Well after two games as an ally and one as an enemy I have to say it's been a blast. Good luck with the projects!The Silent One wrote: ↑Sat Dec 28, 2019 8:15 amI'll take a break from playing to finish some development projects.
Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
Moderator: Oberlus
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
I'm ready to concede on sixth game and start seventh game. I'd enjoy playing a bit more but the current slow pace of the game is a bit of a torture if I also know I've lost.
I suggest o01eg, alleryn (Magnate) and I concede to check victory condition and then move forward to the next game.
BTW, I have the feeling that some of the players signed in for seventh game might actually not be aware of that. Is that right, o01eg? If that's the case, I suggest writing to each player that has not explicitly confirmed his availability for the game. I can do that, except for JonCST, my tries to contact him through the forum in the recent past have been fruitless.
I suggest o01eg, alleryn (Magnate) and I concede to check victory condition and then move forward to the next game.
BTW, I have the feeling that some of the players signed in for seventh game might actually not be aware of that. Is that right, o01eg? If that's the case, I suggest writing to each player that has not explicitly confirmed his availability for the game. I can do that, except for JonCST, my tries to contact him through the forum in the recent past have been fruitless.
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
I agree on winning with TSO, although i have almost twice as much power than he does
I'm ready for the seventh game if the resignation logic is fixed.
I'm ready for the seventh game if the resignation logic is fixed.
Team S.M.A.C.: play multiplayer with us!
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
The server will send message to all players about launch test game and then actual game.Oberlus wrote: ↑Sat Dec 28, 2019 5:13 pm BTW, I have the feeling that some of the players signed in for seventh game might actually not be aware of that. Is that right, o01eg? If that's the case, I suggest writing to each player that has not explicitly confirmed his availability for the game. I can do that, except for JonCST, my tries to contact him through the forum in the recent past have been fruitless.
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
I've enabled conceding without cleaning empire's assets.
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
By the way, i won mostly because the stupid mapgen tossed a couple of Good planets near my HW. I think this should be fixed.
Team S.M.A.C.: play multiplayer with us!
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
I had a bunch of good planets nearby but I had to defeat a couple maintenance ships to get to them which really slowed me down. How was the monster RNG near your homeworld, also favorable?
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
Yeah, the monsters weren't especially troubling, as i found out later they were about inbetween me and other empires (except Magnate's that was close to his HW).
Team S.M.A.C.: play multiplayer with us!
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
There's a fine line isn't there between starts that are too diverse (like this game, comparing mine and L29Ah, or last game comparing mine and Alleryn's - in both cases the good start was so much better than the bad that there was no real chance of the loser being able to win) and starts that are too homogenous (everyone gets exactly the same colonisable capacity within x jumps - game would feel much less immersive and more like chess). Compare Stellaris, where the diversity of starting positions has far less effect on winnability - which says to me that planetary environment+size in FO is too important. Maybe specials should make more of a difference? Or environments should have less harsh gradations - e.g. you can start by colonising hostiles (max pop 1) and poor (max pop 2) and adequate (max pop 3) and improve from there... maybe size class should add max pop rather than multiply, so a Large isn't 33% better than a Medium...
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
Now conceding doesn't clean empire's assets but research effects doesn't apply. I think it's fine implementation.
Should something be done with it before release or next game?Magnate wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:02 am There's a fine line isn't there between starts that are too diverse (like this game, comparing mine and L29Ah, or last game comparing mine and Alleryn's - in both cases the good start was so much better than the bad that there was no real chance of the loser being able to win) and starts that are too homogenous (everyone gets exactly the same colonisable capacity within x jumps - game would feel much less immersive and more like chess). Compare Stellaris, where the diversity of starting positions has far less effect on winnability - which says to me that planetary environment+size in FO is too important. Maybe specials should make more of a difference? Or environments should have less harsh gradations - e.g. you can start by colonising hostiles (max pop 1) and poor (max pop 2) and adequate (max pop 3) and improve from there... maybe size class should add max pop rather than multiply, so a Large isn't 33% better than a Medium...
Just a thought.
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
FWIW I agree with that, I was just thinking aloud about longer-term balancing.
Re: Sixth game on the multiplayer slow game server (0.4.9)
Saves are available: https://freeorion-test.dedyn.io/FO0006-saves.7z
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm