Ganging Up

[Hawk_]

I am an anon player and here is my take on ganging up:

1 vs. 1 does not end in draw.  Otherwise Titan games would be draws.  I am currently in a  3 vs. 3 Primeval game that I don't think will end in a draw.  1 on 1 does lead to a longer more draw out battle that may place you behind kingdoms winning via alliances.

In team games players agree on predetermined teams in an effort to create a balanced game.   In diplomacy games players form alliances (teams) and try to get NAP's to gain an advantage.  If during the sign up period of the game it was disclosed the game will be a design of   3 vs 1 vs 4 vs 2 vs 2  would you choose to be on a small team, no team, or a big team?  

The alliance and agreement building aspect of Alamaze is truly a game within itself and it is just not a game that I enjoy playing.   So I am happier playing the anon variants and taking my chances against anon alliances versus full diplomacy alliances.

I think it is great that all the different variants exist so people can choose the version they think is the most fun.


 

[bananas]

I think it is great that all the different variants exist so people can choose the version they think is the most fun.

I think that is a key element for Alamaze's success. Try the different variants and then stick with whichever you like best. I see it as a parallel to the myriad different options for PVE vs PVP that helped make World of Warcraft so big. You didn't have to play just one way. 

[Madmardigan]

One thing that is rarely mentioned is the idea of cheating in anon games.  


Now in the diplomacy formats you can reach out to see who is and who isn't working against you.  However, what do you do in an anon game when multiple attackers hit your region and their actions seem just too coordinated to be a coincidence?  Do you scream foul?  Do you drop in protest?    

I know I am not the first one to ponder this.  

[Hawk_]

One thing that is rarely mentioned is the idea of cheating in anon games.  


Now in the diplomacy formats you can reach out to see who is and who isn't working against you.  However, what do you do in an anon game when multiple attackers hit your region and their actions seem just too coordinated to be a coincidence?  Do you scream foul?  Do you drop in protest?    

I know I am not the first one to ponder this.  

I have not personally seen anything I thought looked strange in any of the games I have played in.    If I did I suppose I would bring it up in my post game write up. 

[DuPont]

I've played in a bunch of anonymous games. I'd guess that I have played in more than any other single player. I've never once suspected collusion - usually the opposite in fact - that it should be plainly obvious that they should be attacking the clear leader and instead are farting around doing something else! I have been hit by more than one player at once but then they often wind up tripping over each other and that can sometimes help me fend off the attack.

[Thudargh]

I think it is great that all the different variants exist so people can choose the version they think is the most fun.

I think that is a key element for Alamaze's success. Try the different variants and then stick with whichever you like best. I see it as a parallel to the myriad different options for PVE vs PVP that helped make World of Warcraft so big. You didn't have to play just one way. 

I see both of these comments as pretty spot on.  The inclusion or exclusion of diplomacy is really such a major change that I'd argue it's really two different games.  I'd make the same argument about PvE and PvP in MMORPGs.  Both games are fun in their own way, but take very different strategies and mindsets - in some ways opposite strategies and mindsets.  Given that, it's perfectly reasonable for some people to really like one version and really dislike(or even hate) the other version.

[VballMichael]

I've played in a bunch of anonymous games. I'd guess that I have played in more than any other single player. I've never once suspected collusion - usually the opposite in fact - that it should be plainly obvious that they should be attacking the clear leader and instead are farting around doing something else! I have been hit by more than one player at once but then they often wind up tripping over each other and that can sometimes help me fend off the attack.

I have also been in lots of anon games. In one I am currently in, both of my regions were attacked simultaneously and flawlessly by two separate kingdoms. Never crossed my mind that it was coordinated.
Afterwards, I thought about it and concluded that it was just the right time for enemies to invade as I was the clear leader and status points had just come out. Sadly, the invaders chose different regions to invade.

I have also had two enemies invade me in one region and avoid each other almost purposefully. I do that also. If I move into a new region and I see two folks already fighting, I either back out if it is too hot, or I take advantage of the confusion and land wherever the other invader has not landed. That could definitely look coordinated. But, like others have stated, I have not seen collusion in an anon game.

[HeadHoncho]

I think it is great that all the different variants exist so people can choose the version they think is the most fun.

I think that is a key element for Alamaze's success. Try the different variants and then stick with whichever you like best. I see it as a parallel to the myriad different options for PVE vs PVP that helped make World of Warcraft so big. You didn't have to play just one way. 

I see both of these comments as pretty spot on.  The inclusion or exclusion of diplomacy is really such a major change that I'd argue it's really two different games.  I'd make the same argument about PvE and PvP in MMORPGs.  Both games are fun in their own way, but take very different strategies and mindsets - in some ways opposite strategies and mindsets.  Given that, it's perfectly reasonable for some people to really like one version and really dislike(or even hate) the other version.

Echo all of these comments.  One of Alamaze's strengths is that it is so customizable.  I know the number of variants can sometimes cause logistical issues for the management, and I totally get that, but to the extent that can be handled, I think that is one of the things the players really love about the game.

I also echo DuPont and VBM about the relative lack of collusion in these games.  I think we have an honorable player base, and on top of that, it would completely ruin a player's reputation if there was any evidence of actual cheating.  Because we're a tight-knit community that cares about things like accumulated status points and reputation, I believe that's additional incentive not to do anything truly underhanded.