Moderator: Community Team
mc05025 wrote:I do not like that. Giving the opportunity toa player to decide if he should take a card or not makes the game more complicated. Deciding if you should take a card or not is not easy in many cases. I suppport any feature that makes the game more complicated and more intresting.
Metsfanmax wrote:mc05025 wrote:I do not like that. Giving the opportunity toa player to decide if he should take a card or not makes the game more complicated. Deciding if you should take a card or not is not easy in many cases. I suppport any feature that makes the game more complicated and more intresting.
Would you support a feature that required you to solve a math problem correctly before initiating an assault? Not all complications to the game are desirable simply because they make the game more complicated, nor is it the case that giving people more options is always a good thing. There needs to be a better argument for this than simply that "it gives people more options." There are myriad ways to do that. We want to retain only the ones that truly add fun gameplay that is challenging in a non-trivial way, while retaining an element of fairness and preventing abuse.
aage wrote: Maybe you're right, but since we receive no handlebars from the mod I think we should get some ourselves.
Metsfanmax wrote:mc05025 wrote:I do not like that. Giving the opportunity toa player to decide if he should take a card or not makes the game more complicated. Deciding if you should take a card or not is not easy in many cases. I suppport any feature that makes the game more complicated and more intresting.
Would you support a feature that required you to solve a math problem correctly before initiating an assault? Not all complications to the game are desirable simply because they make the game more complicated, nor is it the case that giving people more options is always a good thing. There needs to be a better argument for this than simply that "it gives people more options." There are myriad ways to do that. We want to retain only the ones that truly add fun gameplay that is challenging in a non-trivial way, while retaining an element of fairness and preventing abuse.
IcePack wrote:So if you are playing a 1 min freestyle esc game, and can't get your whole turn (assualt, reinforcement, end turn) in because of lack of time...is it going to reward your slow play with a card as well regardless of whether you were assualting still, reinforcing, etc?
mc05025 wrote:Obviously I do not support features that has nothing to do with the game but I support any kind of complications that fits normally at the existing rules.
D4 Damager wrote:mc05025 wrote:Obviously I do not support features that has nothing to do with the game but I support any kind of complications that fits normally at the existing rules.
OK, but do you concede that this feature introduces no extra complexity given that you have to take a strategic decision either way? As ahunda mentioned:
No spoil on timeout means you have to decide if it is worth sacrificing your reinforcement phase to avoid a spoil.
Auto spoil on timeout means you have to decide if it is worth sacrificing your assault phase to avoid a spoil.
From this point of view, I can't see why you would defend either option except that it is what you are used to.
Dukasaur wrote:The point has been made before, and needs to be made here: consider what this would mean in real life. If you were playing the board game at the kitchen table, and someone finished his turn but forgot to take a card, would that stand? Or would you grab a card and hand it to him? I think the not-taking-spoil thing is an exploit. Granted it's an exploit the site has tolerated, but it's still not a genuine "strategy".
What's a set of spoils? You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region, just like reality!
Metsfanmax wrote:Seems like a pretty good idea to me. The cash at the end of turn idea is more consistent with real Risk gameplay, but there's no reason why this particular aspect of it has to match up, if there are no negatives to changing the reward time.
One potential problem is that the server has to remember that you earned a card for a long time, before actually granting it to you.
rdsrds2120 wrote:If I'm understanding this right, you basically want to award cards to those that run out of time as well, granted they've done what's required to get a card normally?
I like that idea. I hate lagging at the end of a speed game where I need a card. It really affects my gameplay.Metsfanmax wrote:One potential problem is that the server has to remember that you earned a card for a long time, before actually granting it to you.
I don't think that it would make a HUGE deal.
Right now I think that the system checks to see if you've successfully attacked/bombarded then awards a spoil upon ending your turn.
Instead of doing that, you can do the same thing and just have the check happen when you press 'Begin Turn' on the following. Holding one boolean value on the game is nothing compared to everything else that it stores.
Even if that's now hot it happens, it wouldn't be hard to store a boolean value of getting a card true or false, but I'm not a web developer. Up to turtle.
Chariot of Fire wrote:Personally I've always been fine with it and not seen it as a cheap tactic. If the oppo lets the clock run down so he doesn't card it means two things:
1. He's not earning any more cards for the foreseeable future
2. He cannot fort
I consider that punitive enough and any further advantage obviously rests with me. So I'll take that advantage and let the deliberate not-carding slide.
jetsetwilly wrote:I completely support eliminating the ability for a player to take his turn, capture or bombard a territory, then time out without being awards spoils. If a player times out on his turn, he will automatically be awarded any spoils he would have received if he ended his turn normally
You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region
mc05025 wrote:yea, when running out of time you do not end the turn. You do not pess end turn and there is no 'end turn' written in the log. The turn is incompleted and the game moves on. So it is correct right now
greenoaks wrote:mc05025 wrote:yea, when running out of time you do not end the turn. You do not pess end turn and there is no 'end turn' written in the log. The turn is incompleted and the game moves on. So it is correct right now
if my turn hasn't ended how come i can't continue to attack?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users