Any idea? Most of the unlimited truce games end in a stalemate.... But is there a way to change the way they are played?

We have some bubble building scripts now that make even a solo a dangerous competitor after truce.

We have a sector cannon spreadsheet that can tell you how much fuel will be needed to kill opposing corps on entering your sector. If you have 4 planets fueled you can rotate them and you cannot be invaded in a single day. Stack your door 3 deep and you cant be taken out in 3 days....

These same considerations apply to turn games, though on a smaller scale.

What if you just built planets and left them in all the games 6 way warp sectors? What if you started slicing up the universe in sections with strings of planets, a de to SD or your door to SD? What if you amtraked the msls with planets instead of figs, surrounded fed with planets instead of figs?

H

Personally, I would love to play a game where there were no Dead-ends (expcept maybe the odd one-way worm hole --to another Server!!), zero Trade Ports. Sectors could have multiple player fighters (ie: mine, yours, and of course theirs.

If there were no Bubbles and you had to make your own Trade Ports AND protect them, well, to me that would be a great environment for Trade Wars.

Alas, I think starting a game with only Class 0 ports, and zero Gold Bubbles would be an interesting unlim.

These options could be to be scripted via T-Edit. Or if JP added it in might try asking for a feature request since minimum port density is 10% currently, changing to 0 should be simple. But you better give some cash otherwise it would be the slowest starting unlim on the planet. lol
Plus have the ability to change the port build rates.

Waiting 8 days to build a port you would be brutal.

Or, maybe a little less brutal - have the game bang with 10% SBB ports only. That would still require port building, but at least you'd have fuel to get started.

I think you guys have that capability now with your server side scripts.

Helix, I think you touched on a solution in your own post. I don't play unlims, but I study them out of curiosity. I've heard experienced players say that the stock planets are far too powerful. It seems obvious that if you can make it impossible to invade a sector, then of course you're going to end up with a stalemate.

Thats where you are wrong. Sure if everyone hides behind their planets then a stalemate can ensue. But all the cash in the world, all the planets, all the figs, won't get you back in the game after your corp gets SDed. Ask Farley, Loc, and CBYNot. (Xanos and T0yman were contesting access to a Class 0 port killed Farley and CBYNot. Invaded their base since Loc was not online.) As long as you are contesting sectors, the game is not a stalemate.

H

Makes sense. But if that's the norm, then why the post asking how to end stalemates?

If you don't want people to turtle, then perhaps you're onto something else: an artificial, externally imposed victory condition involving control of sectors, which may lead to the natural victory condition of your opponents being SD.

Makes for a good conversation Plus you never know what kind of ideas other people might have.

It's common sense that if you don't want a game to stalemate, then you reduce the amount of gas the planets hold and/or produce, OR you limit the maximum amount of planets per sector to 1 or 2, OR possibly both. (Chapter 3, page 21, "Sysop 1.01")
Sure they could overload the sector with planets and move them out/in around extern, but eventually someone is going to screw up doing that and poof.

There's my good deed for the next 3 months. Maybe I'll become an ambassador.

Holy frijoles, I agree with something Big D said. Mark it on the calendar!