I doubt it would be a popular choice in this game but the super hero game I mentioned, although it didn’t go ahead, was replaced by a small game with friends which had some of the same settings.
It worked really well and each empire had a single star at the start. Each with maximum starting infrastructure 30/30/4, max cash of $3000., 10 starting ships on that star. Nothing else.
It focused your starting strategy, instead of spamming stars, and your home star fuels your empire. If you capture another empire’s home star it is a huge achievement and becomes a point to fight over.
I am just putting it out there in case people like the idea, but I will use it for a big hero game in the future.
In the current team game, I remember because the Warp Gates were expensive, we had to think REALLY hard about doing 'em … I think a good thing.
Green Square ONLY if super-duper easy … didn’t mean to make work for 'ya.
Damn, no trading smokes or dirty magazines! 
I LIKE infin8eye’s suggestion of a single mega-world … that may be too much … but I would balance that direction as I also suggested.
I am for the 30-30-4 mega homeworld.
And yes Hulk, I’ve enjoyed playing with Sekoms for quite a while now. It’s sad that I actually have to go against him in this game 
I’ve played a game with Mega home worlds. It did make them a jewel to try to steal. I’d think infin8’s suggestion of a single start would be good, but I would counter it with lower/minimal starting cash. As I said, you can buy ~30 econ on a standard 10 star start with $1500. I would shy away from 4 Sci to start, this game is as much about research tactics as anything.
Oh, and because I forgot to respond @jongrantham, you are welcome to brainstorm a team name/team persona, I think if we aren’t able to do team colors, we probably would do something like A Hulk, A Neo, A Sekoms or 1 Hulk, 1 Neo etc. so that you can do whatever alias you want, yet still see at a glance the team designation. Anything long might get in the way of a name. Though, if you all pick something that will fit in a normal Leaderboard, both Team and Name, feel free.
Yes get your team names ready. If you decide on a theme for all three in the team to role play, then have a team name related to that, it would be good. You could shorten the team name for the Empire name, so it works on the leaderboard.
I’ll use Hulk as an example, as it is the easiest to create a theme, if you don’t mind (I don’t see his team doing this, but…):
The Avengers team, made of Hulk, Iron Man and Thor.
Empire names as follows:
AVGR_HULK
AVGR_IRONMAN
AVGR_THOR
I’m not sure of the purpose of needing the ENTIRE team on the top 3 leaderboard. What if some strategy came about where there was a division of labor, and one of the players ended up with very few planets? (maybe because one person went DEEP into terraforming, and are shaving costs by not sharing it with everyone?) Or if one player went AFK, but the other two people in the team masterfully pulled off victory anyways?
The point is really that you are playing as a team, and AIM to finish as a team. That should be the goal.
If it doesn’t work out that way then fair enough, but this is kind of a dry run for Jay implementing Formal Team Game rules.
If and when Jay is able to add this feature to the game, then the victory conditions would belong to the team’s total star count. Not individual empire star counts. In which case a single empire within a team being weak, while overall their team has 75% of the galaxy stars (and assuming that is the victory condition) then that team wins.
Selkie,
In one of my previous posts indicated that if you lost a team member, then the remaining players need to shoot for the top two spots.
We understand that each team will have different tactics that will play out in different roles. Four of us are in a team based game currently, and have seen different roles especially based on starting positions. My map design is set up to help compensate for some issues with what we saw in that game.
However, in the end game, if a team has a demanding lead of 66-75% of the galaxy, they can start abandoning stars to each other to move a lowest ranked member into the top 3. One reason I suggested both the victory condition being so high, and the alternative ending option of players conceding when a team takes 75% is to avoid a situation where a team collectively gets enough to trigger the victory, then abandons everything to a single player. That was a concern we had early in the other game, where victory is set at 33%
I don’t mind going with a 50% individual win, and 66% agreed team ending if people feel that would be sufficient.
1 Like
I am fine with any settings but prefer an early high cash flow.
And thanks Hulk, its nice to hear my name is floating around.
Brian: Alrighty, good to know!
I’m excited for this.
I do think a 50% individual is a fine game-ending condition … otherwise, the end-game can just drag on and that’s a pretty boring aspect of the game. I would suggest Brian you post an updated spec list based on various people’s comments.
Sekoms: Got any good names for our team? Obviously we can go with the Avenger theme (but sorry man, I would then trade you for Black Widow!), but I’m open for whatever.
1 Like
I vote we wait for Jay to get back to us on the team colours issue. If it takes him a couple of days to get round to it but it can be set up, I think it’ll make all the difference. This game will probably last for weeks if not months, so what is 3-4 days at the start matter anyway?
And I think the colours will make the game muuuuch better just in terms of seeing teams and their distribution and power around the map. Names are an OK secondary option, but colours by far and away blow it out of the water IMHO.
1 Like
F.I.S.T. - Federated Interstellar Supreme Triumvirate
Or something along those lines
1 Like
I played a 66% game and it was awful. It works for small games. Big games? No way.
We will be team Foxystoat, you will be able to read our ramblings regarding the game at www.foxystoat.com once the game starts. To be fair it will probably just be a lot of arguing…
Hopefully you can work as a team LDG!
I agree 66% mop up is awful, hence the suggestion of conceding the victory at a point of no return. I realize that is counter to how many people like to play, ‘fight until the last.’ I think in general we should strive for that, but when it gets to a point where a team has clear domination over all others combined, I think the best thing (due to the lack of a team victory condition for now) is to declare a winner, and start a new game.
I agree with bills6693, we will wait until Jay is able to get back to us with an answer. It should only be another day or two. It if is easy, and we can do team colors great. If not, we go with plan B and get started!
2 Likes
I read that as “Foxy Toast”. 
1 Like
lol, that’s toast with artisan bread right?
My suggestion is
- slow game (not turn based)
- CHEAP Economy - makes high rewards from attacking stars
- EXPENSIVE Industry and Science - this kinda balances the cheap econ and even more increases the “reward” as you are getting an expensive infrastructure by capturing an enemy star.
Tech:
- Expensive Weapons, starting at 4
- Cheap Banking
- I don’t have thoughts on other tech
Why that? Cheap Banking will yield high cash rewards and even a player who focuses on military due to being on front line can research it, while Expensive weapons will require much more Science to keep the tech rolling unlike any other tech - this means that teams will have to keep one player high on Science (2x more than his teammembers) - more teamwork.
Map:
I suggest increasing distances between enemies at rear starting positions. (Put allies little closer)
PS: Also, do you guys have hangout? We can discuss there much faster and can get notified once the game is ready. Add me nimareq@gmail.com