[GO] No Dice Games

[misher]

Concise description:

The dice hate some people, thus unrandomize them. 2 man to take one country with one defending, 8 to take on 7, etc. Or maybe a possible defending bonus. Of course this would be a special type of mapmode...realistic or something?

Specifics:

Make a gameplay mode where instead of dice just do a my army is 90 yours is 89 90-89 I win and have one man left alive.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

Shuts people up like me who flame the dice. Have alot deeper strategy/prediction games, diplomacy and other aspects would would increase.

[drunkmonkey]

This would make for the most boring games imaginable. Also, although this removes the chance of the dice, the game would then be decided by the drop.

[zoober]

While I agree that it would make the games a bit more "boring," it would allow for a pretty big set of people to play to test their strategic abilities versus just how well the dice roll for you that game. This would definitely be something desirable for doubles and things like that where its not just one person on one person. I may be wrong, though I think a lot of people would get a kick out of a battle of the wits and not the dice and cards. I almost feel like there is too much randomness at some points in the game because of the luck of the card and dice system. I find myself personally playing a lot of 'no spoils' games just to remove a factor of randomness from the games. And Yes, I understand that there's more than just luck of the dice in games right now, I was just being sarcastic about it.

[iamkoolerthanu]

I like this idea, as an option. Some people would find it boring, but if you play it on the right maps, it could be all about skill...Then again games would go on forever, because in reality you would always have the same number of troops as your opponent unless you have cards..

[zoober]

I would say not necessarily, because then the region bonuses and other bonuses you can obtain would become vastly important. I would like to play this kind of game with no spoils. Then it is a pure strategy game of predicting your opponents moves and strategically placing yourself to have the best opportunity for success.

[iamkoolerthanu]

I like this idea, as an option. Some people would find it boring, but if you play it on the right maps, it could be all about skill...Then again games would go on forever, because in reality you would always have the same number of troops as your opponent unless you have cards..

I for some reason was only thinking of 1v1 games when I wrote this post... and forgot about bonuses... what was I thinking??
I think this idea would be great :)

[DeadCenter]

Boring game? That's why it'd be a game OPTION - if you don't like it you could choose not to play it. Just adds a little something for those who do. I think this would be a fine idea to implement.

[iamkoolerthanu]

Boring game? That's why it'd be a game OPTION - if you don't like it you could choose not to play it. Just adds a little something for those who do. I think this would be a fine idea to implement.

Exactly. Like I find No Spoils boring on certain maps with certain number of players. This suggestion would also be boring in some maps. But in some maps it would be very fun!

[TheForgivenOne]

I, for some reason, don't like it. Can't put a nail in the head as to why, but i don't. If i think of the reason, i shall return

[misher]

Dunno about you guys, but I just had a game where I was going to take antioch for the win...and lost...15 men to 4, which then lead to my defeat.

Sometimes the dice just get bloody annoying/aggravating.

[TheForgivenOne]

Let me ask you this. You expect every single role, at those numbers, 15v4, to win every time? There is a thing called luck and odds. Every once in a while you should lose that attack. Technically, this gamestyle, could never be played on Circus Maximus with no spoils, as you'd just go in a circle forever, until someone deadbeated, as their are no bonuses.

[mattattam]

Yeah I don't this will happen. Takes away the luck factor that makes it interesting. Perhaps a modified version of your proposal could be made where you can't lose a certain amount compared to your opponents stack. I dont see that happening either though.

[misher]

If you cared about interesting, luck, and sheer randomness, I don't think you'd play near constant 1v1's with players....1v1 is alot more skill based than most.

Sure non-random would screw 1v1 games, but in a 6 way free for all its fun as hell.

Plus you seem to all be forgetting the fact that people always say shit about the dice, this gets them to shut up once and for all!

[JoshyBoy]

I don't like this idea, it detracts from what CC is all about.

[iamkoolerthanu]

I don't like this idea, it detracts from what CC is all about.

Which is why you would not play this OPTION.

[AgentSmith88]

If you cared about interesting, luck, and sheer randomness, I don't think you'd play near constant 1v1's with players....1v1 is alot more skill based than most.

