STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP (THE SEDG) (Sponsored by Flying Moose Technologies' Starweb Analyzer - http://flyingmoose.cjb.net) VOL 34 May22, 2000 CONTENTS Feature Article - TYPES OF ALLIANCES/AGREEMENTS Questions - SEDG Web Page URL The Captain's Log - More Can Be Better The Swap Corner - The Profile Manager Correspondence FEATURE ARTICLE - TYPES OF ALLIANCES/AGREEMENTS I find that the key to successful play of Starweb (and in fact any diplomacy game) is clear and good communication. Obviously some skill at playing the game is also required. It is amazing how two players can agree to the same thing on turn 4 but by turn 10 each feel the other player is not only not living up to their end of the bargain but are actually working against them even if they are "allies". Yes, I know some players actually look for any small infringement of an agreement (e.g. He only dropped 20 metal instead of the agreed on 21) to give cause for holy war. That aside, many players working side by side in an alliance if asked will tell you they are irked by something their ally is doing (or not doing as the case may be). This is precisely why on first contact the disposition of the world, art or keys is the last thing I worry about. The first is an understanding of what the other player wants from the game. To this end finding out his character type is the first step. Asking if he is playing it in character is also important as he might be a pirate out for blood and not plunder. But I digress - Starweb character behaviors are actually another article I have for the SEDG. So, assuming you do know what your new neighbor wants from the game how do you cement an "arrangement" with him that you can both live with and hopefully both will be able to refer to later and be on the same page? This is why I want to discuss types of agreements, alliances etc. Concrete Deals The easiest of all agreements are concrete deals. For example this is where you say, "I will stay with my key and after capture of the neutral world/key/art will leave with the key allowing you to capture the world". In this scenario if you then drop an I ship or transfer a ship to the neutral key to hinder the other players capture, or fail to move your key then you should be shot on sight. After all, you are a deal breaker and liar! You say you only promised to leave but didn't expressly state you wouldn't do those other things. Obviously, this makes you a slimy dealer and not following the spirit of the deal. If you made an honest mistake - better beg forgiveness and do something fast to placate that other player because screwing up on a simple deal makes you at best - an incompetent. Alliance Be very, very careful with the 'A' word. What exactly is an ally? Poll 12 players and you will get 12 answers. At it's simplest is the definition in the Starweb Rule Book. An Ally will not ambush allied ships, and you will not capture worlds belonging to your ally. Your ships will help protect allied industry and even if they are "at peace" they will keep enemy fleets from capturing allied worlds. If you are a pirate, you will not capture your ally's ships. As the rulebook also says "The Word 'Ally' has additional connotations which DO NOT APPLY in Starweb. But let's look at what we mean when we say ally. Allies are players that will help you and that you will also have obligations to. Simple enough eh? But does that mean he can tell you what to do with your Resources? Does that mean you have to help him out in a war he may have started? Even better what are your obligations if two players you allied with start to fight with each other? If invaded are you obligated to defend him? And what about scoring? Do you just hand him what he needs to score with, even if he can't match the value to you? Worse yet, if you both need similar things like worlds do you subvert your scoring to favor him? And how do you win if giving your allies more points will allow him to pass you? You can see that being an ally can mean totally different things to different people. So the best thing to sort out is what type of alliance you are in and what are your (and their) obligations to each other. Alliance types - yes there are different types. Some focus on the military and let everyone fend for him or herself regarding scoring. Some are concerned more with trade than agreements about offense or defense and then there are the internal relationships between allies - are they all allied with each other? Serial Alliances This is where you (A) are allied to B who is allied to C. However you are not allied to C. This is the simplest case. You can have 8 different players with a convoluted map of who is allied to whom. This is the weakest type of alliance for maximizing scoring and warfare. Because if A decides to attack C you are unsure of B's reaction. B's best stance is to declare at the beginning that he is neutral if 2 allies fight (and he should stick to this). The other tactic I have seen is B declaring he will always ally with the one attacked (makes for an interesting situation eh?) B is in the best situation for defense. If he is attacked both A and C may help. A and C however can only rely on B and hope that B's influence and good will might swing some support from B's allies. The scoring situation is similar to the military situation. There is a lot of potential for friction among individuals in a large loose alliance like this and it can make for some very interesting and fun politics and diplomacy. Players are still quite independent and can go for a win without having to seek consensus from a large group. 