Anonymous Steel - Mid February 2015

[Lord Thanatos]

Is this REX only or are there going to be SVC?

If REX only I am in. If SVC no thanks, I will wait for a REX game.

Me too.

If REX I am in.  If SVC, I will wait for a REX game.

[Ry Vor]

Why all the noise against the Secret Victory Conditions?  You guys haven't even seen them in action, instead going on what happened two years ago and long before.  Its been a weird month or so where its sort of like deconstruction with Pagan and no SVC.  What's next, take out the political emissaries?

[Drogo]

I believe there has been only one game that's ended with the new SVC, yes? I'm certainly willing to give it a chance.

I also think JF was pretty clever and really snuck up on some players (especially me who came in second and I would argue was in a very strong position to finish well) with a SVC condition that allowed him to set up the win without making much noise (he only controlled 1 region). Meaning some of us in other corners of the map had no idea he was that close to the win. I think we'll all be more aware in future games.

[Airborne Ranger]

I believe there has been only one game that's ended with the new SVC, yes?  I'm certainly willing to give it a chance.

I also think JF was pretty clever and really snuck up on some players (especially me who came in second and I would argue was in a very strong position to finish well) with a SVC condition that allowed him to set up the win without making much noise (he only controlled 1 region).  Meaning some of us in other corners of the map had no idea he was that close to the win.  I think we'll all be more aware in future games.

I will reconsider and join. If the other few who were waiting do the same I think we have a game (12), I do not want to see others waiting too long for a new game, REX will come soon enough, just have to hammer others and win my other games to open up new REX! I'm in.

[Acererak]

I'm in too.

[HeadHoncho]

1) JumpingFist
2) Cloud
3) FeralKoala
4) Harry O
5) DuPont
6) Lord Alz
7) TWhitewolf10
8) Diamond Cutter
9) Airborne Ranger
10) Madmardigan
11) Drogo

This is in order of expression of interest. LT would make 12. The list does not account for the "Chivalrous" part of the setup, I will let the admins figure that part out.

EDIT: Oops, cross-posted with Acererak. I guess his firm expression of interest is technically prior to LT's who wasn't interested in SVC, but I will let the admins figure that part out, too.

[Lord Thanatos]

Why all the noise against the Secret Victory Conditions?  You guys haven't even seen them in action, instead going on what happened two years ago and long before.  Its been a weird month or so where its sort of like deconstruction with Pagan and no SVC.  What's next, take out the political emissaries?

You know I love Alamaze, Rick.  I am a very satisfied Imperator!

Still, the idea of a SVC (however it is implemented) is antithetical to my love of Alamaze.  It makes worse (exacerbates!) the few things I do not love about Alamaze.

I eagerly open each set-up genuinely excited about the possibility of conquering the world.  Every time, without exception, that a game ended with a SVC it has been a disappointment. If a player has to conquer four regions he is on everyone's radar when he controls that second region.  Whether full diplomacy or anonymous, the skilled players see control of that second region as an indication to become actively involved in hindering that player's ascension.  Now the building-up phase is definitely over!  There is no such indication for SVC.  Often (as happened turn 17 in the first contest with the new SVC) the first indication players have of another player's impending victory is the notification of actual victory.  Yes, I know there are orders to learn of the SVC for a player, but I do not feel like issuing 14 such orders simply so I am not surprised.

Also, SVCs make the necessity of diplomacy even more of a requirement.  This directly leads to a further advantage for those initiating a 3v1 or 4v1 attack.  Do I need to explain this?  It seems self-evident to me.

Maybe some players see Alamaze as primarily a game of duplicity?  I certainly do not.  I guarantee I will not ever again trust the player who offers to assist me and I learn that the offered assistance ended as soon as he obtained his final significant in the region we were attacking and claimed a SVC victory.  I can do without such assistance!

The idea that a game ends prematurely and there are now 15 players ready to pay a new set-up fee also bothers me slightly.  I readily acknowledge I am not complaining about cost and can afford whatever is charged.  But there are others for whom cost is definitely a consideration and I would dearly love to see the player base grow.  How does that player feel to be in the middle of a game and enjoying the growing might of his kingdom to suddenly find that kingdom is gone and new fees await?  Just something worth considering . . .

Maybe I am a bit slow-witted, but I still do not understand at all the allure to the player base of SVC?  Maybe someone can explain why this feature/mechanic is enjoyable?  With REX I can see the game unfold and anticipate the game reaching its conclusion.  SVC is sudden, unexpected, and annoying as hell.

