Trench Warfare

[SimplyObsessed]

we have round limits. so what's the point of a concede/forfeit button?

just start the game with whatever round limit you feel like and that's it.

Completely disagree, it's hard to tell how many rounds you will need in any given game as its dependent on dice, drop and strategy. And what about random where maps vary from Doodle Earth to Hive.. how is anyone supposed to estimate that? A forfeit button could be installed for a losing player to forfeit at a time where it's clear who is the winner is. Requirements for the forfeit button's use could be introduced, for example only after one player has twice as many troops as the other. What I'm seeing at the moment is players who are losing a Trench 1v1 game deadbeating, which is a waste of my time quite frankly not sure if I can leave my computer or not in case they come back. Even those who do play the full game I'm sat playing the additional rounds, waiting on the other player to take his turns for a good five minutes (classic) longer than I do for standard games when it's clear I've won which for me is ruining what is a great addition to the site.

you might have missed the fact that the Trench thing is not obligatory and in no way imposed on you. Why do you have to start a game on random map with Trench on? Trench might not be the best idea, but it's awesome on certain maps. Just stick to those maps when you wanna play Trench and you should be fine. When you want to play any particular map in which Trench doesn't fit, just keep it off. End of story!

As for the forfeit option, I'm pretty sure the hopeless players, who happen to be the majority on this site, would just abuse it to end a game as soon as possible, especially the freemium players who would like to finish their games earlier.

Just think how a forfeit can negatively affect a multi-players game when a strategy of a player can be ruined when one of the noobs, whose existence in the game is necessary for other players due to diplomacy or alliance, just decides to choose the easiest way to get rid of the game and quit it like suddenly.

I haven't missed the fact that Trench isn't obligatory, but I find it a fun way to play the game and think a forfeit offer to players that have no chance of winning could be a good addition to the site and be more enjoyable for the majority who don't wish to sit needlessly waiting for a game to end.

The 'hopeless players' you refer to wouldn't be able to abuse it if restrictions were put in place.
If it were up to me, I'd have these restrictions on a forfeit button
- Trench games only
- Speed games only
- All players must agree
- Only after 10 rounds
- Only if one player has twice the number of troops as any other.
- Person making the game must indicate 'Yes' or 'No' during creation whether to include a forfeit button.

What I have described above isn't open to abuse, and keeps everyone happy as the forfeit button isn't obligatory.. would stop the high number of deadbeaters I've observed in 1v1 Trench.

[pearljamrox2]

DAY 3 OF MY SNAPSHOTS NOT WORKING. IRRITATING!

[denominator]

we have round limits. so what's the point of a concede/forfeit button?

just start the game with whatever round limit you feel like and that's it.

Completely disagree, it's hard to tell how many rounds you will need in any given game as its dependent on dice, drop and strategy. And what about random where maps vary from Doodle Earth to Hive.. how is anyone supposed to estimate that? A forfeit button could be installed for a losing player to forfeit at a time where it's clear who is the winner is. Requirements for the forfeit button's use could be introduced, for example only after one player has twice as many troops as the other. What I'm seeing at the moment is players who are losing a Trench 1v1 game deadbeating, which is a waste of my time quite frankly not sure if I can leave my computer or not in case they come back. Even those who do play the full game I'm sat playing the additional rounds, waiting on the other player to take his turns for a good five minutes (classic) longer than I do for standard games when it's clear I've won which for me is ruining what is a great addition to the site.

you might have missed the fact that the Trench thing is not obligatory and in no way imposed on you. Why do you have to start a game on random map with Trench on? Trench might not be the best idea, but it's awesome on certain maps. Just stick to those maps when you wanna play Trench and you should be fine. When you want to play any particular map in which Trench doesn't fit, just keep it off. End of story!

As for the forfeit option, I'm pretty sure the hopeless players, who happen to be the majority on this site, would just abuse it to end a game as soon as possible, especially the freemium players who would like to finish their games earlier.

Just think how a forfeit can negatively affect a multi-players game when a strategy of a player can be ruined when one of the noobs, whose existence in the game is necessary for other players due to diplomacy or alliance, just decides to choose the easiest way to get rid of the game and quit it like suddenly.

I haven't missed the fact that Trench isn't obligatory, but I find it a fun way to play the game and think a forfeit offer to players that have no chance of winning could be a good addition to the site and be more enjoyable for the majority who don't wish to sit needlessly waiting for a game to end.

