Posts: 204
Threads: 3
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
I'm fine with the way things are but I'll vote for #1. More options is always better and money's not the issue. If I was price conscious, I wouldn't be playing this game at all! I mean, I could be eating hot dogs right now. I wonder if anyone's ever thought about the comparative price of a turn of Alamaze vs. buying a hot dog. I would be interested in hearing about that.
Posts: 2,272
Threads: 78
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation:
18
I am always in favor of more options, especially in light of the new automated processing.
I would pay more for faster turns, but like the optionality of choosing a faster game when appropriate.
I mostly play anon or team games, so faster is good.
Posts: 1,968
Threads: 71
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation:
6
So far:
#1 - HH, Sinestro, Cloud, LT, VBM
#2 - Feralkoala
No vote - Frost Lord
Posts: 2,197
Threads: 111
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
23
More options, both faster and slower, should bring in more players (some have left saying it was too fast). So I'm up for creating daily and two week intervals. Ry Vor mentioned to me that he wants hourly like Fall of Rome but that won't be for a while yet due to the database situation but other intervals are possible for future games.
Posts: 226
Threads: 2
Joined: Nov 2014
Reputation:
1
I'm going to put my vote for #2. While the 6 of the 4-4-6 can feel *really* long, I don't think I'd pay more just to avoid it. The "adding more games" strategy has worked pretty well for me.
Which doesn't mean I won't reverse course should other options eventually become available. I embrace my hypocrisy!
Posts: 2,585
Threads: 42
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
7
I Vote option 1
Some thoughts though
Currently I play as Ry Vor suggested just get into more game if I want to play more. But as others have pointed out it is that 6 day turn around that really gets me. With many games I loose my focus because the game is no longer fresh in my mind. This is the reason I do not play many warlords games because with a one week turn around it almost feels likely I am relearning my kingdoms each turn I process. For the Titan games I do feel satisfied doing them once a week. The team is so large that it would be a lot of work to play any others games if Titans ran on other days along with other games.
To me the natural upgrade would be to allowed to switch from 3 turns every two weeks to 6 turns every two weeks or three turns a week at twice the slots cost. I think this format would get me fully saturated into the game and able to focus very well. Becoming likely a more enjoyable alamaze experience over-all. Having a game run daily If made to equal cost level would cost about 4 slots most likely to restrictive to be able to form a 12 player game and still create/form other new games.
set-up charges are a non issue because weather you set up 1 game that runs twice as fast or 2 games that run longer over the same period of time you will have collected the same setup fees.
One issue I do see is new game creation. If a click of players likely the highest service level only with to play fast pace games the slower pace games are going to be hard to fill. Effectively by creating a set of fast pace possible games it creates 2x the variants as before. We already generally take longer than a week or two to start a game. I would not like to see game creation times suffer from this. The choosing could fix this problem for a while due to high demand at first for what is new.
My final note why does my vote even really matter don't I play in almost every game and format anyway?
Buddy/Ignore List
I think you're teasing me, as I'm pretty sure I brought that up before, but decided hot dogs were comparatively way too expensive, so started comparing an Alamaze turn to the cost of a Popsicle.
Kind of.