AG - Introduction and Discussion

[Bob De Quatre]

Thanks Tomsche

Week 4 has officially ended, and Week 5 has started. Note that this week is also the last week to enter Challenge 1, and it will be judged at the same time as builds for week 5.

[aeralure]

Here's an update finally with my actual sigfig. Best photo I was able to manage. Aera with her favorite weapon:

And an updated 100x100 for my sigfig if we could change that? (thanks! )

Edited June 15, 2015 by aeralure

[Space Terrapin]

Err, I'm a Driver and I don't seem to have been awarded my 3 job bonus credits for my mech this week (week 4). Could you check? Thanks!

[Bob De Quatre]

Err, I'm a Driver and I don't seem to have been awarded my 3 job bonus credits for my mech this week (week 4). Could you check? Thanks!

On the scoring spreadship the "spaceship" box was checked instead of "Land vehicle"... I corrected everything

[Dardanel]

I believe that:

1. Judging should be more transparent and more streamlined. Example would be:

- Right colors? +1 point

- Right environment? +1 point

- Wrong environment? -1 point

- Minifig on a plate? -1 point

- Over 500 pieces? +1 point

- Advanced techniques? +1 point

- etc

2. Rules should be enforced to the letter (especially time boundaries!).

3. Digital builds should be treated the same as brick-built builds (but this would come to be as a consequence of 1)

[EpsilonEta]

I believe that:

1. Judging should be more transparent and more streamlined.

2. Rules should be enforced to the letter (especially time boundaries!).

3. Digital builds should be treated the same as brick-built builds (but this would come to be as a consequence of 1)

And I believe this should be fun and not about strategi. I have invested a lot more time in AG than I intended just to analyse the best tactics. I would rather we just had fun the way the game was intended.

I said this privat but it can be good for all to read

“I checked the resources change this week and reward on contral is only given once.

This means the entire gaming mechanics is made for making many builds (with high scores). If it wasen't for the rare planets and high reward planets being far away it woulden't mater where everyone built or how slow/fast they would get domination. Everyone could build where they wanted and it the speed they wanted.

It's a nice setup for a GoH kind of play and as soon as we start to make “bourders” (or treatys) between the companies we can start to play that way.

If we were to learn something for another time every compeny should have started closer to one of the rare planets. It woulden't have been the same mad race then.”

Edited June 16, 2015 by EpsilonEta

[Ninja Nin]

Hi Bob, I think the Galactic Banking system might not be reliable because they have charged me 10 more credits in my signature ....

[EpsilonEta]

I have been thinking.

If we want a more friendly game where everyone can build in the speed they want (rather than racing for dominance) then I sugest a simpel rule change and a treaty.

-Rule change: Reward on controll on the rare planets is nothing (it's only 750 biomass onec, what's the big deal?)

-Treaty: All companies (basicaly Octan now) promises to not box in any rare planets.

Then each company can reach two rare minerals whenever they are ready and we don't have to build like mainiacs just to not be left without some resources.

The alternative is for MANTIS and Kawasita to ether fight over Guinevere or help each other against Octan.

[WickNole]

I'll just ask one small question here: do you think the six empty hexagons in the middle of the map are for decorative purposes only?

[Kodan Black]

Thus far this game has been about capturing planets that are unaligned. I think people need to see how the "combat" shapes up as we start to battle over planets. If we all acted gentlemanly/ladylike and allowed everyone equal access it would become rather dull.

[Tomsche]

OR we just build what we like, where within the rules we are allowed for, and have something else to build like I usually do with GoH... but then again, that is my personal motivation why I`m in here.

Fun first, victory later (or never)

[EpsilonEta]

I'll just ask one small question here: do you think the six empty hexagons in the middle of the map are for decorative purposes only?

Yes

Thus far this game has been about capturing planets that are unaligned. I think people need to see how the "combat" shapes up as we start to battle over planets. If we all acted gentlemanly/ladylike and allowed everyone equal access it would become rather dull.

