RE scanning- I found that I rushed to get scanning to be able to see across the gap between myself and Macomber, and just enough stars to see how many ships he could amass if I launched an invasion, and how many ships he could launch at me and therefore how many I would have to stay behind. However in that last game as I was behind him at the start, I needed intel to know that I would be able to take my stars. Like Belson, when Iām not messing around in a game, I rely on intel to make sure my attacks will be effective. And when Iām unsure about my opponents forces, I know I should be more reluctant to attack, but for some reason I play more aggressive when I donāt have scanning and donāt know what they will have. Depends depends
I am open to settings changes, but i do like the basic settings alreadyā¦ seems like the fewer variables we throw at the settings, the better in terms of fine tuning or isolating factors.
Agreed, Iāll only change one setting this round based on the poll above and create an exit poll at the end to see how well it was received.
Good point, I think @Dysp brought this idea up a while ago, just to mix things up every round.
Iāll have to give it some thought, but maybe Iāll create a very basic āsetting randomizerā that gives me 3 or 5 potentially crazy setting changes for next round (i.e., changing cost of infrastructure / techs, tech starting levels etc.) - then create a poll at the beginning of the LLL thread and the most popular one gets implemented just for one round
Random changes are an interesting idea. I know we are trying to āoptimizeā the settings for a clean, fast, 1v1 mano y mano challenge. But there are lots of settings that would be āfineā. It might be an interesting challenge to know that every month there is a new twist.
The pings are just reminders to the previous participants who have not replied yet. Wouldnāt want to spam anyone unnecessarily, the next ping to players already signed up will be the match-ups
