[GO] Extra Foggy Games

by **jammyjames** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:29 am

great suggestion, this would make fog play so much better

by **ad10r3tr0** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:39 am

I agree 100%... this needs to happen asap, unfortunately it will be at least a year

by **chapcrap** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:25 pm

ad10r3tr0 wrote:I agree 100%... this needs to happen asap, unfortunately it will be at least a year

Or 6.

by **GoranZ** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 5:55 pm

chapcrap wrote:
ad10r3tr0 wrote:I agree 100%... this needs to happen asap, unfortunately it will be at least a year

Or 6.

sooner the better, probably over half(just guessing... no one can really know for sure) of foed players in CC are as a result of the issue I pointed out... and that is a lot of players that cant join games.

With my proposal I'm trying to make fog games more realistic and with that more interesting, and on top of that some of the reasons for foeing players will disappear... I bet that over 90% of the players that like playing in fog will support this suggestion.

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:also, changing the tell of how many regions was attacked by each player seems impossible since the log is updated once per each action. other than that this would be a very nice addition to conquer club.

hopefully there will be enough support generated for this.

It is easy... only the first region from defeated player will be shown(change only in presentation...), every other after that it wont... well I'm hoping CC to implement this very soon so I can win our game :lol:

... jk I can win without this :twisted:

, you only need to give me a chance

by **Teflon Kris** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:22 pm

I'm into it - big problem is if someone drops a bonus first turn but that should be prevented by xml anyway really.

Perhaps we should have 4 option - Sunny, Moonligt, Mist & Total Fog.

by **chapcrap** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:27 pm

DJ Teflon wrote:I'm into it - big problem is if someone drops a bonus first turn but that should be prevented by xml anyway really.

Perhaps we should have 4 option - Sunny, Moonligt, Mist & Total Fog.

Would Mist be Fog as it is now?

by **WILLIAMS5232** on Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:20 pm

chapcrap wrote:
DJ Teflon wrote:I'm into it - big problem is if someone drops a bonus first turn but that should be prevented by xml anyway really.

Perhaps we should have 4 option - Sunny, Moonligt, Mist & Total Fog.

Would Mist be Fog as it is now?

i think what we have now is "moonlight"

i want mist.

i thihk goranz wants complete fog. no chat, no info other than border vision.

which imo is kind of dumb.

it's basically just rolling dice and nothing else.

i want to know how many regions have been attacked by who. and i also would like to know if there is a bonus taken. not necessarily how much of a bonus, just that there's been one taken. and the spoils too. they should say got bonus of ? added to ?. and then display what spoils were cashed.

if you don't have at least a minimal amount of info, then everyones just playing blindly, mindlessly attacking each other while one player get's unintentionally left alone by chance and gets to mop everyone up after a few turns. that's kind of dumb i think. may as well just play doodle assassin games.

also i'd not like to do without chat. the reason i play is the interaction and propaganda. if i didn't want that, i'd just play 2v2's or 1v1's. i like playing all games with bunches of communication. monopoly, spades, dominoes, etc.....

by **Herbas** on Mon Sep 19, 2011 5:41 am

I'm also not so sure about "foggier fog".
I would say that right now many people are already clueless in FoW and I fear that by taking away even more information from the log will make games to simple guessworks and luck based.

In order to have a strategy, you need to have some amount of real information. If you don't have anything, then you can't even create strategies.

by **chapcrap** on Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:00 am

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:
chapcrap wrote:
DJ Teflon wrote:I'm into it - big problem is if someone drops a bonus first turn but that should be prevented by xml anyway really.

Perhaps we should have 4 option - Sunny, Moonligt, Mist & Total Fog.

Would Mist be Fog as it is now?

i think what we have now is "moonlight"

No, DJ describes what he means by Moonlight here: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=153537

Either, way, I don't care what it's called. I think the 4 options would be good.

by **GoranZ** on Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:18 pm

chapcrap wrote:Either, way, I don't care what it's called. I think the 4 options would be good.