I am uncertain how anonymous and SVC will interact.  I fear the worst...

To directly answer your question, Rick: pagan, no svc, and anonymous all grew as variants to lessen the effect of 3v1 and 4v1 in full diplomacy - TO LENGTHEN THE CONTEST.  The hope is that the game is lengthened and every player receives the fullest measure of enjoyment he possibly can by playing Alamaze.  Exploratory was intended to slow the first turn coordinated assaults - Pagan is a natural extension of this variant.  Rex only (no svc) was in the hopes that games would last longer than an average of about 18 turns.  My understanding is that only a few contests went 40 turns.  This means that in almost every Alamaze contest someone eventually clawed his way to control of four regions - this is a GREAT RESULT. And Anonymous was intended to prevent coordination completely.  Many players have already expressed that this variant is now their favorite

I did not mean to hijack this thread.  I intended only to decline to participate in this particular contest.

[Drogo]

Sorry HeadHoncho, I wasn't actually joining this game just expressing a general opinion that I am willing to give the SVC a longer trial run than one game. If you get stuck for a 12th I could be convinced but if someone else wants to join this game I'm ok with that.

I have a few kingdoms that I would really like to try out next and so a late pick may not get me one of a few kingdoms I'm itching to try out.

[Jumpingfist]

It may come as a surprise, but I am also not found of SVC. I prefer games to come to a conclusion of a dominant winning. Rex does this well for the most part baring 3 vs 1 and dog piling the new guy. I have put a little thought into SVC and came up with an idea. Of course I do not know programming required or if it a direction Rick would like to go.

SVC would not end the game. Instead you declare the single player victory and the game continues. Only one person can claim the SVC once determined it is off the table. After the game ends with either REX or 40 turns. Incase of a REX win. The top spot would go to the higher point total of SVC winner and REX winner both getting there winning status points included. 2nd place goes to the loser of the two. 3rd next highest point total. If it is a 40 turn game the SVC winner takes first automatically.

[Ry Vor]

I don't want anyone "forced" into a format they don't like.  So I will open a thread for a 12 player Steel Rex.  The problem with having several queues is then players are waiting longer for games to start.  But anyone who wants can withdraw from this game and join the other.

It really did hurt my argument that the first SVC game ended quickly.  But consider:

• A top, if not the top, Alamaze player won, in a game with lots of newbies, many of whom dropped along the way, not helping the player base;
  
• As the DE, his natural enemy resigned somewhere in the first 5 turns, ceding him one of the SVC's;
  
• This game, sorry to say to the other participants, was not our finest hour in that at least 5 drops occurred, including virtually all of the DE's neighbors.
  
• The DE went hard and fast for his SVC, and barely squeaked in the 3 Substantial and 2 Significant regions condition on the final turn;
  
• No other player tried to determine his SVC's, or detected 8 fleets in two different seas;
  
• In my opinion, when the AN dropped, there should have been some interest in what the DE was doing.  This especially since this was a full diplomacy game and all participants knew Jumpingfist was the DE.
  

I'm finding lots of Fall of Rome players (lots being a relative term) like Rex-only.  These are aggressive players who want to dictate pace and are not that interested in reconning opponents, looking behind the curtain so to speak, basically treat it as a race to get to 4 regions.  That's fine, that's one way to play.  Sort of like at the Kentucky Derby, lots of horses have blinders on to not be distracted.  One way to play, not the only way.  Having the SVC does mean some effort has to be expended to see what other players are up to, not just get a bell ringing when a kingdom gets two regions under control.

Fall of Rome was usually criticized for the kingdoms being too similar.  They were all intended to be able to win as the Rex.  Alamaze kingdoms are not designed that way, and won't be in the future, whether called Alamaze, Kingdoms of Arcania, or something else.  I don't see the Underworld, or Sorcerer, or Warlock, or even the Ancient Ones, Demon Princes, or perhaps other kingdoms, winning by controlling 4 regions.  They need another way to proceed.

I also see Alamaze as a game involving diplomacy, and the game Diplomacy is one of the best board games ever, and I would bet most Rex-only players never played Diplomacy.  Imagine a game of Diplomacy with, well, no diplomacy.  Such is Anonymous, in my opinion, to Alamaze.  I am not a great diplomat as a player, and so I guess my personal preference is the middle ground of Magic Anonymous, meaning just coordinating with your two other teammates.  But the game was designed as a full diplomacy game.