STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP (THE SEDG) (Sponsored by Flying Moose Technologies' Starweb Analyzer - http://www.flyingmoose.ca) VOLUME 86 November 2005 CONTENTS Feature Article - Turn 1 Fleet Movement in Starweb by Jack Fulmer Questions - Changing accounts, pirate captures and Art SEDG Web Page URL The Swap Corner Correspondence FEATURE ARTICLE Turn 1 Fleet Movement in Starweb By Jack Fulmer I know that this subject has been covered before in the SEDG. However, I think that this may be a different take on it. I don't remember anyone tackling the subject of turn 1 fleet moves in multi- Starweb in any detail at all. I thought that there might be some interest among SEDG readers in comparing our approaches to fleet movement on turn 1 of a Starweb game. Here are some examples of how I approach the topic. I strongly encourage other players to submit their thoughts to Elliot for publication in the SEDG. Single Position Starweb Turn 1 Fleet Movement In a single position Starweb game of course we all get five keys and thirty-two ships to work with on turn 1. How we deploy them on turn 1 can have a lasting effect on our success in the game. The key uncertainty affecting fleet movement on turn 1 is of course "How many connections exist to my homeworld?" My key strategic principle guiding fleet deployment is to simultaneously maximize the number of worlds and keys captured while balancing the number of ships on my exploration fleets. 2-connector Homeworlds: From a two connector homeworld I send out four exploration fleets carrying thirty ships. Two fleets and fifteen ships go to each world. I retain one fleet with two ships at the homeworld. My rationale is that first, this gives me the best chance to balance my ships among fleets owned on turn 1 and those captured on my ring 1 worlds. This works well for further exploration and/or attacking neutral home fleets. Second, any of my fleets can reach any ring two world on turn 2. So retaining more than one fleet at my homeworld is not necessary to reach all available connections on turn 2. Finally one 2-ship fleet retained at the homeworld becomes a 4-ship exploration fleet with the turn 2 builds. Ideally I will find myself on turn 2 with a balanced number of ships on my exploration fleets and have at least enough fleets to move to all available connections on turn 2. 3-connector Homeworlds: From a three connector homeworld I send out three exploration fleets carrying eight or nine ships each. I retain two fleets totaling seven or eight ships at the homeworld. This homeworld configuration is the most likely to result in unbalanced numbers of ships per fleet on turn 2. 4-connector Homeworlds: From a four connector homeworld I send out four exploration fleets carrying thirty ships. One fleet and either eight or seven ships go to each world. I retain one fleet with two ships at the homeworld. 5-connector Homeworlds: From a five connector homeworld I send out one exploration fleets carrying five or six ships to each world. I consider immediate exploration more important than retaining one fleet at the homeworld to pick up the turn 2 builds. 5+ or 1-connector Homeworlds: I suppose it may have happened but I've never seen a homeworld with more than five connectors or with only one connector. If I ever do I will balance my exploration ships among five fleets that explore five worlds and probe any remaining worlds. I would treat a 1-connector the same as described above for a 2-connector world. Multi-Starweb Turn 1 Fleet Movement In a multi-Starweb game of course each homeworld has the same five keys and thirty-two ships to work with on turn 1 as in regular Starweb. In addition to the variable number of connections to each homeworld you also have a need to get ownership of fleets properly distributed among your characters. I still want to simultaneously maximize the number of keys captured while balancing the number of ships on my exploration fleets. However, how many fleets and ships actually explore on turn 1 may be different when compared to a homeworld in a single position. This is because I will be making gifts of some number of keys among my characters. The possible combinations of three character types and the number of connections at three homeworlds are too numerous to analyze in this article. Here is just one example. Suppose that I have chosen a Merchant / Pirate / Berserker combination as I often do. With this combination of characters I will want as quickly as possible to get all worlds to the pirate and have about six merchant fleets servicing each homeworld. I won't worry much about how many keys the berserker owns until the middle turns of the game. Generally I would: have the merchant give two keys to the pirate; have the pirate give two keys to the merchant; and have the berserker give one key each to the merchant and pirate. But suppose that the pirate has a 2-connection homeworld while the merchant and berserker each have 4-connection homeworlds. It is easy to decide that the merchant will explore four worlds and give one key to the pirate. But what gift should the berserker make after sending out four