Non-combat games

Have a suggestion to improve the site? Post it here!
Sargon
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:46 am

Non-combat games

Postby Sargon » Sun Mar 27, 2016 1:13 am

I was looking at some of the regular games to join, and I noticed one that was quite imbalanced, due to four experienced players on one side, and one slot remaining of four on the only other side, two of those filled by newer players.

The chance of the inexperienced side winning that game is zero. Even if an experienced player were to join, it would still be zero.

If there were more factions, there might be more of a chance, but in situations like the one I described above, the (last) player who joins will be accepting a given loss.

It got me to thinking ... perhaps there could be a mechanism that could be implemented to have non-combat games, but still win based on the conditions (which of course, would need to be tweaked, since one side could hog all religious centers, for example).

The non-combat scenario could be implemented in situations, say, for example, when it's a 4 vs. 4, and the last player to join can implement a selection of some type preventing combat, via a check box or something.

What does everyone think about that?

In addition, I'd really like to see some sort of secret mission variant. No doubt we can all pool our ideas together and come up with many ideas for secret missions. :D

Sargon


User avatar
e_i_pi
Posts: 1118
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Re: Non-combat games

Postby e_i_pi » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:00 pm

Sargon wrote:I was looking at some of the regular games to join, and I noticed one that was quite imbalanced, due to four experienced players on one side, and one slot remaining of four on the only other side, two of those filled by newer players.

The chance of the inexperienced side winning that game is zero. Even if an experienced player were to join, it would still be zero.

If there were more factions, there might be more of a chance, but in situations like the one I described above, the (last) player who joins will be accepting a given loss.

I've pondered this for a while too. I was thinking of having a function where players could join as "deadbeated" players, basically subbing in for someone who has quit. This would slightly re-balance games where a team is disadvantaged by deadbeats.

As for teams of high ranking players playing against low ranking players, there's a few options here. When the site is bigger, I plan on having "league" games, where you can only play against player within 25% above/below you in the scoreboard. This, coupled with the new scoring system, means that everyone would be paired against opponents that match their ability and competitiveness, which I think is a good thing, and seems to be the way a lot of games are going nowadays. A further option is to have a notional "chance of winning" when the game starts, and this acts as a multiplier when the game is finally scored. I'm not really keen on that idea though, as the new scoring system will be game-order agnostic, and this idea tightly couples game order with the scores, a bad design IMO.

It got me to thinking ... perhaps there could be a mechanism that could be implemented to have non-combat games, but still win based on the conditions (which of course, would need to be tweaked, since one side could hog all religious centers, for example).

The non-combat scenario could be implemented in situations, say, for example, when it's a 4 vs. 4, and the last player to join can implement a selection of some type preventing combat, via a check box or something.

What does everyone think about that?

There will be non-combat-ish games when I get around to it. USA will have a colonial type game where missions are one of various types: capture X territories, capture specific zones, erect/capture religious monuments, create X non-combat (e.g. trade / civilian) troops, eliminate specific opponents, etc. So, some people will be playing in a non-combat manner, others will be playing in a combat manner, but no matter which way you go, you will need to "defend" against your opponents. If an opponent has a trade mission, you will need to put in trade barriers to prevent them from having a runaway win for instance.

In addition, I'd really like to see some sort of secret mission variant. No doubt we can all pool our ideas together and come up with many ideas for secret missions. :D

Suggest away, the thread is here:
[http://www.artofwar.cc/forums/viewtopic.php?t=875&f=8]http://www.artofwar.cc/forums/viewtopic.php?t=875&f=8[/url]


Return to “Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest