STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP (THE SEDG)

Volume 4 - Monday April 12, 1999

 Hello everyone - I have decided to make this biweekly. I have enough
material to cover until the summer but as this is a fledgling operation 
I have not received any articles and I don't think I can supply 52 weeks 
worth of stuff. This week I am only putting in my wish list for 
articles. Next installment will be Apostle Stuff Part II.

I sure would like some help putting together information and articles 
for this discussion group. With time I hope that the membership will 
grow and it will be mostly a selfsustaining group.

The article doesn't have to be long or complete but I sure would like 
some article input. Ideas I would really like to see are listed below. 
If I don't get any I will tackle numbers 1,2 and 6. I don't have 
experience with the others.


CALL FOR ARTICLES
1)Tales of the Black Box (I would accept lists of what you've seen the 
Black Box do and compile a master list.

2)Backstabbers, Spoilers and brats.

3)Multi games -  best character mix, strategies, alliances.

4)Anonymous games - strategies, how to form alliances and get help in 
war without communication.

5)Bitter end games - character types, alliances, strategies.

6)HW defence ideas - include by character type and vs different 
character types.
----------------------------------------------------------
STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP - is now available on the web.

http://www.accessv.com/~somnos/sedg.htm
----------------------------------------------------------

CORRESPONDENCE

Regarding variations in types of alliances and play (Vol. 2) John 
Shannonhouse sent the following -

Elliot:

I think that I may be largely responsible for the development of the 
"grand alliance".  The first mega-alliance, or at least the first 
published one, occured in SW-890.  The article was published in FBQ #54. 
 This alliance included Berserkers ROCK and MANTIS,  Empire Builder 
POSEIDON, Merchant NEPTUNE, Apostle VALKYRIE, Pirate CEAKER, and 
Artifact Collector CORVAL (me<g>).  In the past alliances normally 
consisted of only 3 or maybe 4 players working loosely together.

I did a heavy push to get everyone in the alliance the maximum possible 
score -- also something a bit different from the past.  Before the 
concentration had been on military support, but scoring was done by 
negotiating one on one.  The idea of simply doing the best for whoever 
needed it in the alliance even if he could not help back was pretty much 
unknown, at least not on such a scale.  That turned out to be 
*extremely* successful.  People who insisted on point-for-point trades 
just could not compete.

In that game I also introduced what was then a new concept -- the leader 
voluntarily reducing his rate of growth to keep from "burying" his 
allies.  I gave away massive amounts of art (including the Ancient 
Pyramid) to hold my score down.  And we worked very hard to get as close 
as possible to the same ending score.

I had other similar games, and published them as well.

Starweb, where each character class had unique needs that made 
cooperative efforts really useful.  And you could play with people all 
over the world. Starweb is ideally set up to be a cooperative game.  
People willing to cooperate will find plenty of win-win opportunities, 
and have a much easier time of it.

I admit that I enjoy the games that lead to good ratings.  However, the 
most interesting games usually involve individuals or groups of 
individuals who are out to blow everyone else away.  Stopping the 
out-of-control Merchant, recognizing and handling the imminent backstab, 
choreographing a war effort, outguessing a determined opponent -- all of 
those add to the enjoyment of the game, though they also make the game 
less "comfortable".  To me the discussions, brainstorming sessions, and 
threshing out a final plan that everyone can live with is the best part 
of the game.  I like allies who are outspoken with strong ideas on what 
should be done.  Even if they have opposing ideas.

John Shannonhouse
---------------------------------------------------
In regards to Vol. #3 Corresponcence.

Message text written by Dave Lightfoot
>In my view, the various assortment of players makes the game more
interesting, BUT, I would find it very enjoyable to be in an occasional
game where the goal is Points! Points! Points!  I take great personal
satisfaction in finally entering the group of Top Ten Starweb Players
listed in FBQ.  The latest issue of FBQ finds me in positon #5 of the
Standby Top Ten and this is a personal first.<

I am always impressed by people who do well in the standby lists.  They 
might just be lucky, but in my experience it requires a lot of diplomacy 
to extricate yourself from a difficult position.

John Shannonhouse

Hey John - didn't you write an article about the diplomatic difficulties 
in playing the Standby character? How about sending it to me for 
publication? If you can't find it - I may have it in my archives.
----------------------------------------------------

Well, that's it for Volume 4. Don't be afraid to submit articles or 
suggestions. They don't have to be long winded. Address your 
correspondence to
somnos@compuserve.com