The 'hopeless players' you refer to wouldn't be able to abuse it if restrictions were put in place.
If it were up to me, I'd have these restrictions on a forfeit button
- Trench games only
- Speed games only
- All players must agree
- Only after 10 rounds
- Only if one player has twice the number of troops as any other.
- Person making the game must indicate 'Yes' or 'No' during creation whether to include a forfeit button.

What I have described above isn't open to abuse, and keeps everyone happy as the forfeit button isn't obligatory.. would stop the high number of deadbeaters I've observed in 1v1 Trench.

The trench gameplay option has been active for slightly over 24 hours now. I'm not sure where you're getting your observations from on deadbeaters, I can only assume speed games as it's literally impossible for anyone to have deadbeated a standard game already. Provide some game links if you're going to make allegations for that.

I've never been a fan of the forfeit button and I still don't think it's necessary even with the new game option. I assume that for a player to forfeit, the game must be sufficiently lopsided, in which case the winning player should be able to mop up within 3 rounds anyways.

The only place that I can understand the forfeit argument is with regards to freemium players and holding a spot - but in that case there are two issues: 1) the person has the option to pay for more spots and 2) if it goes for more than 3 rounds, it becomes a hostage situation that is already against the rules.

With regards to speed games, we are talking an extra ~15 minutes to mop up the end of the game. With proper, well thought out troop placement it should not take you more than 3 rounds to win the game once the balance has been tilted. Furthermore, if you are not willing to put in the time required to play a complete speed game, you shouldn't have joined that game in the first place. This applies to forfeits and deadbeats.

[TheQuietOne]

With regards to speed games, we are talking an extra ~15 minutes to mop up the end of the game. With proper, well thought out troop placement it should not take you more than 3 rounds to win the game once the balance has been tilted. Furthermore, if you are not willing to put in the time required to play a complete speed game, you shouldn't have joined that game in the first place. This applies to forfeits and deadbeats.

My first Trench win was on Feudal - the balance was tilted as soon as I had 4 kingdoms and 2 villages vs 2 kingdoms and 1 village. However, due to the layout of the board, it still took 10+ turns to "mop up". Some boards are great to play, but hard to bear once the result isn't in doubt anymore.

[flexmaster33]

fantastic update...a new style of play that brings a whole new experience to CC. Well done.

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

Wow, never thought I'd see this update actually make it in. I have to say Lack that you officially rock I look forward to playing foggy trench games when I get back to the site.

Thanks for an awesome update lack

[DiM]

we have round limits. so what's the point of a concede/forfeit button?

just start the game with whatever round limit you feel like and that's it.

Completely disagree, it's hard to tell how many rounds you will need in any given game as its dependent on dice, drop and strategy. And what about random where maps vary from Doodle Earth to Hive.. how is anyone supposed to estimate that? A forfeit button could be installed for a losing player to forfeit at a time where it's clear who is the winner is. Requirements for the forfeit button's use could be introduced, for example only after one player has twice as many troops as the other. What I'm seeing at the moment is players who are losing a Trench 1v1 game deadbeating, which is a waste of my time quite frankly not sure if I can leave my computer or not in case they come back. Even those who do play the full game I'm sat playing the additional rounds, waiting on the other player to take his turns for a good five minutes (classic) longer than I do for standard games when it's clear I've won which for me is ruining what is a great addition to the site.

nobody is forcing you to play a game with this setting. if you want to do it, then you should be prepared for a long game.

also who decides when somebody is a clear winner? twice as much troops? that's bull. i've come back and won games where i had far less troops than that. forfeit should never be introduced.

[General Bax]

guys, i humbly remind you that a forfeit option already exists, its just means more waiting: three rounds of doing nothing and your opponents wins the game.

my point regarding the forfeit option issue was trench warfare games tend to prolong and last 5, 6, and even 10 round after both players have no interest in them any more because the inevitable winner is known. in many quick and small maps waiting for the first out station of the round limit option (20 rounds) is not an attractive option in such situation.

there pros and cons to the issue, and i wouldn't suggest it as a CC -ll-game-variety-wide option before it's tested a avoid abuse (for instance - it's definately abusable in a multi player assassin game, by any to coordinated rouge players), but trench warfare just calls for it.

how about it's intorduced just in trench games for testing?

