08-26-2016, 02:59 PM
08-26-2016, 03:23 PM
I will take R3 
08-26-2016, 03:28 PM
This game was very generously manually created by UM last time. I think best let him and RyVor decide if there be another and start a fresh thread before we all start signing up. Of course I would be happy to Join as well.
Edit: fine I will claim a region so I do not miss out if it happens. R1 please
Edit: fine I will claim a region so I do not miss out if it happens. R1 please
08-26-2016, 03:46 PM
I would like to put my name down if this game gets run again myself. Pencil me in for R6 if it does.
08-26-2016, 06:35 PM
How did the first Confluence end up? If its not finished which players are ahead?
I had asked Ry Vor about starting a signup for a new Confederation game to start once the current games offerings had filled but I'd be ok playing this variant as well. I just might need some additional info about how the PC distribution is different or not. If people are up for playing a Confederation game I might rather do that but if people would prefer this variant then I will sign up for R9.
I had asked Ry Vor about starting a signup for a new Confederation game to start once the current games offerings had filled but I'd be ok playing this variant as well. I just might need some additional info about how the PC distribution is different or not. If people are up for playing a Confederation game I might rather do that but if people would prefer this variant then I will sign up for R9.
08-26-2016, 06:38 PM
game 517 finished... check our Val for the details of how it went. I think just Son of Conan and GKmetty are missing from posting how the game played out.
08-26-2016, 06:41 PM
Basic setup was each player plays both kingdoms in his zone. Only zones 1-10 are available the distibruted kingdoms are not in play. To accomidate two kingdoms in each zone there were basically double the PCs in each region. Win by either of the players kingdoms declaring a victory. Lasted until turn 31 so seemed to work ok.
08-26-2016, 06:57 PM
I'll take R8
08-26-2016, 11:42 PM
I don't recall the machinations Mike did to make the first one happen, so I will leave it up to him as to whether he wants to do it again for the custom work. I hope people know just like "free college", its not free. Not many of us work for free, including Mike. What should the setup fee be for a custom game with 2 kingdoms per player per zone? We already have, what, 10 programmed formats? Does any other game have more than two? I know, we don't care about the other games and what they do or what they charge.
Also, while I want this to be a player's game and players to have a voice, having an unofficial signup suddenly started with the choice (apparently) zones scooped up before the community knows what is happening is not exactly fair. On that note, as with the current Alliance game, I would really like to see the top players choose the more difficult positions. Maybe there is too much emphasis on Valhalla, such that a challenge is viewed as an unnecessary complication? If that is the mindset, then perhaps as I brought up a year ago, there should be a weighting. So the first team gets say, 1x of status points, the second 1.5, the third 2.0, and the guys with the last team, Blue in this Alliance game, would get 2.5 or 3.0. Maybe that would be incentive to not take the perceived favorite. Meanwhile, I go back that in what the game is designed for: 12 players, 12 kingdoms, I think its all fair. Even there though, maybe the last couple selections should get double status points. But for team Black to scheme to eliminate the "maybe this will be fun" team Blue in a blitz is not a good plan to perpetuate Alamaze. If the top team took team Blue and the more casual got team Black, it wouldn't be necessary.
So we will wait for Mike to pipe in as to his willingness to do another custom setup vs. the other things he is tasked to do, and then I think we should have a starting gun announced to pick zones. Or get the 10 players identified and then pick zones in reverse order of Valhalla standings. The theme remains: we need to grow the player base, not set out to crush the newbies or more casual players.
Also, while I want this to be a player's game and players to have a voice, having an unofficial signup suddenly started with the choice (apparently) zones scooped up before the community knows what is happening is not exactly fair. On that note, as with the current Alliance game, I would really like to see the top players choose the more difficult positions. Maybe there is too much emphasis on Valhalla, such that a challenge is viewed as an unnecessary complication? If that is the mindset, then perhaps as I brought up a year ago, there should be a weighting. So the first team gets say, 1x of status points, the second 1.5, the third 2.0, and the guys with the last team, Blue in this Alliance game, would get 2.5 or 3.0. Maybe that would be incentive to not take the perceived favorite. Meanwhile, I go back that in what the game is designed for: 12 players, 12 kingdoms, I think its all fair. Even there though, maybe the last couple selections should get double status points. But for team Black to scheme to eliminate the "maybe this will be fun" team Blue in a blitz is not a good plan to perpetuate Alamaze. If the top team took team Blue and the more casual got team Black, it wouldn't be necessary.
So we will wait for Mike to pipe in as to his willingness to do another custom setup vs. the other things he is tasked to do, and then I think we should have a starting gun announced to pick zones. Or get the 10 players identified and then pick zones in reverse order of Valhalla standings. The theme remains: we need to grow the player base, not set out to crush the newbies or more casual players.
08-26-2016, 11:53 PM
Any weighting of status points based on the order a player chose his kingdom will have to be programmed in at the game level. Valhalla is just about done.
Personally, I am not in favor of it. The veterans have tended to be very congenial to players who really want a particular kingdom or zone. I have yet to see it be an issue.
If certain zones always get chosen first and others chosen last, perhaps tweaking those kingdoms or zones to make them more or less competitive and desirable would be a better option.
Personally, I am not in favor of it. The veterans have tended to be very congenial to players who really want a particular kingdom or zone. I have yet to see it be an issue.
If certain zones always get chosen first and others chosen last, perhaps tweaking those kingdoms or zones to make them more or less competitive and desirable would be a better option.