exploration fleets? I would probably have the berserker give one fleet to the pirate. Should the pirate send out two, three or four exploration fleets? Why not send out four to explore and give one to the merchant? Questions like these are one of the attractions of multi- Starweb for me. OK, there are some of my thoughts. Lets hear yours. Jack Fulmer November, 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- QUESTIONS - Can anyone answer these? Last issue I asked "This one is directed at FBI - If I start a game under one of my account numbers can I transfer it to another one part way through?" Rick answered: Absolutely not. So, if it looks like you will lose the game, transfer it to the account where you don't care about the rating? John Shannonhouse chimed in: I HOPE not. Deciding half way through to throw a game to your "junk" account because it is not going well -- or to throw it to your GOOD account if it is unexpectedly doing superb -- does not sound like a good idea. Editor - that question actually dawned on me when the opposite was about to occur. I am in a game presently with my trash account. I swear that I never even thought about winning but sadly, it looks like I may win the game. I guess it's equally as evil to contemplate transferring a great game from my 'dud' account to my 'serious' account. A while back I inquired about the largest pirate capture on record. Gary Schaefers wrote in for the bragging rights on this. Gary: EL - I didn't total up the Captures, but I made a BIG one, and a REALLY BIG one, plus many other small ones. I don't know if any of these, or if the sum of these can go into your stats. The game is ongoing, so please don't disclose sensitive info. Gary Editor: I certainly don't want to disclose sensitive information so I will change the names to protect the innocent. I scrutinized the turnsheet and I found the second largest capture "The big capture" was only 23 ships, hardly worth mentioning. Then I saw it - and it's a beaut! >> WXXX (YYY,ZZZ,AAA) [] (Metal=xxx,Mines=x,Population=xx,Limit=xx) >> FXXX[GARY]=2 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],Cargo=2) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=5 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM]) >> FXXX[GARY]=10 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=250 (Moved) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=250 (Moved) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=147 (AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=250 (Moved) >> FXXX[GARY]=251 >> FXXX[GARY]=245 (AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=26 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM 2],Cargo=26,At-Peace) >> FXXX[GARY]=255 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=224 (Moved) >> FXXX[GARY]=5 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM]) >> FXXX[GARY]=255 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=250 (Moved) >> FXXX[GARY]=79 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=252 >> FXXX[GARY]=2 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[GARY]=1 (Captured,Lost by [VICTIM],AF) >> FXXX[]=0 (Lost by [GARY],AF) Editor: This must have been the big capture of 649 ships on 19 keys by Gary's 2,119 ships. Awesome! I doubt anyone can top this - but if you can - send me the turnsheet. New Question: Can anyone claim they have finished the game with all the art? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP - is now available on the web. Look for our MAPPER'S SECTION on the SEDG Web Page. http://www.accessv.com/~somnos/sedg.htm ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEATURE - THE SWAP CORNER STARWEB ANALYZER V1.5 - It's on the web site and it's no longer a Beta! Go get it! As before - registered clients of any previous V1.x version can upgrade for free. www.flyingmoose.ca Currently the StarGame Analyzer is being prepped for Starcon (another game). V2.0 which handles both Starcon and Starweb won't be ready for the Starweb audience for a while. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CORRESPONDENCE In this issue Jack said: "I strongly encourage other players to submit their thoughts to Elliot for publication in the SEDG." Editor: OK - I would like to add something. I usually send out one of the keys that remain at the HW with a guessed connection for ring 2. I realize that you don't actually know if this world connects and in this case the FBI SW computer logs your order as an error and ignores it. For example HW W10 connects to W11. So I order F2W11W44. I have never guessed correctly but I just got an email from a long time player (longer than me) and he just did this successfully for the first time. Landing on ring 2 turn 2 is a great advantage and worth the risk. Rick Loomis had a lot of comments about my last issue - Here are some of them: RL: In my first read-through, I saw a comment you made that you thought we put in 1000 points as the ending score for anyone who didn't pick one?!?!?!? Absolutely not. We average those who give a score and leave out those who don't. If one person picks 10,000 and the other 14 dont pick a score, then the ending score is 10,000. >I