Re: Multi-layer game

From: chazz@cais.com (Charles Meredith)

Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0000

petemack@ozemail.com.au (Peter Mackay) wrote:

>In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.951013000621.19779A-100000@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu>,
>Aaron Boyden <6500adb@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu> wrote:

>>An add for an admittedly highly suspicious-looking game nonetheless
>>reawakened a thought I've had for some time.  I've often wondered whether
>>a game could be made to work with at least the following two levels of
>>players: merchants and pirates run by players plying their trades in a
>>space game, in a galaxy of empires also run by (different) players.  Could
>>it be done?  Has it perhaps already been done without my noticing?  Does
>>anybody else even care?

>Difficult but possible.  One problem is that of timescale, in that the
>decision cycle for people flying ships around is so much shorter than for
>those running space empires (or even planets).  How do you let scacefarers
>do their thing while still keeping the game interesting for the emperors?

Well, just put the time scale to that of the individual and provide
the appropriate events for the emperors.  Incomming messages from
groups of potential allies or enemies.  Meetings, bloody meetings.
Perhaps a social level thing a la Engarde.  Stuff that is open to
everyone; but critical to the poloticians.  This way, the spacefarer
could turn polotician should they desire.

>Having said that, it's a great concept.  By and large, once a player has
>set up his empire the way he wants it, most of his effort is devoted to
>fighting wars and stamping out grass fires, and the running of the empire
>is largely automatic.  This leaves a lot of room for smaller players to
>exploit trade opportunities that aren't worth the effort of the emperor to
>cater for, or to pirate a few imperial trade vessels, maybe the odd scout.
>Most empires would rather accept a small loss than divert a squadron of
>warships from *real* work to hunt down a few pesky pirates or free traders.
> If the pirates took over a planet, or captured all ships in a certain star
>system, then it becomes a worthwhile task.

Oh, no.  I think not.  In order to get the empire going in the
direction they want, deals will have to be made, bargains struck, and
debts made.  Any one of these debts could cause a great deal of
playing  -- and possibly incurring more debts....

>Possibly the small fry could work their way up to becoming large fry, say,
>once you control a planet for a certain number of turns, you're an emperor.
> Or maybe those who run empires are not allowed to run ships, and must
>subcontract their needs from smaller players (with the exception of the
>imperial fleet, run by the goofy computer).

Sure, let them run a ship; but it is doubtfull that they will be great
at either the running of the empire or the ship.  It would not be
impossible; but not probable.  The emperor in them would have to miss
the Pi Quandrant Space Partol's dinner (thus showing less support to
them) and the Star Captain would have to miss out on another set of
drills to keep the ship at peak performance.
	A wiser course of action would be to have another game-character run
the ship -- designated as the Emperor's Flagship.

>I put a bit of thought into a game like this some years back, after my
>StarMagic game evolved out of my control, but I never got past the planning
>stage.

Sorry to say I never heard of StarMagic.  How was it run?

References

Multi-layer game
Aaron Boyden <6500adb@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu>
Fri, 13 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Multi-layer game
petemack@ozemail.com.au (Peter Mackay)
Sun, 22 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0000