Everything is relative to perception, and your perception is limited.
The Ginger Ninja
Finally managed to get this on the table awhile ago, and I got to say, it is pretty great. I was absolutely giddy with joy when the first airstrike rolled out, and I was one that got hit! Fantastic.
Couple things I was wondering about is if any of you hard core guys have started thinking about ranking the buildings by power/value. Obviously, depends on the strategies employed, but it seems like some sort of consensus could emerge.
Also, what peoples' thoughts are on table talk. Seems like it is almost part of the game, even beyond airstrike deal making, but I know it can be frowned upon in some circles, or in other games. Wondering how much table talk was, well, discussed in the development.
Armchair warriors often fail, and we've been poisoned by these fairy tales.
Aoi Aoi toki ga toke dasheta.
After my first play with other humans I tried ranking the buildings to know which were the best to buy.
A mistake I made was thinking that requires E was better than requires S/E was better than (any). Completely backwards.
Another was I was trying to figure out the whole thing at once. Waiting for "the best" building, which happens to be at the bottom of the deck, is a losing strategy.
So while I'll make use of what others provide, I've found things too conditional to determine "best" on a buy this ordering. The "best" mine doesn't help me once I have enough yellowcake to win, the "best" university doesn't help me if I have all my permanents and my opponents constantly snag all the contractors.
Value changes during the game based on what you have/ what you're missing.
All that said, here are some favorite buildings:
?? -> SS/E or -> EE/S
E -> $5
EE -> 6 yellowcake
there's something that turns 1U into 4P
then next tier down:
factories that provides planes & money
factories that provide both planes
almost every other mine
all the other universities
Of course I'm still having trouble "sealing the deal" ingame with finding the right yellowcake -> X -> bomb.
Table talk in all games should be encouraged and enjoyed. Pregame, post game, during game, smack talk, analysis, and more. Keep it civil, useful, and as a dialogue.
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Being a strategy guy, I made a few spreadsheets analyzing the efficiency of the various buildings and the different types of bombs. After pondering the question and playing more, I concluded that only the bomb efficiency really matters.
You don't really want the most efficient building, because then you will be the target for espionage, and you won't get to use the building very much, which would need to factor into any calculation for efficiency.
So for bombs, you want the combination of (un)loaded bombs that requires the minimum "fuel cost" that crosses the point threshold. By "fuel cost" I mean the cost of acquiring the fuel measured in number of production turns. This number will depend on some degree on the efficiency of your buildings, so you're back to that question, and that's what makes the game interesting.
In terms of talking, the game provides a specific outlet for overt negotiation, so by corollary, you have to be able to talk openly. This can reasonably occur on any players turn and can include frank discussions about why or why not to target a certain player. The binding portion of the deal can only include airstrikes on that turn, but the persuasive arguments employed can include anything.
Personally, I expect most games to be played this way, so it's nice to have one where "It's allowed in the rules!"
- Last edited Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:44 pm (Total Number of Edits: 2)
- Posted Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:39 pm