[Leehar]

I think the easiest solution they'd make is to give a 10 round limits option, but implementing a whole new surrender functions seems excessive, because as Andy said, it's at least better round limits came out before this update

[SimplyObsessed]

guys, i humbly remind you that a forfeit option already exists, its just means more waiting: three rounds of doing nothing and your opponents wins the game.

my point regarding the forfeit option issue was trench warfare games tend to prolong and last 5, 6, and even 10 round after both players have no interest in them any more because the inevitable winner is known. in many quick and small maps waiting for the first out station of the round limit option (20 rounds) is not an attractive option in such situation.

there pros and cons to the issue, and i wouldn't suggest it as a CC -ll-game-variety-wide option before it's tested a avoid abuse (for instance - it's definately abusable in a multi player assassin game, by any to coordinated rouge players), but trench warfare just calls for it.

how about it's intorduced just in trench games for testing?

That can be up to 15 minutes of waiting, where your opponent is tied to the computer in case you come back.

[OliverFA]

A better alternative to the forfeit option is to introduce a "Domination Victory" option. With this option, when a player owns x% of regions and x% of the troops, that player would be declared winner.

[chapcrap]

A better alternative to the forfeit option is to introduce a "Domination Victory" option. With this option, when a player owns 75% of regions and 75% of the troops, that player would be declared winner.

OliverFA swoops in for the win!!

DAY 3 OF MY SNAPSHOTS NOT WORKING. IRRITATING!

Pull your head out and download the new version of BOB, goober. viewtopic.php?f=527&t=161049

[bad-brains]

Like it!

But.. makes it really lonely when a player bails a 2 player game.

Normally I could take nearly everything in those games in.. 2 moves. But not in trench.

Maybe change the rules for those games? Like one missed turn.. or two.. before kicking a player?

Then again, I've only played trench once. So wait and see

[WorldCup4James]

i suggest clearly indicating a game has Trench by having a bold, red font. This is because the Trench setting offers such a massive change in strategy and game dynamics, incomparable to any of the other settings, and this certainly will limit the number of instances in which players accidentally join a Trench game.

It also will serve as a help for players jumping from game to game to game taking turns so that they can easily distinguish between which games are Trench and non-trench. The red color would be easily distinguishable in the peripheral vision and therefore make it less likely a player will accidentally apply an incorrect strategy.

[chapcrap]

I disagree with making Trench stand out. Did CC make Freestyle stand out? No. Why do it for trench?

[SimplyObsessed]

I wouldn't like it red either, not easy on the eye. People should just be careful when joining games.

[EagleofGreenErth]

How about an option to disable the trench effect once its clear that a player has lost? Require both sides to vote/agree for it to be disabled... I dont know how to prevent abuse of this for medal grabbing tho (ex- immediately vote to disable)

[Mr_Adams]

This sounds disgusting... def a no cards game

[Great-Ollie]

Great update! Thanks for something new CC!

[eddie2]

if you make silver in the time period will it give you auto entry

[AndyDufresne]

if you make silver in the time period will it give you auto entry

Unfortunately not, but you can be among the first to get silver or gold...and have some bragging rights still!

Looks like 27 players, as of this post time, have earned a spot in the Conquer Cup III lottery!

Best of luck, hopefully more will continue to earn the medal by May 1st!


--Andy

[EagleofGreenErth]

if you make silver in the time period will it give you auto entry

Unfortunately not, but you can be among the first to get silver or gold...and have some bragging rights still!

Looks like 27 players, as of this post time, have earned a spot in the Conquer Cup III lottery!

Best of luck, hopefully more will continue to earn the medal by May 1st!


--Andy

I'm one of those but I already preregistered. :/

[AndyDufresne]

If the lottery winner is already pre-registered, we can probably bump your registration to Conquer Cup IV I assume. We'll cross that bridge if we need to on May 1st!


--Andy

[eddie2]

just to double check as lost the post will the players who have played this setting for the past 2 years be getting unique defeats against all we have before the issue of this option like with other medals.

[Pirlo]

just to double check as lost the post will the players who have played this setting for the past 2 years be getting unique defeats against all we have before the issue of this option like with other medals.

I think some mod (maybe Gilligan) said no because it's so hard to check and find those people.

Q: how could anyone play this setting for two years when it came up a week ago only anyway?