3 Musketeers Alliance "All for one and one for all!" This means that A, B, C, and D all agree that they are allied to the whole group. You can see the obvious advantages for offense, defense and for optimizing scoring. It also ties you down more. You are beholding to more people and therefore there are further restrictions to your freedom. These are the only two types of alliances there are. But their inner make- up is highly variable. We need to discuss the components of the alliance agreement as well as the organization chart. 1) Organization chart - Will there be Generals appointed? Such as a Military coordinator (with or without final say) who puts forward "The Plan". Or do you become a democracy and decide on plans put forward by vote? Perhaps consensus will be the way - it leads to a lot of email but it is fun. Although, sometimes it is the spammer that holds the power as the other allies give up trying to send counter arguments just to stem the tide of email . Scoring/Trade Coordinator - and how do you do trade. Equal value versus giving everyone as much of what they need unreservedly versus rotating the resources to get as much bang for the buck (e.g Pirate plunders it then gifts to the EB to be followed by late game PBB by the Berserker/Apostles). What this does to scoring is an important question. 2) Scoring agreement. Of the players who wish to score is there an agreement as to who can win. Is it a friendly race to the finish line (and bury your other allies) or do you agree to pace some player to the finish line because some players wish close seconds and thirds for a good ranking. Will the merchant (or any character vastly in the lead) agree to slow down and allow others to pace him? Will he accept a second place. Is it OK to grab the win to prevent a nonally from winning even if it means a poorer rank for some alliance members. 3) Military! So do how do you handle your OFFENSIVE LINE? Are you looking for a fight? A target? Who will participate and to what extent (after all the Apostle may wish to use some or most of his ships on friendly Jihad). Not all allies wish to fight - some merchants just want to haul metal. Defense - The 3 musketeer approach implies that all allies will leap to your defense. Other alliance types - perhaps your mutual defense needs to be discussed. In my mind allies will exchange turnsheets to expedite information trade and keep this information discrete. It goes without saying (I hope) that an ally will not feed your enemies ships, worlds, access to or recon of your area. That just about covers alliances agreements but there are other agreements. Trade agreements, Mutual defence Pacts, Nonaggression pacts, Cooperative offense pacts. Many of these situations won't come up often. But there are unique situations when you are already allied with a group that doesn't need more partners (e.g. group with an EB doesn't want to induct your other EB neighbor). Those who use these agreements in place of any alliances are real lone wolves (or crazy :-). Nonaggression Pact This basically states that you won't attack him and likewise he won't attack you. It can be a very good solution to stop worrying about a player on your rear while you and your allies disembowel an enemy in front of you. It would be good to put in conditions of dissolving the pact amicably or you face the prospect of either game end nonaggression or the label of backstabber. I have seen players state that there must be a 2-turn declaration of dissolution of the pact. Therefore on T7 you could declare the agreement null and void and pounce on T9. A nonaggression pact doesn't preclude a player from supplying your enemies with information, ships, keys and even access to your border. Of course if you see enemy ships streaming over your border from this nonaggressive player's realm you really do have cause to dissolve the pact unless the map really does lend itself to another player hitting you from this common border. Trade Agreements You are in an alliance that perhaps lacks a certain character type. You may be able to effect trade outside your local alliance without hampering anything. I have seen Art Collectors able to procure a little extra art by giving up a few ships or keys outside their alliance. One must be careful not to give up too much or your allies may take exception thinking that you are not pulling your weight in fulfilling your obligations to them. In a trade agreement there is no obligation for defense, offense and you may even be planning to strike them once your dealing is done :-). Mutual Defense Pacts You basically agree to come help defend a player who is attacked in return for the same favor. In this way small independant alliances of 2 or 3 players can band and fight off bigger alliances without further obligations. I've seen this in my private game with 5 teams of 3. Cooperative Offense Pacts Similarly small alliances can band together to fight a common target without the need for complex and convoluted agreements between them. They don't have to trade turns, cooperate in scoring or even defend the other player. My experience with this was in a game where my alliance of 5 players attacked another one of 3 players. Then two other allied players to my north (a pirate and EB) wanted a safe border with me and wanted my help taking out another 2 players. My allies did not need or want either of the two player types as I was their pirate and we had an EB. But I agreed to cooperate in their offence and got to be involved in every fight on the map. My resources were spoken for and I did not engage in trade with them. Now that I have laid it out you can see how you might find yourself embroiled with 3 allies, one who wants a mutual defense pact, another who is more interested in trade and scoring and yet another who wants to bind tightly into one unit. I find that for maximum enjoyment you should know your goals for the game and how you want to play it. It is possible to vary this from game to game. This game I am a warmongering Pirate who doesn't plunder worlds. I want a close knit alliance with a merchant and berserker for their ship/war abilities. I will support their win but I want tons of ships. The next game you could be the Merchant who will take a second place close on the heels of first but wants to organize a tightly knit group of 4-5 allies who are the '3 Musketeers' variety. Once you meet the other players it is best if you find out their inclinations and see if there is common ground. If not, that's great too. You may have just found your first target. