OK, I see your points,.. I'll modify the rules so that the bases have to be in Dead ends or tunnels.
This is in part why I originaly said 50k figs in sector for the base.  It's real easy to mow 5k figs, less easy to mow 50k.
Any other variations you would like to see?  Got 2.5 hours till it opens
 

Xen, Dude, I don't think anyone is "lashing out" here in any fashion.  A few people offered up some opiniions, that's all.  It's NOT the end of the world, laff.
It's all nice and good that YOU can see a new game as a new scripting challenge.  More power to you.  A lot of us can't, period.
I think RP is looking to perhaps expand his player base to include some of us peons that can and will play but aren't smart enough to write our own scripts.  I may not be as smart as you, but I bet I'm right.
With that said, I wish RP all the luck in the world at delving into the world of truce games, and I hope he expands his player base because of it.
Its one game on one server.  I don't think it has global Trade Wars implications, laff.

Xen, scripts exist. I have mowers that dscan before they go, and auto-retreat off a large amount of figs (something you can't kill in a single hit). But 50k figs in an unlim really isn't that many, some ships could take it in a single wave.

Truce players are unlim players, generally. If you're looking for variation go w/ turns games.

Anyway, what I was getting at is that no rules like that are hard and fast, but rather have to be put in the context of the game. If you have players that are being jerks and skirting the spirit of the truce... you need to do something about it, even if they don't directly break the wording of the truce. But if you have players that want a truce and accidently break it, well isn't that different?

It's that interpretation that makes truces hard and players complain about favoritism. In general... anytime the sysop gets involved, it's usually bad. Good luck RP.

I had a call for a truce game and nobody played.  This time I'm trying it again on a few existing games.  If it works and people play, good, if not, next bang goes back to normal.  If I start getting to much grief about truce violations they will go away.  I like to think that people in general are smart enough to know what "no hostilities" means. 
But on the flip side, that's what's nice about being sysop.  If it doesn't work, I don't have to repeat, and I don't have to argue
I do try to have a range of games on my site, from unlim to low turn, but seems that most of the games have turned to unlim.  Just trying to expand the available options again.
 

One of the reasons is that only 1 type of planet is mobile in 4 days. The other is to stop the players from contesting those deadends closest to Terra.  Notice it doesnt say you can't use those deadends closest to terra, it says that there are no bases closer than 6 sectors from FedSpace.

I have seen the truce violated in the first 15 minutes over those deadends off fed space nearest Terra.  I have seen you violate the spirit of the truce over them. Remember this is not UTW, Don't expect the same plays you did there to work here. Dropping a fig or a planet is not enough to make it a base in this game.

The bottom line is that you are responsible for your own scripts, if you want to mow around during truce and your mower doesn't scan, you deserve to be banned for being so irresponsible.

Cerne

WAY too far off topic for me, Cerne.  Let's not hijack the thread, so I'll resist further comments. 

Which brings up the question... is mowing thru a bunch of figs being hostile? Base or no? Obviously invading the planets would be one thing, but just mowing thru and taking out a wave of figs...

One question I always like to ask myself in a Truce game.. and really I think anyone should be asking is: How can we DisCern?  it really is very easy to DisCern, after all one only needs to be mindful and cognizant of what's going on in the Logs and on Fed-Com to be able to make a reasonable and accurate DisCerning of how to maintain the spirit of DisCerning. Can anyone else DisCern as simply as this?
Doesn't that make complete sense?
 
 

I have a suggestion for RP, get with River Rat, I think he has a perfect truce game setup, with its settings it would be hard to break truce unintentionally, but I know some will find a way to get around it intentionally.

Vulcan

You missed my point entirely.
I'm not saying "learn2script, noob".  I'm saying instead of saying, "Sysop, your settings/rules suck, change them so I can use the same 10 scripts I've always used in every other game," say, "Hey master scripters, could you add some truce-friendly scripts to the Grimy library I can use in games with these types of rules?"

If they're just single figs in sectors, I'd say no, as that's just a grid.  If it's 5k figs, I'd say yes.  I don't care if 5k is "hardly any" figs in an unlim, it's enough figs that people aren't going to put 5k figs in every sector they fly through as a grid.  If that's normal gridding behavior in unlims, I'll eat crow here, but somehow I doubt the very first grids that go up in an unlim have 5k figs per sector.  It's not time-efficient to reload figs as often as would be necessary to build a grid like that.
The exact number of figs that makes a sector "base" vs. the number that makes it "part of a grid" isn't hard and fast.  But as humans we're pretty good at fuzzy logic.  We "know" intuitively if something is in violation of the spirit of the rules.  If we do it anyway, hoping to get by on a technicality, we shouldn't complain when we get banned, because we knew we were in the wrong and were just trying to test the sysop.
In the case of the rules posted here, it's not fuzzy at all.  2-4999 figs in a sector are NOT allowed during truce.  5000+ are a base (provided other requirements are met such as a planet with the right colos, etc.--if the other requirements are not met, those figs aren't allowed any more than 4999 would be) and destroying ANY fighters in a base sector instead of retreating immediately is bannable.  1 fig in a sector is a grid and go for it, replace it with your grid at will.  The rules don't allow for any fuzzy logic, it's clear.
The only thing I could see adding would be a max # of base sectors per corp, so large sections of space couldn't be cordoned off by setting up "bases".