Maybe its just me. If the rest of you like this game than continue (or make it even more stict as the suggestion that started this)

I'm going to do what I intended from the start, drop in a build sometime on the planet I coose and not care about any strategy. Hope the rest of you have fun.

[Bob De Quatre]

The rules never asked players to build every week. The way you choose to play is up to you. Sure there is a strategic flavor here and there, but if you don't want to follow that's up to you, and I'd like your team mates to accept that. Even on a strategic way, it's better to have someone who build as he please that none.

Let's have fun, build in the way we want and try to be constructive and friendly

I'll just ask one small question here: do you think the six empty hexagons in the middle of the map are for decorative purposes only?

I find them very beautiful, don't you?

[David FNJ]

Wow, you went blazing fast on the judging/updating/etc. this week! Hats off to you all, and thanks for an awesome game thus far :D

Edited June 16, 2015 by David FNJ

[Commander Turtle]

Currently scoring is done by rounded averages between the three judges, who have their own personal rating systems. I've already suggested credits could be given by unrounded averages (e.g. 4.333 gets 43 credits). A more prescriptive system would be nice, sometimes there really isn't much separating a 3 from a 4 or a 4 from a 5. That said, we shouldn't expect the judges to increase their workload by adding more details - not unless you want 1 judge assigned per build.

On the tactics; team members are definitely going to have to come to terms with being on a losing team. Only one team will be in the lead at any given time and there's no catchup system if one team is smaller. I enjoy thinking tactically, but it absolutely has to be second priority behind giving members opportunities for fun builds.

To change topic a bit, it's interesting that the bribe bags have adversely affected Kawashita, as we're on a collision course. While Octan are going to surround 2 of the rare resources at the current rate without being affected at all. Individually the bribe bags sounded nice, but as a team the weekly 20 domination point advantage might have proven to be overpowered - MANTIS were not 60 points behind when they were introduced! This plus the bonus to credits has made Kawashita the underdog, especially as both other companies have headed to our side of the map.

It all would have been fine if MANTIS had just gone clockwise like every other team

I'm interested if any other balancing mechanics will be introduced later.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Commander Turtle

[CMP]

To change topic a bit, it's interesting that the bribe bags have adversely affected Kawashita, as we're on a collision course. While Octan are going to surround 2 of the rare resources at the current rate without being affected at all. Individually the bribe bags sounded nice, but as a team the weekly 20 domination point advantage might have proven to be overpowered - MANTIS were not 60 points behind when they were introduced! This plus the bonus to credits has made Kawashita the underdog, especially as both other companies have headed to our side of the map.

It was stimulate people joining MANTIS - we had like half the number of people as other corporations.

The bribe bag thing is over now that we've caught up in terms of personnel.

[Dannylonglegs]

@everyone: Octan has no strategy. We just want to draw genitals on the board. Isn't it beautiful? H03 was a huge asset in terms of completing that objective. Now that we've done that, we honestly have no idea what we'we're going to do next. Probably nothing. We're probably done.

I'll just ask one small question here: do you think the six empty hexagons in the middle of the map are for decorative purposes only?

Yes. Nothing to see there. Go back to your homes... _. ___

~Insectoid Aristocrat

[Zepher]

This is a long game. After one corp claims Guinevere, I'm sure both will go see what that dastardly Octan has been up to and won't be happy with what they see. I wonder if they'll be able to protect their precious genital-based map from two corps.

And yeah, I'm in the same boat, just have fun! Strategy is there, but if winning doesn't matter to you, don't have to follow it! My first two builds were on an useless planet, now I'm helping the cause, but who knows where my story will take me next.

Those Bribe Bags did really screw us over, but that will be part of the Kawashita history. When we over-come them, we will be even better respected!