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- QUESTIONS - Can anyone answer these? In Volume 33 I asked: Has anyone seen the famous turn 1 'Guess the connection to ring 2' gambit work? I have an ally in SW-Z1300. Eddore the Pirate - and he landed on ring 2 on T2 after such a successful connection guess. So yes, it is possible. Apparently the Starweb program will allow you to write two sets of movement orders for a key. If the first one is incorrect (wrong connection information) it won't count as a movement order and the second one can be tried. Here's a new one - Chris Richards asked: Elliot, Do you know the answer to this one? I tried to post it in the discussion forum but the server seems to be down at the moment. If I fire with a fleet on the same turn I create a PBB with it, do the 25 ships that turn into the PBB get to fire? Or does the fleet fire 25 shots less than there are ships on it? - Chris Great Question Chris. I can't say that I know the answer either. I will post it in the SEDG and see if we get any response. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP - is now available on the web. Look for our new MAPPER'S SECTION on the SEDG Web Page. http://www.accessv.com/~somnos/sedg.htm ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEATURE - THE CAPTAIN'S LOG 000510.0514-4 By Walt Schmidt walts@dorsai.org More Can Be Better - Large Industrial And Metal Worlds - Part II of II "A living thing is distinguished from a dead thing by the multiplicity of the changes at any moment taking place in it." - Herbert Spencer Last Log we spoke of (the dreamt of) Large Industrial And Mine Worlds (LIAM Worlds), and SW2000's TPs - Transfer Portal. And while I've heard nothing from the Gods of Starweb, us common-folk have spoken a word or two. As such, I'll let this log be part two of two concerning LIAM Worlds - and the true defense against TPs - Pirate Traps! But before we start that discussion, Alter has asked for a moment, I've promised to give him the time, and also promised to refrain from commenting. SO, some of you find me annoying do you! WELL let me tell you - you want to know what boils my ass? I WATCH (so to speak) Elliot and Nemo bust their respective asses [AND knowing that while Nemo is keepin' his word - he is dying to say it - so I'll say it for him "...and there IS much to their asses to respect!"] AS I was saying before I interrupted myself, I watch them bust their asses to get an issue of SEDG out, chock full of the stuff of which a good discussion could be made. AND what happens? YOU arm-chair, couch-potato(e), couldn't-string-a- readable-sentence-together if-your-life-depended-upon-it-whiners read their work - and that's it. YOU want me, Alter, to be less of a pain in an ass? THEN get your asses in gear and write to Elliot. AND I know that both of them are ego-secure enough that it does not matter whether you agree or disagree with them. WRITE to SEDG and let your voice be heard. HELL - annoying am I - well as far as I am concerned - you can take the high-horse you road in on and go...[Okay Alter - you made your point - and I know I promised to keep shut - but no need to get us in trouble with the word-police] [WELL, hell, Nemo - let them try to turn out top-notch copy every two weeks with little or no response from the readers...boils my ass] [And I thank you, Alter - but Elliot and I do this to fill a void we believe exists and needs filling - and we don't expect everyone to be of a like mind. Remember, Elliot and I have been enjoying Starweb since the 70's - it has become part of who we are. And as all Sci-Fi readers known FIAWOL - Fandom Is A Way Of Life - so is Starweb!] [SHAI STARWEB!] [Right you are, Alter]. Last issue we spoke of the SW2000 Empire Builder's ability to build TPs, and how LIAM worlds would facilitate this. Well, LIAM worlds would also facilitate the Pirates answer to TPs - the Pirate Trap. Once set, a PT [AH Nemo, give me a break - the defense to a TP is a PT - sheesh!] [Thanks Alter, at least someone has noted the play on letters] does not destroy the keys and ships that blunder upon them, but rather captures them. A PT follows the current Ambush rules with the following exceptions. 1 - The capture rate is quadrupled not doubled, i.e., 1 ship captures 2 ships. 2 - The first turn after a Trap order has been given, the ships will only ambush - consider this the trap preparation turn. 3 - The second and following turns PT ships can only Trap. 4 - Only the turn after a Trap has been Unset, can the ships do other than Trap - consider this the time needed to dismantle the trap. 5 - Any non-ally ships that are captured by a trap increase the total of the trapping ships on a one for one basis. This, except when all ships on a key are Trapped, in which case the key and all it's ships ownership revert to the Trapping Pirate. 