Posts: 685
Threads: 44
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation:
3
DuPont is right, I think. If you go back and read the stories of the recent games posted in Valhalla, there's a lot of stuff like, 'I could have won by taking the city, but I didn't want to do that to the GI since we had been working together.' With the stories posted in the old Oracle reports, you get almost none of that.
More NAPs could just be a byproduct of easier communication through email which makes it easier to reach out and touch someone.
There are I suspect fewer broken NAPs too. With the internet, everyone's afraid of being labeled dishonorable in the forums and having that follow them from game to game with the whole player base. I suspect in the 90s, if you broke agreements to win, it didn't affect you much.
That said, I have to agree that secret victory often seems much more attainable that standard since many of the things in the SVC (a set number of artifacts or level of wizard etc,) are things you'd need to get anyway as you develop your kingdom.
Posts: 1,266
Threads: 25
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
8
I think the biggest issue is NAPs. In a couple of games I have had far too many and it's been a bit of a detriment. I'm seeing how it works going forward with more "loose" agreements and fewer NAPs. Stay tuned!
-The Deliverer
Posts: 1,968
Threads: 71
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation:
6
I agree NAPs are an issue as well but I also believe NAP-management has become part of good play, and this feeds back into my point about any good player being able to score a win if the SVC is favorable (or at least not adverse).
Posts: 220
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
0
12-22-2013, 01:10 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-22-2013, 01:12 AM by Cargus10.)
(12-21-2013, 03:19 AM)HeadHoncho Wrote: I love anonymous as well, I've been trying to get more games of that type going, but have run into a wall.
I would love to get into an anonymous game. Count me in for a new one
I agree the disparity in SVCs are a major factor in all this. The range of conditions is really quite broad
Posts: 5,613
Threads: 619
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
6
12-22-2013, 02:15 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-22-2013, 02:16 AM by Ry Vor.)
(12-21-2013, 03:19 AM)HeadHoncho Wrote: I love anonymous as well, I've been trying to get more games of that type going, but have run into a wall.
Well, maybe #123 will be a 12 player anonymous with no DE, AN or UN.
Then would you want teams (2nd Cycle of Magic) or individual?
Wynterbreeze, on your question, no one wins by standard victory, ergo it is too difficult. We had a thread on that awhile back, and oddly most players didn't want to make a significant change.
I agree somewhat with the criticism that there is too great a range in difficulty of the randomly assigned SVC's, for which there generally are at least 10 possibilities for each kingdom down to very nuanced levels, like specific cities or artifacts that need to be controlled. That will be addressed in 3rd Cycle.
Posts: 2,776
Threads: 70
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
3
I'm up for another anonymous game, but not a team one. Individual.
Posts: 5,613
Threads: 619
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
6
(12-22-2013, 02:17 AM)DuPont Wrote: I'm up for another anonymous game, but not a team one. Individual.
See the new thread under Alamaze Sign Up.
Posts: 981
Threads: 33
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
1
(12-22-2013, 02:23 AM)Ry Vor Wrote: (12-22-2013, 02:17 AM)DuPont Wrote: I'm up for another anonymous game, but not a team one. Individual.
See the new thread under Alamaze Sign Up.
What has been average length of finished games?
Posts: 21
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation:
0
Honestly I have just started playing and for the most part have only managed to get myself knocked out fairly quickly, but I would agree that the ability to contact each other via e-mail has a lot to do with games going out early.
So far Alamaze strikes as a very unforgiving game if you wind up being the odd person out. If suddenly it's just you and a couple other kingdoms are going after you it's just a matter of time. There is very little room for error or development when there are a lot of players who know the game. And that is cool. But it makes for games which will be short, brutal, and dominated by communication between players.
If the game makers want to make the game last longer, making them anonymous would do a lot. Another interesting twist would be to wait till turn 3 before you know your strategic objectives, secret victory conditions, and natural enemy (of course you could have to change up the natural enemy a bit). That would toss a big wrench into everything.
Posts: 220
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
0
Based on what Ry Vor has said about 3rd Cycle, I really do think this may be mitigated a good bit. For instance:
- Shorter range for emissaries and diplomats + (possibly) larger map means a "blitz" is harder to execute
- Variable setup positions vis-vis the kingdom (e.g. bidding on kingdom and startup location separately) will result in a much more dynamic environment. Known "opening books" can't be used.
There were some other things too, but my brain is tired right now  I really think the current game will be hard to fix without, basically, changes that rival 3rd Cycle in scope, so why not just wait on 3rd Cycle?
|
Buddy/Ignore List
