[GP] Eliminate spoils cheap tactics by 'deferring'

[ljex]

Maybe I don't understand freestyle well enough, but why are you implying that there's some sort of advantage to not ending your turn?

currently there is a disadvantage if this were implemented it would make it that you could make riskier plays in terms of time because you could still get a card even if you didnt end your turn

[Metsfanmax]

The fact that people wait until there's seconds left in the game and then move is a disadvantage inherent to freestyle itself. If this is what turns out to be the best style of play, then it's just a change to what freestyle currently is - there's no inherent reason why it's worse.

[ljex]

The fact that people wait until there's seconds left in the game and then move is a disadvantage inherent to freestyle itself. If this is what turns out to be the best style of play, then it's just a change to what freestyle currently is - there's no inherent reason why it's worse.

It promotes a further unfair advantage and makes for a worse game with less skill...not sure how you feel that dosnt make the game worse

[Metsfanmax]

The fact that people wait until there's seconds left in the game and then move is a disadvantage inherent to freestyle itself. If this is what turns out to be the best style of play, then it's just a change to what freestyle currently is - there's no inherent reason why it's worse.

It promotes a further unfair advantage and makes for a worse game with less skill...not sure how you feel that dosnt make the game worse

I don't understand what the "unfair advantage" is. Anyone can play using the style you stated. Why will some players have an unfair advantage?

And no, it won't be less skill - it will just be a different type of skill.

[ljex]

The fact that people wait until there's seconds left in the game and then move is a disadvantage inherent to freestyle itself. If this is what turns out to be the best style of play, then it's just a change to what freestyle currently is - there's no inherent reason why it's worse.

It promotes a further unfair advantage and makes for a worse game with less skill...not sure how you feel that dosnt make the game worse

I don't understand what the "unfair advantage" is. Anyone can play using the style you stated. Why will some players have an unfair advantage?

And no, it won't be less skill - it will just be a different type of skill.

Well noobs would be more likely to end their turns like it should be than skilled players who know the loophole...thus it would create an advantage for good players.


Also it would be way less skill...what is harder attack till the time runs out or figure out how much time you need to make a kill/make sure you end at the last second if you took more time than anticipated. Thus there would be less skill in the game something that im not a fan of...especially considering how little this actually helps fix any problems i can see.

[eddie2]

lol do you know what gets me about this freestyle speed game play that you are all talking about.

you are cheating.

is there not a rule that states you are not allowed to intentional miss a turn. i have been involved in one or 2 of these games were a shot goes and players on 5 cards dont cash and just let the time run out. so stop defending the cheats. ow wait now i understand this is a tactic used by all the high ranks so it is allowed.

[Masli]

lol do you know what gets me about this freestyle speed game play that you are all talking about.

you are cheating.

is there not a rule that states you are not allowed to intentional miss a turn. i have been involved in one or 2 of these games were a shot goes and players on 5 cards dont cash and just let the time run out. so stop defending the cheats. ow wait now i understand this is a tactic used by all the high ranks so it is allowed.

think you mean : intentional deadbeating.

Missing a turn is not the same as deadbeating.
Starting a turn and let the time run out, is not missing a turn

[eddie2]

lol do you know what gets me about this freestyle speed game play that you are all talking about.

you are cheating.

is there not a rule that states you are not allowed to intentional miss a turn. i have been involved in one or 2 of these games were a shot goes and players on 5 cards dont cash and just let the time run out. so stop defending the cheats. ow wait now i understand this is a tactic used by all the high ranks so it is allowed.

think you mean : intentional deadbeating.

Missing a turn is not the same as deadbeating.
Starting a turn and let the time run out, is not missing a turn

no what has been said is players do this 2 gain some sort of advatage now players who do this first shot on das scholls have been warned for it. so doing it later in the game is abuse of the game engine. so is cheating

[Metsfanmax]

Well noobs would be more likely to end their turns like it should be than skilled players who know the loophole...thus it would create an advantage for good players.

So your argument is that good players will do better than bad players? How is that unfair?

