Re: Ultimate Goals in Olympia

Kevin Davis Connery (
13 Jan 1995 23:48:36 GMT

In a recent article (<3f26ah$>), (Rich Skrenta) wrote:
>If your goal is to eliminate every other player from the game, then you're
>not going to enjoy an open-ended system.

Actually, that's not entirely correct.

I'm in an open-ended PBM--Rimworlds--and one of my main goal IS to
eliminate most other *characters* in the game. In fact, that's part
of the definition of my affiliation -- they're/we're a group of
xenophobic (or at least xenocidal) lizards who don't much approve of,
or tolerate, certain classes of characters.

So I spend much of my time hunting for and trying to destroy them.

Fortunately for my enjoyment, this is possible; I've managed to destroy
or capture about a dozen starships and/or starbases.

Fortunately for the enjoyment of most players -- this is NOT a combat-based
game, after all -- it's not easy. It's taken me 7+ years to hit this
score, and I am quite probably the #1 position with regard to this goal.

Accomplishing "reliable" and repeated combats is possible, but it takes
a lot of work -- so few people do it.
Protecting oneself from destruction is possible, but it takes a lot
of work -- so few people do it.
Focusing on that goal means other goals were severely impacted.

Were it easy to protect onesself 100%, it would make my job impossible,
and my position unplayable.

Were it impossible to protect onesself 100%, it would make some other people's
job's (trading, mining, exploration, etc.) impractical, and the positions

The difficulty is in establishing the trade-offs.


 | Kevin Connery      | Quality must be designed |         Not speaking for: |
 |  | into software; it cannot |   Integrated Systems, Inc |
 |   | be patched on afterwards |           Santa Clara, CA |