Dukasaur wrote:In Escalating Spoils games, once the cash reaches 100 it increases by 10% of the previous cash, instead of a steady progression by 5s.
This will be genuinely Escalating spoils: after 100 there will be a hyperbolic instead of the current arithmetic (straight line) progression.
How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
There is a generally-accepted belief that escalating games don't stalemate. Unfortunately, more and more often we are seeing escalating games that do stalemate, or at least take a very long time to play. The old progression was designed when most of the maps were wide-open maps like Classic or Hong Kong. Maps have gotten bigger and more complex. They have many dead ends for players to hide in, and numerous bonuses that make the spoils less important. Larger armies are needed to break open the defensive lines that are causing stalemated games on maps like the Hive, Supermax, Conquer Rome, Das Schloss, and even World 2.1.
Original Suggestion wrote:Concise description:
In speed freestyle games, games often turn into a stalemate simply because it benefits no one to attack. Stalemates like this occur when the ability to cash garners less armies than it would be to simply sit back and do nothing. Thus the players sit back... and do nothing. No incentive is made to attack others because they'll get 225 armies or so for killing someone... when they have to blow through 400 armies to kill someone. So no one does anything, and continents at this point in teh game are useless
I propose that after the 100 army turn-in point, the armies should start increasing by 15-20 armies instead of by a mere 5. Therefore games won't end in stalemates and people will be able to continue to have an incentive to eliminate others.
This will improve the following aspects of the site:
-Help stop stalemates late game in escalating games, whether speed or casual.
Look at this game, it was going on forever... (also watch the chat logs of Blue being a moron)... It went down to a threeway stalemate between yellow, grey, and I. Eventually we let yellow win the game not because he was ahead (he was the weakest) but simply because he had eliminated the most players during the course of the game, and it was the only solution we could agree upon.
Having games end like that, which apparently get to that state often, is terrible...