Also it would be way less skill...what is harder attack till the time runs out or figure out how much time you need to make a kill/make sure you end at the last second if you took more time than anticipated. Thus there would be less skill in the game something that im not a fan of...especially considering how little this actually helps fix any problems i can see.

I don't believe that this will be a preferred tactic. The people who win are those who can both attack and reinforce properly - if you're just blindly attacking, it seems unlikely to me that you'll beat a player who is thoughtful and ready for the blitz at the end.

Besides, you're thinking about this too narrowly. This is aimed to fix a problem with the game as a whole - I basically only play regular games, not freestyle, so that's not where I'm coming from on this debate.

[ljex]

lol do you know what gets me about this freestyle speed game play that you are all talking about.

you are cheating.

is there not a rule that states you are not allowed to intentional miss a turn. i have been involved in one or 2 of these games were a shot goes and players on 5 cards dont cash and just let the time run out. so stop defending the cheats. ow wait now i understand this is a tactic used by all the high ranks so it is allowed.

Um...no good player skips cashing with 5 cards also please actually read the suggestion you still need to attack to get a card

Well noobs would be more likely to end their turns like it should be than skilled players who know the loophole...thus it would create an advantage for good players.

So your argument is that good players will do better than bad players? How is that unfair?

My argument is that beginners will not know of or take advantage of the loophole...similar too double turns this will create a bad game experience for a lot of people.

Also it would be way less skill...what is harder attack till the time runs out or figure out how much time you need to make a kill/make sure you end at the last second if you took more time than anticipated. Thus there would be less skill in the game something that im not a fan of...especially considering how little this actually helps fix any problems i can see.

I don't believe that this will be a preferred tactic. The people who win are those who can both attack and reinforce properly - if you're just blindly attacking, it seems unlikely to me that you'll beat a player who is thoughtful and ready for the blitz at the end.

Besides, you're thinking about this too narrowly. This is aimed to fix a problem with the game as a whole - I basically only play regular games, not freestyle, so that's not where I'm coming from on this debate.

I can assure you this would completely change freestyle escalating speed games for the worse...there is very little gained from forting and in most situations it is useless, please understand that while you dont play this setting it is my favorite here on CC and this would make it way less fun. How often does this issue of people not getting spoils really happen where it is a good thing for them? Only in nuclear spoils every other time it is bad for them (please try to give me an example of when it is good for them otherwise and i will surely prove you wrong). Is it really that hard to rate with cheap tactics and move on, foe them, or just try to get a solution to your problem that doesn't cause problems elsewhere in other game-styles?

[Darwins_Bane]

i dont think this argument is going anywhere on the subject of ideals and reasons behind. You both have arguments for each side. the question now should be, how many people will each option affect? Anyone have any statistics or numbers? how many people currently would be negatively affected by handing out a card at the end of the turn vs how many people are currently negatively affected by someone not ending their turn.

[Metsfanmax]

How often does this issue of people not getting spoils really happen where it is a good thing for them? Only in nuclear spoils every other time it is bad for them (please try to give me an example of when it is good for them otherwise and i will surely prove you wrong). Is it really that hard to rate with cheap tactics and move on, foe them, or just try to get a solution to your problem that doesn't cause problems elsewhere in other game-styles?

The example was given earlier on in the thread - if it's near the beginning of the game and everyone has 4 cards, you can attack and wait your turn out to avoid getting a card, while everyone else will get a card before you. As a result, you cash last and get the biggest set. You should only be allowed to cash last if you didn't actually attack in the round where you had 4 cards - that's the cost of that choice. The current system means that choice has no cost at all.

[ljex]

How often does this issue of people not getting spoils really happen where it is a good thing for them? Only in nuclear spoils every other time it is bad for them (please try to give me an example of when it is good for them otherwise and i will surely prove you wrong). Is it really that hard to rate with cheap tactics and move on, foe them, or just try to get a solution to your problem that doesn't cause problems elsewhere in other game-styles?

