[GO] EXTREME ESCALATING SPOILS

[Woltato]

From a mapmaking perspective, this is a nightmare. The Foundry would have to enforce a 8888 policy, instead of a 888 policy, and older maps would suffer for not being up to 8888 standards...

Plus, first cash will win more than not.

-Sully

I don't see why this is a problem as no-spoils games can often go on for a very long time and end up with players having thousands of troops. Game 7361554 this is an example of such a game.
Escalating games are much more aggressive and tend to be over quickly and therefore it's less likely that this would be a problem.

I think also that the original post suggests that the spoils would start off small like in the current escalating and therefore it would not lead to the first cash in winning, if anything the last cash in would get more troops and have a better chance.

[Metsfanmax]

From a mapmaking perspective, this is a nightmare. The Foundry would have to enforce a 8888 policy, instead of a 888 policy, and older maps would suffer for not being up to 8888 standards...

Plus, first cash will win more than not.

-Sully

I don't see why this is a problem as no-spoils games can often go on for a very long time and end up with players having thousands of troops. Game 7361554 this is an example of such a game.
Escalating games are much more aggressive and tend to be over quickly and therefore it's less likely that this would be a problem.

It is a problem because the percentage of games that end that way are tiny. If you have a whole new set of spoils such as the ones here, this situation would happen quite often, justifying a fix. But if troop numbers in the thousands are so rare that you could only come up with one example off the top of your head, it's legitimate to keep the maps as they are and still claim that the new setting would be bad for those maps.

[ad10r3tr0]

From a mapmaking perspective, this is a nightmare. The Foundry would have to enforce a 8888 policy, instead of a 888 policy, and older maps would suffer for not being up to 8888 standards...

Plus, first cash will win more than not.

-Sully

I don't see why this is a problem as no-spoils games can often go on for a very long time and end up with players having thousands of troops. Game 7361554 this is an example of such a game.
Escalating games are much more aggressive and tend to be over quickly and therefore it's less likely that this would be a problem.

I think also that the original post suggests that the spoils would start off small like in the current escalating and therefore it would not lead to the first cash in winning, if anything the last cash in would get more troops and have a better chance.

not as many troops as this game Game 1204465

[karelpietertje]

I think the cards should escalate 10 by 10 after you hit 100, but this suggestion is just silly.

[OliverFA]

IMHO this is "yet another option" and what we need to look for are options that open new and different ways of playing. But that's just my opinion.

[Woltato]

From a mapmaking perspective, this is a nightmare. The Foundry would have to enforce a 8888 policy, instead of a 888 policy, and older maps would suffer for not being up to 8888 standards...

Plus, first cash will win more than not.

-Sully

I don't see why this is a problem as no-spoils games can often go on for a very long time and end up with players having thousands of troops. Game 7361554 this is an example of such a game.
Escalating games are much more aggressive and tend to be over quickly and therefore it's less likely that this would be a problem.

It is a problem because the percentage of games that end that way are tiny. If you have a whole new set of spoils such as the ones here, this situation would happen quite often, justifying a fix. But if troop numbers in the thousands are so rare that you could only come up with one example off the top of your head, it's legitimate to keep the maps as they are and still claim that the new setting would be bad for those maps.

I fail to agree with you. If the spoils went up quicker then the game would end more quickly. In fact if the spoils rose exponentially then it would be even less likely to have a situation like this. Virtually all games with this system would be over by about round 12

[Martin Ronne]

Is it bad to bump this thread??

[agentcom]

Is it bad to bump this thread??

Not necessarily, though the likelihood that it will get implemented is low considering it is in rejected suggestions.

As to it being in rejected, I can't really explain it. Is seems from my (very cursory) review that people either liked it or misunderstood it.

This spoils system wouldn't change anything until 14 sets of cards had been turned in. I think that some analysis would have to be done, but it seems to me that this is right about the time that a lot of games will either turn in favor of one player or start to look like a deadlock. This could help in the latter circumstances. I kind of like the idea, myself. But I think there are other cooler spoils ideas out there, so I wouldn't put it at the top of my priority list.