by interference cannot modify their vectors the following turn. Oh yeah flying off the track results in automatic disqualification of the player from the race. I was thinking that we could also somehow randomize the order in which players complete their turns, just to make things a little less predictable. For example, In Turn 1 the sequence could be players A, B, C, D, while in turn 2 the sequence could be D, B, C, A We can use the files attached as a ZIP archive. :1st:Victory Condition: First player to reach the start/finish line wins! GridRacing.zip
  13. Whoah, AI using crawlers? I might start playing this game again!
  14. But I think we should all celebrate because I got my first set of wheels last saturday, effectively cutting my commute to work in half (time-wise) and therefore from now on I will have only a little time to kill. So I can't help but gravitate back to these forums.
  15. Hey its a work in progress. One that will take some time to complete seeing as I have very little time to kill. #9 best time killing activity on WPC trying to figure out what the french-speaking SMACers are up to in their french-speaking threads about their french-speaking games... and of course using online translators or having some previous knowledge of french will be considered cheating for these purposes.
  16. #10 best time killing activity on WPC rummaging through BUncle's avatar thread in search of a SMAC graphic that best suits your day.
  17. pretty cool, I've never even noticed this little detail until you brought it up. Of course I am known to shun SMAX factions. On a slight detour; has anyone ever met a real person with the name Deirdre? Recently I've noticed the name appear in some database entries that I'm working with at work. I know that she recently joined the company but is working in another building, just across the street. I know its just a name, (one I'm still having difficulty pronouncing), but every time I see it somewhere in the records, I can't help but wonder if she may be similar in her appearance or character to the Lady Deirdre Skye we all know.
  18. I was wondering if any of you guys had any ideas about making a SMAC-themed Multiplayer Forum Game that abstracts and removes much of the micromanagement of pushing units around and focuses more on diplomacy and psychology of competition, trade, etc. It would be great if the game mechanics were simple to execute and keep track of, it could be played in a small number of turns (or player-input sequences), and could be highly repeatable.
  19. Yes its quite upbeat when you establish a new base! At least when you're playing with the Morganites I don't know anything about the files through
  20. I don't know, maybe its just because I can't buy into the whole idea of environmentalism as being the way of the future, but somehow I feel that green economics in SMAC is way too overpowered. Specifically its the +2 Efficiency bonus that's bothering me. This little feature makes green economics the default choice for every elephant sized empire on the planet. In other words if your faction is big and sprawled out, green economics is a no brainer of a choice. In fact, green economics is the only viable choice really since inefficiency becomes a major headache for a world-sized empire. So where am I at odds with the way the game handles this choice on a philosophical level? Right! Back to the +2 Efficiency bonus, for supposed "efficient" use of resources and the aim to integrate "sentient progress with the needs of the biosphere" On the other side, we have Free Market Economics where the market forces are turned loose in the society. "Unfettered market economics can produce great wealth quickly, but in the context of Planet's fragile (ecosystem), emerging economies can also lead to extremes of pollution and ecological damage" Based on Lady Deirdre's aversion to Free Market Economics, I'm going to assume that Green economics is diametrically opposite of Free Market. That means where in FM we turn the market forces loose, in Green Economics we must regulate the market. Does this mean that Green Economic System is a not too distant cousin of Planned Economics? If so then there should be inherent inefficiencies that arise from meddling with the market's natural flow in Green Economics, much like we see in Planned. Where I'm going with this is that I think that Green SE choice should perhaps exclude the Efficiency boost of +2. Now of course I'm not approaching this from the direction of game balance, but rather am more interested in the ideological and philosophical spin on these social engineering choices. Still I can't help but wonder what I'd have to add to Green to make it a practical option for a SMACer if I go through with cutting out its efficiency bonus. Or would it be still okay if left with just the +2 Planet, and -2 Growth?