The example was given earlier on in the thread - if it's near the beginning of the game and everyone has 4 cards, you can attack and wait your turn out to avoid getting a card, while everyone else will get a card before you. As a result, you cash last and get the biggest set. You should only be allowed to cash last if you didn't actually attack in the round where you had 4 cards - that's the cost of that choice. The current system means that choice has no cost at all.

well i would like to reiterate my point that missing cards in escalating is a cost...if you can get a card every round you should. Cashing first for 4 troops on means you are going to be able to cash first when cashes are worth 20+ let me also say that in escalating if you want to skip a card dont attack or you waste troops attacking for no gain...everyone should know that escalating is all about cards/troops so why attack if you dont want a card. Thus in this situation you both lose a spoil which would give you the opportunity to cash first for the larger amount of troops and have kill opportunities, and troops for taking a region when you dont get a card...which will basically never be a good play in an escalating game.

[Commander62890]

In speed freestyle, ending your turn in time to get a card is an art.


You would be taking this aspect that great speed freestylers have learned entirely out of the game.


This would change speed freestyle for the worse because there would be one less aspect of skill involved. Everyone would attack until the end of the round, everyone would get a card... it's just going to decrease the amount of skill it takes to win a speed freestyle game.


If we hadn't been exposed to speed freestyle the way it is, we wouldn't be complaining. Your suggestion makes sense. However, the fact is that we were exposed to the current gameplay of speed freestyle, and this would not only change it (which is bad enough), but make it less involved and less skill-oriented.


Remember... it's an art. Don't do this.

[mbhirsch]

I think you should still get a card when you run out of time. At least in the new 1, 2, and 3 minute speed games.

Just my suggestion, anybody else think the same as well?

[blakebowling]

I think not getting them still adds to the gameplay.

[Gilligan]

I always thought running out of time to miss a card was a gross abuse of the game. If you attack, you pick a card. If you don't want a card, don't attack. You shouldn't be able to attack and not get a card.

[blakebowling]

I always thought running out of time to miss a card was a gross abuse of the game. If you attack, you pick a card. If you don't want a card, don't attack. You shouldn't be able to attack and not get a card.

That wasn't my idea of added gameplay.

I mean there should be an incentive for finishing your turn within the time limit.

[Bruceswar]

I always thought running out of time to miss a card was a gross abuse of the game. If you attack, you pick a card. If you don't want a card, don't attack. You shouldn't be able to attack and not get a card.

In a speed game sometimes you simply run out of time. Those who miss on purpose are what you are talking about and I agree.

[mbhirsch]

In the faster speed games like the 1, 2 minutes ones its so hard to finish in time. I mean just switching over web pages takes a couple of precious seconds.

Eh, I guess for now on I'll just avoid those low minute games.

[betiko]

In the faster speed games like the 1, 2 minutes ones its so hard to finish in time. I mean just switching over web pages takes a couple of precious seconds.

Eh, I guess for now on I'll just avoid those low minute games.

or maybe it's not a good idea to start more than one 1min speed game at a time?

[chapcrap]

In the faster speed games like the 1, 2 minutes ones its so hard to finish in time. I mean just switching over web pages takes a couple of precious seconds.

Eh, I guess for now on I'll just avoid those low minute games.

or maybe it's not a good idea to start more than one 1min speed game at a time?

This.

[mbhirsch]

In the faster speed games like the 1, 2 minutes ones its so hard to finish in time. I mean just switching over web pages takes a couple of precious seconds.

Eh, I guess for now on I'll just avoid those low minute games.

or maybe it's not a good idea to start more than one 1min speed game at a time?

Or maybe CC isn't the only thing on the internet

Thank you, come again....

[Woodruff]

I always thought running out of time to miss a card was a gross abuse of the game. If you attack, you pick a card. If you don't want a card, don't attack. You shouldn't be able to attack and not get a card.

In the newer really-short games, I wouldn't necessarily agree simply because I don't believe it will usually be on purpose. But for the longer-termed games when it's pretty clearly on purpose, I absolutely agree.

[Woodruff]

In the faster speed games like the 1, 2 minutes ones its so hard to finish in time. I mean just switching over web pages takes a couple of precious seconds.

Eh, I guess for now on I'll just avoid those low minute games.

or maybe it's not a good idea to start more than one 1min speed game at a time?

While I agree (and this was even a rule I held myself to with 5min speed games), at a 1-minute game on a huge map, you may still not have time to finish.