Sure non-random would screw 1v1 games, but in a 6 way free for all its fun as hell.

Plus you seem to all be forgetting the fact that people always say shit about the dice, this gets them to shut up once and for all!

Hilarious!

Maybe if you play freestyle speed or sequential on a few maps like AOR. Any normal map is decided by drop and who goes first 90% of the time.

[misher]

Just to clear it up the reason I said that is on most seq maps or free for me it's basically who gives up and suicides who, sure I win about 30% of them but thats because I factor that in and attempt my best not to piss suiciders off. (sadly my rank has been inspiring more and more of it....)

As for 1v1 drops do play a part, but all in all I think a 2-3 man head start that drops would give you would be inconsequential which is why alot of players can win there 1v1 maps ?80%? of the time. Because they've mastered all the skill they can possible squeeze out of the map.

I've pretty much mastered (at least as much as anyone else has mastered) freestyle and that took me about 2 years, I still learn new things everyday, infact I just had a few realizations about taking territories and leaving 1 man as defense that I'm going to try to implement in my gameplay today.

Theres always room for expansion, while pratice may very well be affected by the law of diminishing marginal returns, these 1v1 players have played the same damn map over and over and I'm damn sure (since I've checked the facts and the logs of alot of 1v1 players) that most of them tend to win most of the time unless they suffer near fatal bad luck with drops.

[sm8900]

I like this idea. since one of the amazing things about about Conquer Club is the sheer number of comprehensive ideas and options which we can try here, we might as well give people a chance to use this one...if they choose to use this when creating the game.

[AgentSmith88]

Just to clear it up the reason I said that is on most seq maps or free for me it's basically who gives up and suicides who, sure I win about 30% of them but thats because I factor that in and attempt my best not to piss suiciders off. (sadly my rank has been inspiring more and more of it....)

As for 1v1 drops do play a part, but all in all I think a 2-3 man head start that drops would give you would be inconsequential which is why alot of players can win there 1v1 maps ?80%? of the time. Because they've mastered all the skill they can possible squeeze out of the map.

I've pretty much mastered (at least as much as anyone else has mastered) freestyle and that took me about 2 years, I still learn new things everyday, infact I just had a few realizations about taking territories and leaving 1 man as defense that I'm going to try to implement in my gameplay today.

Theres always room for expansion, while pratice may very well be affected by the law of diminishing marginal returns, these 1v1 players have played the same damn map over and over and I'm damn sure (since I've checked the facts and the logs of alot of 1v1 players) that most of them tend to win most of the time unless they suffer near fatal bad luck with drops.

Fact of the matter is CC is based on the board game RISK. No board game (or card game for that matter) involves 100% strategy - there is always some luck involved. This is not a variation of a play style; it's a completely different game.

[natty dread]

Fact of the matter is CC is based on the board game RISK. No board game (or card game for that matter) involves 100% strategy - there is always some luck involved. This is not a variation of a play style; it's a completely different game.

Agreed. If you want no dice involved, go play chess. Sure, we all shout and curse when we lose that crucial 8v2 battle but it's all part of the game. There's a random element you cannot predict, and this is what makes the games exciting. Without dice it would be like acting out a screenplay, where every move is known in advance, extremely boring...

[iamkoolerthanu]

Fact of the matter is CC is based on the board game RISK. No board game (or card game for that matter) involves 100% strategy - there is always some luck involved. This is not a variation of a play style; it's a completely different game.

Agreed. If you want no dice involved, go play chess. Sure, we all shout and curse when we lose that crucial 8v2 battle but it's all part of the game. There's a random element you cannot predict, and this is what makes the games exciting. Without dice it would be like acting out a screenplay, where every move is known in advance, extremely boring...

Which is why you would not play this OPTION.

[Army of GOD]

But then my dice hack would be completely pointless...

[iamkoolerthanu]

But then my dice hack would be completely pointless...

Which is why you would not play this OPTION.

[natty dread]

Even having it as an OPTION would be counterproductive IMO.

[drunkmonkey]

Every time the flaws of a suggestion are pointed out, the counter-argument is "that's why it would be an OPTION". No. We can't fill the site with terrible "options" that people can just choose not to play. We already have freestyle; isn't that enough?