Hi, I saw all that. I had put a vote up and it was removed without taking effect. Now I understand the other President has vetoed it. From the looks of things people seem to prefer starting at war and staying that way.
In a game about Trade this seems strange to me. But oh well.
Poitics and President
War and Trade
Hi, Only players out after kills like War.
To gain max experiance a player needs 1000 total in relations with a race.
You start with 500 towards your own so need to earn another 500 by trading.
You can't trade with a race you are at war with but if you have peace you start at -100 or-200. So you cannot gain max experiance.
Players out to kill will always have targets. (They can hunt one another or hunt by alignment ) But traders are restricted by war. (If the hunters were a bit smarter they would realize free trade would mean more Buffalo grazing. Traders will not vist galaxies where they cannot trade meaning the hunters have to prey on their own race or enter hostile galaxies.
But that is another issue. I am mainly concerned by 6 players having the power to restrict all the others (via the veto regardless of how the actual votes are going) Since the President is the player with the highest alignment prehaps vetoing peace should cost a few alignment points.
To gain max experiance a player needs 1000 total in relations with a race.
You start with 500 towards your own so need to earn another 500 by trading.
You can't trade with a race you are at war with but if you have peace you start at -100 or-200. So you cannot gain max experiance.
Players out to kill will always have targets. (They can hunt one another or hunt by alignment ) But traders are restricted by war. (If the hunters were a bit smarter they would realize free trade would mean more Buffalo grazing. Traders will not vist galaxies where they cannot trade meaning the hunters have to prey on their own race or enter hostile galaxies.
But that is another issue. I am mainly concerned by 6 players having the power to restrict all the others (via the veto regardless of how the actual votes are going) Since the President is the player with the highest alignment prehaps vetoing peace should cost a few alignment points.
-
Vtreka
- Beta Test Team Leader
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:51 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
and that's the point 
so the rpesident can stop traders of other races from draining their routes, or getting access to their weapons. Not every race wants peace, but its not like that with all races though.
so the rpesident can stop traders of other races from draining their routes, or getting access to their weapons. Not every race wants peace, but its not like that with all races though.Founder of: Death Control, Life Control and The Order
Member of: DK, CM, EdL, Northstar, RR, FTV, FI, SPB, TD, LoM, LB
Member of: DK, CM, EdL, Northstar, RR, FTV, FI, SPB, TD, LoM, LB
Trade
Hi, I could understand more if Alliances were also race restricted. But they are not. Since most Alliances have members of every race, war only makes it hard for traders. And it can make certain members of an Alliance targets if they belong to a race that remains at war while other members are of races that are at peace.
There is certainly a purpose for war. However there is no purpose in Race War in a universe where the races join together in bands. These bands declare war regardless of the racial settings and they make peace with other alliances regardless of race. There is no voting required and because the reward for killing players is greater then what is attained peacefully we have the Universal War.
Universal war does not protect trade it restricts it. Rather than have traders from other races restocking your galatic ports (traders sell and buy.) you close them off and this means your traders are restricted to the same ports. Within an Alliance weapons can still be obtained. You just have one member purchase the weapon, place it on a planet and another member pick it up.
What the constant war allows is for the hunters to roam at will and never worry about alignment because as long as they go outside their galaxy everything is a target with a bounty. And that same time the traders are just so much game on a preserve because they cannot leave their home galaxy unless their Alliance owns another galaxy.
I just think that wars are too hard to end. I can see where 1 person decides to put going to war to a vote but I can't understand how 1 person can override the vote for peace. Prehaps it is because we begin at war and with relations at -500. Have they ever began a game with Univeral peace? How long before the first war broke out. Was there any two races that never went to war? I think most traders would agree it is much better to have access to more routes. The war status makes it impossible first because you cannot trade accross race and second any same race port outside your home galaxy means you must enter areas where enemy forces roam at will. It is much more risky to enter home galaxys then it is to wait beside a warp in another. There is much status assigned to killing traders and not enough for the trader who can survive in a very hostile setting.
(It takes 40,000 experiance from trading to advance in player rating or
5 kills and 20000 experience OR 10 kills.
How long does it take to gain 40,000 experiance without others helping you by obtaining maps and aiding in buying a large trader?
How long does it take to get 10 kills when you are given a ship and can hunt traders rather then other hunters?
