Terminatior Game Option

[Itrade]

I think there should be a totally new style of play called elimination, which gives points based on how many people you kill. The game would revolve more around killing people than than taking over the world.

Every person you eliminate will give you the normal amount of points.

I think it'd be pretty cool since there'd be more risk involved and there'd be new strategies flying about.

[max is gr8]

Lack has already added it to his list so sorry.

[Pedronicus]

Lacks list is written on a roll of toilet paper.

It's very long

[TowerClimber]

I was pondering some observations in previous games and also so comments made to me in another game about score. Now first off, I really do not care what my score is. I just enjoy playing the game.

I have noticed in several of my games that I have eliminated a player from the game but in the long run I lose the game. From what I understand only the winner of the game gets points. But it looks like the winner gets the points for the players that I eliminated.

Am I correct in this statement?

If so, I would like to suggest that players get points for eliminating a player from a game or at least the winner does not get points for players they did not directly eliminate.

Maybe you gain points based on who you eliminate, you lose points based on who eliminated you and you gain points for winning a game.

Just a suggestion.

[nhulbert]

Think about where the extra points from winning would come from, though. You can't get points from anything other than your opponents, that would create a linear growth in the overall scoreboard.

[TowerClimber]

Then do not give any points for winning the game, just for who u eliminate. I do not think it is fair that I eliminate 2 players but the winner of the game gets all the points for the eliminated players. I did all the work, they get all the points?

Just a thought.

[max is gr8]

Then do not give any points for winning the game, just for who u eliminate. I do not think it is fair that I eliminate 2 players but the winner of the game gets all the points for the eliminated players. I did all the work, they get all the points?

Just a thought.

NEW GAME IDEA INSTEAD

get points per person you kill.

[fubarcivic]

When playing real life risk, do we determine the winner of the game based on how many players they eliminate? Life's not fair, nor is risk! Its about making alliances, then breaking them. Its about teaming up together to get rid of someone, only to get stabbed in the back in the long run. I seriously wonder to myself what is wrong with you... You should not get points if you don't win the game (this coming from a guy who is below 1000.... ME! lol)

The points you win come from the persons who were eliminated... they're not from a bin of points! Here's food for though:

You're 1 of 4 players in a game. You have eliminated two players, and one remains. You have collected 40 points from those two players that oyu have eliminated. What is the incentive for these one player to continue playing if he will only gain minimal points? We'd have lots of deadbeats!

Cheers!!

[ngiahz]

just because u eliminate someone doesnt necessarily mean u did all the work. ive seen plenty of times someone else vulture someone elses kill ... usually me being the carcass

[moz976]

changing the game dynamics like this would change the game way too much IMO.

If you are eliminating people from the game you will eventually get a win. Your stratagy should always be to win the game. Maybe your streaching yoruself too thin when trying to eliminate people.

[TowerClimber]

Everyone has valid points. Doing anything with the scoring would cause a major change in the scoreboard. The game play itself is fine, it is exactly the way it should be. Yes, I have spread myself to thin, live and learn. Other times I have been the one to come out on top of the situation.

I guess I was not to clear on my earlier post and what my idea was. I was not complaining on how people played nor was I whining about getting beat. That is part of the game, if you can not handle that, then get out.

I was looking to see if there was a better way to rank the players in the scoreboard. Thanks everyone for the responses, brought up points that I did not think of. That is the main reason why I made the suggestion; What feed back would I get and would it tell me something I did not think of. It did.

[AndyDufresne]

A take on your suggestion, perhaps instead of gaining points for every person you knock out, if you happen to lose the match as a whole, depending on how many countries you took over/people you knocked out, you could lose less points.

Though I think the system is fine as it is, I just thought I would throw that out into the mix anyways.

--Andy

[grs]

I don't think eliminating a player has any value in risk. You want to win the game; who eliminates how many players is secondary and should give no score. It only would provoke suicide missions (like in: "Hey, I won't win this game anyways, so I can use up all my units to eliminate one other player. I do not care if I am destroyed afterwards."). That's does not seem a sign of skill to me.

[Mjolnirs]

I don't think awarding points for knocking someone out is the way to go. But, I do think something that rewards you for lasting longer might not be too bad. Say you have a six player game:
1st player eliminated loses (loser's score / winner's score ) * 20
2nd player eliminated loses (loser's score / winner's score ) * 19
3rd player eliminated loses (loser's score / winner's score ) * 18
4th player eliminated loses (loser's score / winner's score ) * 17
5th player eliminated loses (loser's score / winner's score ) * 16

This would give you some credit (via less taken away) for staying in the game longer.