EDIT: Also, just a note, while Kawashita may look like the biggest Corp, we have 12 builders who have yet to build at all, versus MANTIS' 3 and Octan's 1).

[Commander Turtle]

Those Bribe Bags did really screw us over, but that will be part of the Kawashita history. When we over-come them, we will be even better respected!

Exactly, that's the Kawashita spirit. Honour above everything, even in death.

[Dannylonglegs]

This is a long game. After one corp claims Guinevere, I'm sure both will go see what that dastardly Octan has been up to and won't be happy with what they see. I wonder if they'll be able to protect their precious genital-based map from two corps.

Hey... Octan is very protective of its genitals.

Besides there's nothing nefarious afoot! We're "nice"

~Insectoid Aristocrat

Edited June 16, 2015 by Dannylonglegs

[David FNJ]

Woah woah woah there, you guys have 5 planets, and MANTIS has 4. You guys are no underdogs here. Another few builds from MANTIS and we won't have bribe bag bonuses anymore. It accomplished its purpose - get more MANTIS members and get MANTIS back up to speed.

[David FNJ]

FYI, I'm sure the illustrious MANTIS knows this, but the builds seem to be scored in order, so I'm pretty sure whoever gets to 30 DP first will dominate A06 and get the Biomass bonus (which Kawashita desperately needs). And Kawashita will have to then get at least 60 DP on A06 to take it back. Good luck.

Is this true? Or are scores from a whole week combined to determine domination?

[Dardanel]

Currently scoring is done by rounded averages between the three judges, who have their own personal rating systems. I've already suggested credits could be given by unrounded averages (e.g. 4.333 gets 43 credits). A more prescriptive system would be nice, sometimes there really isn't much separating a 3 from a 4 or a 4 from a 5. That said, we shouldn't expect the judges to increase their workload by adding more details - not unless you want 1 judge assigned per build.

On the tactics; team members are definitely going to have to come to terms with being on a losing team. Only one team will be in the lead at any given time and there's no catchup system if one team is smaller. I enjoy thinking tactically, but it absolutely has to be second priority behind giving members opportunities for fun builds.

To change topic a bit, it's interesting that the bribe bags have adversely affected Kawashita, as we're on a collision course. While Octan are going to surround 2 of the rare resources at the current rate without being affected at all. Individually the bribe bags sounded nice, but as a team the weekly 20 domination point advantage might have proven to be overpowered - MANTIS were not 60 points behind when they were introduced! This plus the bonus to credits has made Kawashita the underdog, especially as both other companies have headed to our side of the map.

It all would have been fine if MANTIS had just gone clockwise like every other team

I'm interested if any other balancing mechanics will be introduced later.

Imho, one jugde per build (that has very clear judging process) is a better option. This would ensure that all builds are treated equally and no personal preferences influence the score(s).

[Kodan Black]

Imho, one jugde per build (that has very clear judging process) is a better option. This would ensure that all builds are treated equally and no personal preferences influence the score(s).

What? That would be the opposite. One judge per build comes down entirely to personal preference. The current average of a group approach minimizes any individual bias.

[Dardanel]

What? That would be the opposite. One judge per build comes down entirely to personal preference. The current average of a group approach minimizes any individual bias.

Three judges hardly represent the multitude of different tastes.

In any case I am suggesting that clear directions should be made for judging. Per my recommendation:

I believe that:

1. Judging should be more transparent and more streamlined. Example would be:

- Right colors? +1 point

- Right environment? +1 point

- Wrong environment? -1 point

- Minifig on a plate? -1 point

- Over 500 pieces? +1 point

- Advanced techniques? +1 point

- etc

2. Rules should be enforced to the letter (especially time boundaries!).

3. Digital builds should be treated the same as brick-built builds (but this would come to be as a consequence of 1)

If this "Judging guideline" is crowd-sourced it would most likely be as fair as possible. And big and complex builds would not get the same score as some smaller/less complex builds, which, I am assuming, is the intention.