Who gains the most from war? (Traders gain nothing)
If you are trying to gain by hunting it does not matter how often you are killed. But if you are trying to be a trader it is rather difficult to reach 40k without being killed. (and losing some of the experiance as a result)
There is certainly a purpose for war. However there is no purpose in Race War in a universe where the races join together in bands. These bands declare war regardless of the racial settings and they make peace with other alliances regardless of race. There is no voting required and because the reward for killing players is greater then what is attained peacefully we have the Universal War.
Universal war does not protect trade it restricts it. Rather than have traders from other races restocking your galatic ports (traders sell and buy.) you close them off and this means your traders are restricted to the same ports. Within an Alliance weapons can still be obtained. You just have one member purchase the weapon, place it on a planet and another member pick it up.
What the constant war allows is for the hunters to roam at will and never worry about alignment because as long as they go outside their galaxy everything is a target with a bounty. And that same time the traders are just so much game on a preserve because they cannot leave their home galaxy unless their Alliance owns another galaxy.
I just think that wars are too hard to end. I can see where 1 person decides to put going to war to a vote but I can't understand how 1 person can override the vote for peace. Prehaps it is because we begin at war and with relations at -500. Have they ever began a game with Univeral peace? How long before the first war broke out. Was there any two races that never went to war? I think most traders would agree it is much better to have access to more routes. The war status makes it impossible first because you cannot trade accross race and second any same race port outside your home galaxy means you must enter areas where enemy forces roam at will. It is much more risky to enter home galaxys then it is to wait beside a warp in another. There is much status assigned to killing traders and not enough for the trader who can survive in a very hostile setting.
(It takes 40,000 experiance from trading to advance in player rating or
5 kills and 20000 experience OR 10 kills.
How long does it take to gain 40,000 experiance without others helping you by obtaining maps and aiding in buying a large trader?
How long does it take to get 10 kills when you are given a ship and can hunt traders rather then other hunters?
Who gains the most from war? (Traders gain nothing)
If you are trying to gain by hunting it does not matter how often you are killed. But if you are trying to be a trader it is rather difficult to reach 40k without being killed. (and losing some of the experiance as a result)
Mogami, hunting is not as easy as you seem to think. If you look at HoF for last game you'll see that top hunters got roughly 11 times more kills than the requirement you posted while top traders traded roughly 12 times more xp. If you look further down the list at 25th you'll see that the trader got roughly 7 times as much xp as the requirement you posted, while the hunter just 2.5....
Also, traders do gain something from war, they gain lack of traders from other races on their routes.
Also, traders do gain something from war, they gain lack of traders from other races on their routes.
War and Peace.
Hi, Thanks for your response. I joined the last game with only about 4 days to go. I managed to get to 600 out of 1700. All I did was trade. But then I never left my starting Galaxy.
1 Salvene 73
2 Thevian 72
3 Creonti 69
4 Ik'Thorne 68
5 Alskant 48
6 Nijarin 41
7 Human 67
8 WQ Human 49
War restricts traders to just their galaxy or if they care to take extreme risk they can try to trade in 13 non home Galaxys. But not all ports will be open (in fact only 1/8th of these ports will be open.)
In peace the competition would expand to 462 (if all players were traders)
But the ratio of traders to open galaxies would be 22 traders per galaxy. The competition for everyone would be less then half of what it is in time of war. (4 out of 8 races would go to 1/3 the competition.
Now war as applied currently is not about one race trying to protect it's trade. It is about bounty collecting. And impact on alignment. The races do not really fight one another because there are no Racial forces at war. Players are either independant agents or they are members of Alliances. Alliances cross Racial boundries so it is common to have races that are at war actually fighting side by side against their own races. The real trade wars occur between alliances. Having the larger but meaningless Racial war settings allows multi race Alliances to attack ports and control areas.
I'm not complaining about the game system or advocating code changes. I'm just pointing out how the strategy employed effects the game.
The persons who decide peace or war are the players with the highest ranking. (and alignment) But since most kills are going to yield alignment gain (because of the war status) it does not hurt the hunters. Behind a
screen of hunters, in a galaxy controlled by your Alliance life is very good for the trader. But the independant or small Alliance suffers. So it is not Race that matters but rather having a bounty on killing traders that is the motive. This allows players to both kill for profit and be rewarded with the high alignment required to retain control of the war and peace machine.
