commons@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (Peter Commons) (02/04/91)
>I also have a question, I have looked in the listings from the usual Mac >places, and I have yet to find a place that carries SC 3.0. Where did you find >it, or did you go by the upgrade route, a path unavailable to those of us >without 2.xx? > Strategic Conquest 3.0 is available from MacsPlace, MacConnection (I think), and directly from the company, Delta Tao Software, (408) 730-9336. It will be more widely available this summer. -- Peter Commons commons@cs.stanford.edu Computer Science Department, Stanford University
joes@phoenix.princeton.edu (02/12/91)
Although I am a big fan of Delta Tao Software, and I like almost all of the improvements to Strategic Conquest 3.0, I feel that they made a mistake in eliminating the computer's "double production" at the higher difficulty levels. It is true that the new computer opponent algorithim is better. However, it is not nearly good enough to "out think" an experienced human player, even at level 15. AS a general case, I feel that In complex games where a computer opponent has to play by the same rules as the human, the computer *is going to lose*. SSI games are a fine example of this. I don't know why Delta Tao eliminated the doubled (quadrupled, sometimes) production for the computer. But it makes the game considerably less challenging and interesting for veteran players. Joe Studholme <joes@idunno.princeton.edu>
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (02/12/91)
In article <6151@idunno.Princeton.EDU> joes@phoenix.princeton.edu writes: > It is true that the new computer opponent algorithim is better. However, it is >not nearly good enough to "out think" an experienced human player, even at >level 15. AS a general case, I feel that In complex games where a computer >opponent has to play by the same rules as the human, the computer *is going to >lose*. SSI games are a fine example of this. It is my understanding that the computer gets a better starting position at the higher levels, i.e. a starting island with considerably more cities and the human player starts out with fewer cities. Are you consistently winning at level 15?
orpheus@reed.UUCP (P. Hawthorne) (02/12/91)
joes@phoenix.princeton.edu writes:
. It is true that the new computer opponent algorithim is better. However, it
. is not nearly good enough to "out think" an experienced human player, even
. at level 15. As a general case, I feel that In complex games where a
. computer opponent has to play by the same rules as the human, the computer
. *is going to lose*. SSI games are a fine example of this.
I have only won on level 15 once, and that was a two week game that ended
around turn 600, against the old computer opponent. I had two things going
for me, namely, a working knowledge of the idiosyncracies of the computer
opponent, and a spreadsheet that explored the economics of the units.
Of course, nuking everything you possibly can works out pretty well, too.
Every computer opponent I have ever faced, be it in Strategic Conquest or
Falcon, is static. An idiosyncracy, once spotted, can be exploited over and
over and over again without worrying that he's going to catch on. So if a
human player learns enough about the opponent logic, he has only to contend
with the economics of the game, the way I figure it.
Mind you, at level 15, you are usually glowing cinders before you get a
chance to worry about much in the way of economics. But if you get a chance
at all, taking out two utterly predictable birds with one stone is easy.
Short of dynamic opponent logic, stacking the deck against the human
player is probably the best way for a game to make itself challenging.
orpheus@reed
No sig is a good sig.saaf@joker.optics.rochester.edu (Lennart Saaf) (02/12/91)
Does anyone know the difference among the levels? The manual is silent on this matter (unless I missed something). Does it get more cities or is it smarter or both? I am new to the game--I just got killed at level 4 last night. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Len Saaf, The Institute of Optics, Univ. of Rochester, Rochester, NY | | Internet: saaf@joker.optics.rochester.edu Bitnet: SAAF@UOROPT | ------------------------------------------------------------------------