suggest that FBI put out in their monthly mailing the Starweb >Variant of the Month Club. RL: This is more or less what I've intended, but ended up being too rushed usually. >Marketing >How about marketing the game to encourage sign ups? Have contests, >sales or campaigns. Sign up with a friend who has never played and you >get 5 free turns. Sign up with 2 friends (could be a partner variant) >who have never played and your game is free. Sign up for the new >Variant of the Month and the setup fee is waived! Play a dual Multi at >the cost of only playing one position. RL: We've already got "sign up a friend and get two free turns". Doesn't seem to be attracting much attention. Editor: Well Rick - it's been 2 months since the last SEDG and I haven't gotten a monthly email with your news where you were going to feature new variants or games with stuck waiting lists (please let me know if you have cuzz we have had problems with compuserve spam blockers before ;-). And about that FBQ . Maureen Hudes wrote (That's my wife and she really did write!): Hi El, I received the latest edition of the SEDG and feel compelled to respond! Wow! You had amazing suggestions-hopefully Rick doesn't want to kick your ass now! My favourite section was the Q&A. Actually, it was the A's that got my attention. I'm also astounded by your ability to fit everything into your day! Love, Moe Editor: Well, I suppose Rick might want to kick my butt - but he usually restrains himself as long as I sign up for 4 or more games :-). Just kidding - I am not in 4 games honey (it's more!). As to fitting things in - ignoring sleep and the wife helps (kidding!) Love, El Stephen Moore writes: Hey Elliot, Great ish, thanks. Two things: 1) I'm interested in the Score Equalization variant, but I don't have time for two games at once, and I don't *think* I have time for a non- anonymous game at all. 2) I'm in my first game back after a 16-year absence. Worse, I only played one game the first time around. I may try to do a "Return of a Newbie" article after the game finishes, sometime in the next few months. Happy gaming. Stephen Moore << Editor: Thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately - as of right now - we have only 3 signups for the Equalization Variant. I will let you know if it changes in the future OR perhaps FBI will take me up on my challenges and offer up some new and interesting variations. Enjoy your return - PBM is a lot of fun and you meet such interesting people. I look forward to your 'Return of the Newbie'. Stephen Moore: >> Hey Elliot, I've now finished my "first game back" (SW-A1348 about three weeks ago) and will try to write that "Return of a Newbie" article when I can find time. I finished fourth as a Pirate (top Pirate, even!), and my main opponent, a Merchant, finished first. Also, I had a question about one of your old SEDG articles. In "On Being Metallic" in SEDG #1, you offer this tip: "4)When deciding whether to R attack vs PBB - breakeven is 100 population. To kill 100 takes an R25 and gives 400 points. To PBB a world 0f 100 takes 25 ships also and gives 400 points." Wouldn't an R25 kill 200 population (25 ships = 50 robots = 200 dead population)? I'm sure I'm missing something simple here, but I'm thinking about trying a Berserker and want to get my facts straight. Anyway, hope you are well. Happy gaming! Stephen Moore << Editor: Hi Stephen I look forward to your article. I have one for November and will publish by month end so your article could see print in January if you send it to me. As for the robot attacks. Each ship creates 2 robots who in turn kill 2 people worth 2 points each. So 25 ships = 50 robots = 100 kills = 200 points. Your ratio of 4 kills to 1 robot is too high. The quick calculation is each ship can get you 16 points of kills. Take care, El P.S. start writing Al Rosin writes: Elliot- Years ago I played Flying Buffalo games (88 to 98: 4 Illuminati, 4 WWBP,4 BP, 2 Mobius and 2 Starweb games) and I was amazed to run across the SEDG website. I am impressed that a group of highly-experienced devotees have kept interest in STARWEB alive as it seems that Rick does not publish the Quarterly anymore (that used to be the best part of playing FB games, reading all the controversy going on in the Quarterly) and rarely holds convention tournaments. I kind of get the impression interest in play-by-mail has diminished but hopefully I am wrong. Do you know if Larry Rodin and his whole gang are still playing STARWEB? Editor: Hi Allen Yah - Interest does seem to be waning but there are a small hard core group of SW gamers still around. I played with Larry Rodin just a few years ago. I haven't seen him in a little while though. Lots of the players are 'vintage' so why not sign up and play with us again :-). Lou Sheehan: Part of an exchange with Chuck G. Maybe your newsletter should enclose a note that CHUCK GAYDOS made a mistake? Editor: I hadn't realized that this was so unusual as to be newsworthy but here it is in the SEDG. Chuck Gaydos made a mistake ;-). Wow - we sure are a tough audience eh? Well, that's it for Volume 86. 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