I agree with 4 options also...
The suggestion that I proposed is only one suggestion on how and what should be added... other opinions on the same subject are always welcomed... maybe I missed something or someone can improve my proposal

by **WILLIAMS5232** on Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:12 am

i think with four options there is enough to make everyone happy.

by **Teflon Kris** on Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:25 am

chapcrap wrote:
DJ Teflon wrote:I'm into it - big problem is if someone drops a bonus first turn but that should be prevented by xml anyway really.

Perhaps we should have 4 option - Sunny, Moonligt, Mist & Total Fog.

Would Mist be Fog as it is now?

Yes, or just call it fog and the new setting 'Dense Fog'

by **WILLIAMS5232** on Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:42 pm

i read the moonlight thread, and personally that's not for me. but i do think the current fog needs to stay. plus a foggier fog. and if folks want "moonlight" that's fine too. i just prefer to have sunny, fog like our current fog, and another foggier fog, kind of like;

? for territory count
state bonus amounts as a ?
card terts and state 2 troops added to ? ( if applicable )
everything else in regular fog is fine for me.

then the fourth option could be for whatever anyone else wants.

i sure wish this was being taken for serious. or at least someone could say it's possible or not possible.

seems like a great idea with plenty of support.

by **TheGeneral2112** on Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:14 pm

Bump. All for this one.

by **jgordon1111** on Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:05 am

support of this suggestion with one change leave the game log alone its needed to play,dis allow opponents to talk to anyone except thier team if it's a team game. otherwise players can talk to each other after the game

by **rhp 1** on Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:35 pm

partly cloudy should be in there somewhere... sounds funny

good idea though...

by **sirgermaine** on Sun May 27, 2012 3:26 pm

In Fog games, it kind of bothers me that you can see so much information in the information section. Why should I know how many terits someone has or how many attacks they have made, if I can't see those terits? I'd totally play a super-foggy game where all that shows up in the live report is when players start and end turns, and absolutely nothing else, since I hypothetically am unaware of it. This might be a no-new-recruits option, though. I find it weird that I can tell how many reinforcements someone gets, or what bonuses they are getting, without seeing any of the involved terits (and obviously not all of them). I would say that perhaps when someone cashes spoils, that might make the feed (but not whether they got any bonuses for owning those terits), since with escalating spoils you'd need to know how many spoils had been played, but the number of spoils each player has at any moment should also be hidden. This total lack of information would make the game much more exploration-style, not investigation-style.

I presume that providing less, not more, information in the game log would be really easy (only show start/end of turn) to implement, and I think that this would be an interesting game dynamic option.

Am I the only person crazy enough to want to play a game like this? I'd totally play a super-foggy trench game with 8 players, just to play as blindly as possible. Comments appreciated.

by **squishyg** on Sun May 27, 2012 6:22 pm

Yes yes yes. We could call it Dark of Night warfare.

by **DiM** on Sun May 27, 2012 6:46 pm

by **sirgermaine** on Sun May 27, 2012 9:40 pm

I kind of liked "extra foggy, but Dark of Night does sound pretty awesome.

by **jgordon1111** on Sun May 27, 2012 9:57 pm

+2,Very good idea. Tougher way to play fog. =D>

by **agentcom** on Sun May 27, 2012 10:00 pm

It's been suggested before ... But I'm still all for it.

by **sirgermaine** on Mon May 28, 2012 9:53 am

Oh, I looked but maybe I just didn't search the right way. Anyway, I didn't mention but it also makes (truthful or not) diplomacy a bigger part of games, since you basically have to take people's word for where they are.

by **agentcom** on Tue May 29, 2012 12:04 am

Yep. It would be a really cool setting. I don't think there are many people against it that I've seen. Most of the discussion is on where to draw the line.

Also, in your initial post, you said that you think spoils should make it in. That got me thinking that they don't necessarily have to. Why do you "need" to see what your spoils are going to be worth in an escalating game. (Or even what color your own or other people's cards are in a flat rate game ... or even which territs get nuked by whom in a nuke game). You could even kill that info. That would be an intense game, trying to guess at what spoils are worth.

Other people have even suggested disabling chat in games. You wouldn't even be able to do diplomacy. I think I'd play any variation/level of this fogginess.