  21. A multiplayer democracy game is a multi-player game where teams of players play against one another and manage their factions through discussion and consensus. Additional Role playing rules (up for discussion and new proposals are welcome) 1) Cannot switch Society Values more than once every 10 years 2) Must wait x number of years to switch economic models, where x = population/4 3) We can come up with some interesting rules for switching politics model 4) Create a forum-based component to the game where factions can influence the society choices of other human controlled factions through some kind of espionage activity. (We have yet to invent some rules for this) 5) Human controlled Democracies cannot declare vendetta without cause for war 5.1) What constitutes a cause for war: (we have yet to decide on this, some obvious ones are being attacked by an aggressor or coming to the aid of your ally) We will not allow democracies to declare war by agreeing to an AI-proposal for a joint-attack, or back-stabbing another AI or player. 6) Fundamentalist Factions can't delcare vendetta against other fundamentalists I'm thinking that additional "role-playing" rules may make the SE choices less typical, for instance it may be worth running a police state because it is easier to declare war than under a democracy. Probably the number of human-controlled factions should be 3 at most to create an interesting geopolitical environment and allow for the game to advance at a suitable pace.
  22. sehr gut!
  23. Not bad! However I thought colonel Santiago would be on the left, next to my name since I'll be playing for the Spartans and comrade t_ras will be the front man for the collectivist hordes. Overall a great improvement from where we started
  24. the funny thing is that efficiency does not necessarily go hand in hand with ecological harmony. Green economics I would tend to think that the aim of green economics should be to strike a balance with nature while still being able to exploit its resources. A really conservative idea may be to strive for the preservation of an ecosystem's original natural state. Use of resources is only allowed to such an extent that prevents major deviations from original state of the ecosystem. I may be assuming here that a human colony cannot contribute positively to both its own growth and the productivity and stability of the ecosystem it is relying on. I believe that the premise that Green Economics allows for more efficient use of resources is false. Free markets by their very nature reward the most efficient of producers. Hence Free Market is the system that makes the most efficient use of resources. It is the system where we are likely to see the most effective recycling strategies and the most drive for efficient technology. When we are talking about Green vs. Free Market, efficiency is not at the heart of the struggle between the two models. Free markets tend to be short sighted and lead to fast growth and overuse. Increases in efficiency are an invitation to increase consumption. Free markets love efficiency, they reward it! We may think that green models like efficiency as well, because we think that being green is synonymous with having lower impact on our surroundings. Of course an obvious way to decrease impact would be to decrease consumption, (by becoming more efficient, which is misleading, since efficiency only drives more consumption) I'm tempted to say something that may sound contradictory to today's mantra on "greenness" by saying that Green by design is not efficient by design, but rather Green is something that has no negative effect on the surroundings. To be truly green is to integrate yourself so fully into the ecological system that you are no longer a burden but rather something that contributes to its growth or adds stability to the system. A bee goes about its work by flying from one flower to another, collecting nectar for its colony's use but at the same time contributes to the propagation of the plants that flower. Both types of organisms are able to increase their specie's biomass due to this interaction. Now a farmer working his tractor to plow the fields where he is planting some crop could also be seen as beneficial. Both types of organisms, the crops and the human are in a relationship which allows for them to increase the biomass of their species. However this is often seen as a typical example of negative ecological impact. The farmer may be contributing to lower biodiversity in the region by allowing only one type of plant to grow and removing all others. The system as a whole is becoming more homogeneous and life's insurance against extinction brought about by great shocks is being stripped away with every specie that is removed. A society that adopts the Green Model would then be one that can coexist with the other lifeforms and contribute to both growth and diversity of the ecosystem. The +2 Planet is well prescribed then, since negative Planet ratings tend to diminish your ability to make use of Planet's local ecosystem via penalties to nutrient production from fungus covered tiles. But there are no real substantial returns on having positive Planet Society ratings from an economic perspective, which is a little shallow I think. Maybe increase the nutrient, energy and mineral ouputs from fungus tiles for societies with positive Planet ratings? A penalty of -2 to Growth also makes sense, since a Green society is either unable to or cautious not to outstrip the ecosystem's ability to support human existence. The +2 increase in society efficiency really seems out of place. I would rather see a boost to production in fungus tiles as a way to reward the society for trying to coexist with the planet's native ecosystem instead of terraforming the planet to death.
  25. breathtaking images, are these from a game?