Right on, this is exactly what I was trying to say, although I'll add in response to the "but I don't know how to script" camp that they should then go to the people who DO write all the scripts and ask for more public truce-friendly scripts so they can expand their horizons.
I think it would be interesting to automate "policing" of policies like these in the future.  I could do at least some of it with the access library.  It scans once every 5 minutes for any sectors with 2-4999 fighters, or 5000+ and not meeting the other requirements.  If any are found, it sends twmail to the person violating the rules.  If 3 sweeps in a row (15 minutes) go by without the violation being corrected, all violating sector contents are REMOVED automatically (complete with mail from the Feds saying so ).  "Watching" for people attacking the sector figs would be more difficult, but still somewhat possible via reading the twmail file to see what's happened in the past 5 minutes (people rarely log out of unlims, so their mail probably won't get deleted often; it wouldn't be a complete picture, but it would be close) and anyone attacking a sector that was flagged as a PROPER base (following all the requirements) in the last sweep will have their assets removed in some manner (amount dependant on how large the attack was), up to possibly being flagged #SD# and not allowed on until the next day (which I believe is even possible to manually flag via write access in a no death delay game  .
Fuzzy logic could be implemented there too, to give people some leeway, or to avoid giving too much leeway to those trying to abuse the system.  People who know the timing of the sweeps and "fix" their blockades for 5 seconds every 15 minutes (so they get their 2 strikes cleared and can go back to violation for 14:55) would need to be handled appropriately by the "referee software".  A person shouldn't be punished severely for attacking a base sector with 2 fighters vs. someone who just mowed through 5 bases destroying every sector fig.  Things like that.  But it could definitely be done.

If a player doesn't want his figs killed, put them on the planet except for the jump point fig. Some cashing scripts will jump right in with planets even. Mowing through figs is a part of life in a truce game.

The ones that kill the base fighter to try and make other players fuse are the ones to watch out for. I know one corp that had 3 players get fused by the same person killing their base fig in seperate instances. (No, I wasn't involved). The "I didn't mean to fuse them" excuse came out but was somewhat obvious.

I dislike truce games and will very seldom get involved with them - too many issues and I don't have time to spend 3-4 days waiting to kill someone. I prefer a quick game that doesn't last more than a day or two.

               / Promethius / Enigma / Wolfen /

"A man who has no skills can be taught, a man who has no honor has nothing."

lmao, explain away to your lil heart's content, Xen, and it won't change a thing.  I'm pretty sure most of us "noobs" as per your name calling, would simply pass on playing the game with all your complications - and I'm pretty sure that it stands that RP is trying to GET more players, not run more off.
There is nothing wrong with a simple game with simple, manageable rules for us "noobs."
Why don't you take the name calling to smack, where it belongs?
 

Is that enough emphasis on what I ACTUALLY said or do you still need help with your reading comprehension?
As to the only part of your post that was actually meaningful because it wasn't based on misreading me, my entire original POINT was that I find it appalling that this community is unwilling to play with anything but the same settings and rules every TW game they've ever played used.  You just backed up my point by saying yes, you would just skip such a game and go back to a cookie-cutter board.
Trying new and interesting things is seen as "running people off" rather than "being creative", and that's the main reason I don't even use my TWGS for any public games.  Only one TWGS really ever needs to run.  I'm not sure why more than one is even necessary.  The others are just carbon copies, and if they're not, they're passed over because they're seen as "running people off".

This is exactly why I stated to be responsible for your own actions and even mentioned scripts if you read the truce rules.  If you run your gridding scripts, and they don't check before entry, and they attack when they enter a base sector, your in violation.  If you want to take that risk, and hope nobody complains, be my guest, but the rules are clear in that department.  You are responsible for your actions, and your scripts as well.
You're not hurting my feelings if you don't want to play these truce games.  There are also those that will pass a turn game for an unlim, and the other way around as well.  Not all games are for all people.  This is why I decided to try expanding my lineup, and see what happens if I offer a few truce games.  There are those that like them.  I myself don't really care for truce games, but I don't play my board, so what do I have to loose.  If I catch to much grief from the game, guess what,.. it won't come back!
 

I think Thrawn has something like this now in place.  I just wish I could duplicate his skills!  Your library I'm sure would make this possible to more of us, but I'd still have to rely on a programmer to set it up for me.