Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#521 Victory Condition
#21
Oh please vbm. You deleted your comment when you knew you were being rude. As you deleted it why don't you put it back.
Reply
#22
(11-12-2016, 09:07 AM)Jumpingfist Wrote: I think 1st 2nd 3rd is actually very good for the game.   It allows more players to share in a part of winning or coming close to winning and being reconized thru Valhalla for coming close.   Having only a 1st place could cause more drops and less enjoyment.   But also I do not like seeing a war game end in a tie.  

To me Rex is saying I dominated this particular game.  If someone else has also declared REX then obviously this is not true and the game need to continue to be fought or the 1 true REX of this game need to be figured out.  REX used to be 5 regions remember

The trouble I would see with a dual REX going forward is others are going to now want to get it as well.  So players will ally together and dominate a game and then drag the game on to get to this goal.  This will likely make the game less enjoyable for the others playing.

Worse, a clever coalition of players could figure out how to end up with a 3-way tie using the Usurper victory conditions so there are 3 1st place medals awarded.
Reply
#23
(11-12-2016, 01:26 PM)7IMPERIAL_TARK Wrote:
(11-12-2016, 09:07 AM)Jumpingfist Wrote: I think 1st 2nd 3rd is actually very good for the game.   It allows more players to share in a part of winning or coming close to winning and being reconized thru Valhalla for coming close.   Having only a 1st place could cause more drops and less enjoyment.   But also I do not like seeing a war game end in a tie.  

To me Rex is saying I dominated this particular game.  If someone else has also declared REX then obviously this is not true and the game need to continue to be fought or the 1 true REX of this game need to be figured out.  REX used to be 5 regions remember

The trouble I would see with a dual REX going forward is others are going to now want to get it as well.  So players will ally together and dominate a game and then drag the game on to get to this goal.  This will likely make the game less enjoyable for the others playing.

Worse, a clever coalition of players could figure out how to end up with a 3-way tie using the Usurper victory conditions so there are 3 1st place medals awarded.
That actually sounds kind of challenging
Reply
#24
(11-12-2016, 01:49 PM)Jumpingfist Wrote:
(11-12-2016, 01:26 PM)IMPERIAL_TARK Wrote: Worse, a clever coalition of players could figure out how to end up with a 3-way tie using the Usurper victory conditions so there are 3 1st place medals awarded.
That actually sounds kind of challenging

I'm fairly confident to say that if people tried to manipulate the system like that, we'll see more requests for anonymous games to prevent such dishonesty in a game. Also those players would establish a negative reputation for themselves such that no one would want to play with them anymore. Would you?

So I don't think that collusion among others is something that we need to prepare against but if the majority of players are against ties then perhaps something should be done. If anyone is interested in my vote about ties, I'd say keep things as they are with ties sharing the podium. It's kind of cool having two 1st place finishers too Smile
Reply
#25
So, I was away since early this morning until now.  Then come to read this new thread with several deleted posts.

My impression, coming in with no emotional attachment on any side of, ah, the "argument" is that almost everyone posting seemed to be misunderstood.  I really didn't find any of it offensive, accusatory, or ill-spirited. 

Honestly, I think its something of a tempest in a teapot.  So one game in several hundreds since the Resurgence has had dual winners.  I think that's fine and am not proposing any changes.  I don't think any further comment would add anything constructive.  If someone thinks I'm missing the point, they can send me an email to either support or my personal email.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)