It seems to me the thing most important to success is
1. Being a member of a large active well organized Alliance.
Trying to go independant is suicide as is belonging to any alliance with less then 25 members that do not all use 500 turns every 2 days.
And within these alliances the trader supports the muscle who in turn protect the trade routes that do not worry about race because the Alliance is multi racial and ignores war status within the Alliance.
So I return to my conclusion the war status is not about protecting trade routes and if a person is voting to maintain war he is restricting his traders. But that said traders will still be restricted (because of health concerns) unless they operate in areas controlled by their Alliance because other Alliances don't care about war status. The war status is used to maintain control and collect bounties. The more successfull you are as a hunter the safer you become. Killing enemy races adds to your alignment and this allows you to stay better armed when traveling and still log off in protected space. The illegal traders are the ones most exposed to danger and the ones who most require the war. (This allows their protectors to work without penalty)
It's a nice system if you can gather 25-30 players who understand their roles and can work together. But anyone who thinks they can play the game and just be "a peacfull trader" does not understand what is going on. The peacefull trader cannot leave the galaxy he begins in and after a time is not even safe while trading there.
1 Salvene 73
2 Thevian 72
3 Creonti 69
4 Ik'Thorne 68
5 Alskant 48
6 Nijarin 41
7 Human 67
8 WQ Human 49
War restricts traders to just their galaxy or if they care to take extreme risk they can try to trade in 13 non home Galaxys. But not all ports will be open (in fact only 1/8th of these ports will be open.)
In peace the competition would expand to 462 (if all players were traders)
But the ratio of traders to open galaxies would be 22 traders per galaxy. The competition for everyone would be less then half of what it is in time of war. (4 out of 8 races would go to 1/3 the competition.
Now war as applied currently is not about one race trying to protect it's trade. It is about bounty collecting. And impact on alignment. The races do not really fight one another because there are no Racial forces at war. Players are either independant agents or they are members of Alliances. Alliances cross Racial boundries so it is common to have races that are at war actually fighting side by side against their own races. The real trade wars occur between alliances. Having the larger but meaningless Racial war settings allows multi race Alliances to attack ports and control areas.
I'm not complaining about the game system or advocating code changes. I'm just pointing out how the strategy employed effects the game.
The persons who decide peace or war are the players with the highest ranking. (and alignment) But since most kills are going to yield alignment gain (because of the war status) it does not hurt the hunters. Behind a
screen of hunters, in a galaxy controlled by your Alliance life is very good for the trader. But the independant or small Alliance suffers. So it is not Race that matters but rather having a bounty on killing traders that is the motive. This allows players to both kill for profit and be rewarded with the high alignment required to retain control of the war and peace machine.
It seems to me the thing most important to success is
1. Being a member of a large active well organized Alliance.
Trying to go independant is suicide as is belonging to any alliance with less then 25 members that do not all use 500 turns every 2 days.
And within these alliances the trader supports the muscle who in turn protect the trade routes that do not worry about race because the Alliance is multi racial and ignores war status within the Alliance.
So I return to my conclusion the war status is not about protecting trade routes and if a person is voting to maintain war he is restricting his traders. But that said traders will still be restricted (because of health concerns) unless they operate in areas controlled by their Alliance because other Alliances don't care about war status. The war status is used to maintain control and collect bounties. The more successfull you are as a hunter the safer you become. Killing enemy races adds to your alignment and this allows you to stay better armed when traveling and still log off in protected space. The illegal traders are the ones most exposed to danger and the ones who most require the war. (This allows their protectors to work without penalty)
It's a nice system if you can gather 25-30 players who understand their roles and can work together. But anyone who thinks they can play the game and just be "a peacfull trader" does not understand what is going on. The peacefull trader cannot leave the galaxy he begins in and after a time is not even safe while trading there.
It is the nature of the game that large & well organized alliances will have some advantages over others, and that is how it should be - there should be some benefits that come with success.
With the current changes making SMC hunting much more difficult. it is much easier for traders to survive if they trade smart. If you die once on a prime route, switch to a smaller one. Don't trade the same route every day. Don't trade the same time every day. Use scouts and mines. Read the news to figure out which routes are heavily hunted.
With the current changes making SMC hunting much more difficult. it is much easier for traders to survive if they trade smart. If you die once on a prime route, switch to a smaller one. Don't trade the same route every day. Don't trade the same time every day. Use scouts and mines. Read the news to figure out which routes are heavily hunted.