6 - Only the Pirate that set the Trap will know his ships are in Trap- Mode. 7 - However, if a Pirate probes a world that contains any Traps set by any Pirates, his probe will recognize those ships for what they are - a Trap. And if that wasn't nifty-keen enough. 8 - Following the Pirate's "more than three to one" capture rules, a Pirate can also capture or take over another Pirate's Traps. On the turn the capturing Pirate takes over the other Pirate's trap, the ships he just obtained are considered to immediately be in non-trap mode. Consider this then - two SOIs [Sphere Of Influence]. Aah builds a TP to Bee's HW. But Bee, being an experienced SW veteran has their Pirate set a PT at Bee's HW. Now then, consider just these three of many points: a - You have had your Pirate probe Bee's HW using your TP, haven't you? b - You do see the effect of a multi-wave attack, don't you? c - You do understand that the PT ships cannot fire for two turns, don't you? LIAMS, TPs, PTs, SW2000 - oh well enough dream-time, back to the real world next log. Til then - Shai Dorsai ! Nemo ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEATURE - THE SWAP CORNER The Profile Manager For those of you that have availed yourself of the V1.3 update you may have noticed that the Starweb Analyzer now is listed in the Start Menu. In addition, there is a selection called the Profile Manager. Hunt as much as you like but Mike and I did not put any references into Help files about the Profile Manager. There are two purposes to the Profile Manager. If you have gone to File ->Preferences you see that you can select preferences for various things in the Starweb Analyzer. Some are game specific such the color coding of specific character's on the map. Others may be more specific to the account (you may have noticed you can list games under several accounts). But if more than one person is using the Starweb Analyzer on the same computer you can set it up so that each person will bring up the Analyzer with only their unique games listed and all the preferences set specifically for them. I do this frequently as both my sons are playing Starweb and want to keep their games separate and their preferences for how the Analyzer works specific to their needs. If you are the only one using the Analyzer then when you open the program it will just open with your list of games. If you have different profiles then a the profile manager will open each time you activate the program and you will have to select the profile that you wish to use. If you go to the start menu and activate the Profile Manager when you are the only user you will see that their is only one profile called Default. Select 'Manage Profiles' to go to the window that will allow you to create other profiles. The other use of the Profile Manager is to allow you to create these profiles on new computers without having to reload every game with everybodies' preference profiles and game profiles. This is due to the fact that this information is stored in the Windows Registry. This is handy when you upgrade computers or buy a laptop. Using the Starweb Analyzer profile manager to transfer this info on your old computer go to the Start Menu->Starweb Analyzer->Profile Manager - and click to start it. If you are the only one using the Analyzer - your profile of games is called . Click on Export profile and the profile manager will create the file swap.pro. Bring this file to your new computer. After you set up the new computer with the SWAP (best if you use the original file/password so it sets up the profile manager in the start menu) - use the profile manager and import profile - browse and use the swap.pro file for this purpose. You have to create a new profile.pro file for every profile you have on the old machine and repeat the process. Voila - your new computer has all the profiles and games set up properly like the original computer. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CORRESPONDENCE Dear Elliot Walt Schmidt's idea about Empire Builders having the ability to build Transfer Portals is the best idea anybody has come up with to improve the game of Star Web to date. What a great way to give EB's a real purpose and edge. This would open up the game in ways we can't even think of. Everything would have to be rethought. Wars, alliances, and commerce would be conducted entirely different. This idea is so great that I almost forgive Schmidt for his annoying alter ego. Opening up the map in this way not only puts the Berserker on notice it might actually help in breaking up the big alliances. This would give players a greater choice of allies. No longer limited by map and time restrictions when that huge monolithic alliance comes knocking there would now be an escape or avenue to other players/allies for help. If there is ever a possibility that this variant might be created I want in! If you're already customizing a game though let me throw my 2 cents in. How about allowing message beacons like probes. Instead of getting a report back of a world, you leave your sign which remains till another player comes to that world and receives it. If you are going to speed up travel why not communication too? Brian Lease Editor: Sorry, to my knowledge there are no plans for reprogramming the Starweb program. I enjoyed the idea of the Transfer Portal and the Pirate trap very much. Both were exceptionally novel and interesting. I would like to have a chance to try them. CONTEST RESULTS The Flying Moose Technologies Starweb Analyzer Contest is over. The winner of a Flying Moose Technologies T shirt is John Muije. Many thanks to all who played. John - your Shirt is in the mail! Well, that's it for Volume 34. Don't be afraid to submit articles or suggestions. They don't have to be long. Address your correspondence to Elliot Hudes at somnos@compuserve.com