Create account / Log in

twilight imperium PBEM anyone?

Post about ongoing games here.

Moderators: Tim M, uckelman

Re: twilight imperium PBEM anyone?

Postby AbsoluteZero » February 1st, 2012, 7:34 am

The only thing I didn't like all game was the trading of blockading docks, and while I mean no offense I stand by it.

Blockading the Space dock: I had two options: ask Mentak, or Creuss if they would allow.

To me this is the exact opposite of competitive play. I would never allow someone to blockade my dock, nor would I expect anyone to let me blockade theirs. The point of SE objectives was to encourage more fighting. You have a valid point that it is expensive to fight for it, but it should be. Many, if not all, of the other objectives are expensive - the planning, material cost, and political fallout are an appropriate cost. Further, this is one of the few objectives you can keep someone from claiming without invading them, and I think denying other players (especially those with more points than you) public objectives is a very important part of competitive play.

However, I'm relatively new to online play. I was pretty surprised to see how common this is. As I have said, the group I play ftf with is very aggressive. I told my ftf guys about it and they were shocked as well. But as Shaun said, there are lots of ways to play this game.



Unrelated to that, this was my 3rd and probably last game with distant suns. In all 3 games I've gotten many more greens than reds. In the first I was Yssaril and finished in second after eliminating Muuat who got a lot of reds (Letnev eliminated Mentak and won that one). The second was our asymmetric game, which ended early, but I was in pretty good shape there. And then this one. In all cases I feel my good position was cheapened because the board did some of the work for me. Theoretically I really like the idea, but in practice I don't like so much of the very important early game going to chance.
AbsoluteZero
 
Posts: 842
Joined: September 5th, 2011, 3:46 am

Re: twilight imperium PBEM anyone?

Postby shaunm » February 1st, 2012, 8:17 am

I disagree regarding the Space Dock blockade. As Rus pointed out nicely, you can rarely win TI without making allies. I've often seen - not just in our ftf group - that part of an alliance is relatively "easy" trading of VPs. I don't think there's a difference in allowing to blockade each other's docks to other "shared VPs", e.g. mutual passing of Support of the Throne, "lending" of planets to fulfill tech-specialty related objectives, passing of TGs to fulfill "I now spend..."-objectives, etc.
I believe it is worth much more to try to bargain with someone in an attempt to get VPs peacefully, rather than investing in large fleets and being a bully.
In conclusion though, it all comes back to the fact that this game can be played in many different ways, which may appeal more or less to individual players or groups.

I wholeheartedly agree with AZs of Distant Suns though. I can't stress how much I hate the random element involved. I think it has no place at all in such a strategic long game.
shaunm
 
Posts: 610
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 10:56 pm

Re: twilight imperium PBEM anyone?

Postby AbsoluteZero » February 1st, 2012, 3:58 pm

shaunm wrote:I don't think there's a difference in allowing to blockade each other's docks to other "shared VPs", e.g. mutual passing of Support of the Throne, "lending" of planets to fulfill tech-specialty related objectives, passing of TGs to fulfill "I now spend..."-objectives, etc.

I agree there is no difference. I don't like planet sharing or passing of tgs for objectives either, and I personally think support of the throne should not exist partially for that reason.

I will readily agree that it is more efficient to make an ally and help each other score points. But where does it stop? Isn't it most efficient for all 6 players to help each other score points? But wouldn't that be a boring game? I just don't like what alliances like this do to the game. I find the game the most fun when everyone pursues VP scoring on their own. There is certainly room for negotiating terms for not attacking each other, how to vote to get a mutually agreeable result, or when to play strategy cards - I draw the line at deals that directly relate to mutual VPs.
AbsoluteZero
 
Posts: 842
Joined: September 5th, 2011, 3:46 am

Re: twilight imperium PBEM anyone?

Postby shaunm » February 1st, 2012, 4:21 pm

Yes you're right. It would be boring to help others score VPs right to the end. I would never help a player to more than 2 or 3 VPs. At that point midgame everybody is on their own. In the end when players are within reach of victory, I have rarely seen an alliance hold. I would always expect betrayal then. The winner will be the one who set up the scoring of late-game VPs in the best way.
shaunm
 
Posts: 610
Joined: September 3rd, 2011, 10:56 pm

Re: twilight imperium PBEM anyone?

Postby Zaf44 » October 7th, 2012, 11:54 am

Hi guys, got some place left in your game?
Zaf44
 
Posts: 1
Joined: October 7th, 2012, 11:53 am

Previous

Return to Games in Progress

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron