5759 Championship Thread

[gkmetty]

You seem to confuse a full communication game with a team game. That is why I want a ruling. There are team games in the setup. Full communication does not mean team, and that is what you are playing. I understand that Alamaze is a hard game. It becomes much easier when you play in a single person game as a team. Championship games have NEVER been team games. If you want the win so badly, I'm fine with that but it should not be a Championship Game.

[Brekk]

Hello everyone,

I've been made aware of concerns regarding players forming teams in the game. I urge you to address this matter within the game itself, as many issues can be resolved without my direct intervention. When outlining the rules for the championship, I didn't anticipate this scenario, but I'll certainly address it in future games. It's important to note that because I didn't outline it in the rules, teaming up actually made for a good strategy, and it's not the fault of any individual player.

If you observe players teaming up, remember that there are numerous strategies and approaches you can employ to counteract this during gameplay.




Brek

[Glowamane1]

You seem to confuse a full communication game with a team game. That is why I want a ruling. There are team games in the setup. Full communication does not mean team, and that is what you are playing. I understand that Alamaze is a hard game. It becomes much easier when you play in a single person game as a team. Championship games have NEVER been team games. If you want the win so badly, I'm fine with that but it should not be a Championship Game.

I had the understanding that it was a full communication game and you could ally and attack anyone. A team game is where the teams are set at the start and cant change.

The sorcerer was attacked by the elves and forgotten who had joined together to attack him. He requested my help and we agreed to ally so it would be a 2 vrs 2 fight. 

This was clear as we allied in game so everyone could see, if anyone thought this was against the rules they should have said then.

Only a few turns ago the only region I  controlled was stormgate and was being attacked by the elves, forgotton, death knights and druid. I did not complain about it as I was leading on points and understood that other players would work together to try and bring me down.

I am sorry if you did not realise this as I think it was clear to the rest of the players.

Ancient Ones

[Zar@shand]

"This championship game will be played in an open diplomacy format, offering a fresh and dynamic experience for all participants."

This statement was made by Brek in the original draft thread is clearly why some of us are confused. I interpreted it as cooperation is allowed and clearly others also believed this to be the case.

As for what happened in game I was attacked by two nations working together, so naturally requested aid from my neighbour to even things out. This created two alliances, both of which clearly flagged this status using the in game kingdom relationship. Nothing was hidden from other players and as one side gained an advantage more nations joined the war to against the ones on top. Leading to a war that encompassed 8 regions and 6 nations in total. In my opinion leading to a fresh and dynamic experience.

I do think any that had a problem with this clearly have had the opportunity to flag this up over the last 20 turns and not leave it to turn 38, when it is too late to change anything.

[davekuyk]

"This championship game will be played in an open diplomacy format, offering a fresh and dynamic experience for all participants."

This statement was made by Brek in the original draft thread is clearly why some of us are confused. I interpreted it as cooperation is allowed and clearly others also believed this to be the case.

As for what happened in game I was attacked by two nations working together, so naturally requested aid from my neighbour to even things out. This created two alliances, both of which clearly flagged this status using the in game kingdom relationship. Nothing was hidden from other players and as one side gained an advantage more nations joined the war to against the ones on top. Leading to a war that encompassed 8 regions and 6 nations in total. In my opinion leading to a fresh and dynamic experience.

I do think any that had a problem with this clearly have had the opportunity to flag this up over the last 20 turns and not leave it to turn 38, when it is too late to change anything.

As an outside observer, the language seems clear to me  - "open diplomacy format". I take that as people can ally - and backstab - as they see fit.

[gkmetty]

I think Brekk was clear in his most recent post that he did not intend the game to be a team game. I can see how new players would be confused by the original post. New players would not understand that Championship games have never been team games. For good reason, we want a Champion not the person who joins the game with their friends. What's happened has happened. I was asked to join this game to fill in empty spots. I will be more careful of the games I join in the future.

[Zar@shand]

This is my first Championship game, so to be honest I have no idea how others in the past have played out.

One thing I do think needs clarifying is what is allowed in an open diplomacy game. And by that I mean the default option, if nothing else is specified. Is military cooperation and alliances allowed in this format or not. I am not sure anyone really knows.

[gkmetty]

My experience is that if it is full communication, there are no limitations. Once, while Rick owned the game, I was attacked on turn six by five kingdoms. The players joined the game with the purpose of eliminating the other seven players and then competing against each other for the winner. The rules allowed it then and this would still be allowed today. This is one of the reasons why I am so opposed to "full communication" games. They inevitably turn into team games, with only one team.

[davekuyk]

My experience is that if it is full communication, there are no limitations. Once, while Rick owned the game, I was attacked on turn six by five kingdoms. The players joined the game with the purpose of eliminating the other seven players and then competing against each other for the winner. The rules allowed it then and this would still be allowed today. This is one of the reasons why I am so opposed to "full communication" games. They inevitably turn into team games.

I can understand that. Team games have the advantage that everyone's intentions are clear.

[Strylian]

The AN and SO Alliance was well within the rules in an open communication game. Congratulations to the AN and SO on their victories.