Flat Rate cashes

[jrh_cardinal]

Okay, I'm in a team game and our team had a bit of a disagreement. I want to see what the community as a whole thinks. This occurred in a quads game, but the same concept holds true for any type of game pretty much, except 1v1.

So you have 3-4 cards (in flat rate) and you have a rainbow. You don't need to save any teammates, you can't eliminate an opponent, you can't take a bonus, and you don't need to fort a bonus. Do you cash? The answer is obvious if it would help you do any of the 4 things above, but if you can't accomplish anything game-changing in that turn, do you cash or hold till you get 5 cards or (even better) a chance at an important move?

[eddie2]

game no depends on the situation if they have a chance to cash and cause damage then cash to fort yourself or if a big map did he get troup bonus down thats also a good reason.

[iamkoolerthanu]

I would wait to cash. If you cashing would save a team-mate, I would cash. If it would give you or a team-mate a bonus, I would cash. If it would prevent the other team from breaking a bonus, gaining a bonus, or holding a strategic location, I would cash. In the situation you are describing, I would opt to hold my cards until a situation arose where I could use the troops more efficiently, especially in a team game.
Then again, cashing right away wouldnt be considered a 'bad' play, it just wouldnt be the most strategic in my eyes.

[SirSebstar]

you taking countries is an objective, cashing in helps you do that. if your team mates want you to cash, you do so.
timing however can be critical, so yes there are sometimes good reasons to wait, in absense of those alsways cash flat rate rainbows when you get em

[eddie2]

also forgot to add were any of the cards highlighted for the 2 bonus troups because i have had that in escalating spoils my team mate was annoyed that i cashed. i was on 4 cards would of been secound to cash for 6 troups but had 3 highlighted so got my cash worth 10 cards. 4 extra troups.

[ljex]

Okay, I'm in a team game and our team had a bit of a disagreement. I want to see what the community as a whole thinks. This occurred in a quads game, but the same concept holds true for any type of game pretty much, except 1v1.

So you have 3-4 cards (in flat rate) and you have a rainbow. You don't need to save any teammates, you can't eliminate an opponent, you can't take a bonus, and you don't need to fort a bonus. Do you cash? The answer is obvious if it would help you do any of the 4 things above, but if you can't accomplish anything game-changing in that turn, do you cash or hold till you get 5 cards or (even better) a chance at an important move?

Whenever you have a mixed set in a flat rage game cash as especially in quads a lot can change by your next turn. Look at it this way, there is no benefit to not cashing and there is a potential loss to not cashing. It increases the incentive for the opposing team to kill you, where if you cash you have both more troops and less cards. Also there is never a time where extra troops wouldn't be of some benefit to your team however small that benefit is.

[Commander62890]

I always cash, no exceptions, and so do my teammates.

You guys forgot about getting all enemies below 12 terts.

IMO it is a rare game in which all enemies are below 12 terts, no bonuses are available to take/defend, AND eliminations are not a factor for either side. If, for some reason, this oddity occurs, I'll just rack up my tert count to above 12. If I can't do that... wow, then I guess I should wait. It don't think it's ever happened, though.

Usually, you've got one of the 3 aformentioned things to do: Get them below 12, take/defend a bonus, and/or Elim someone/help your ally not get eliminated.

I don't even think about whether or not I should cash anymore. I just do. Usually, in a small game, the intent is elimination of an enemy, while in a large game, the intent will be bonuses/tert count.



Then again, I don't play much Flat Rate: 90 from 134(67%) for +232 playing team games. I would like to hear what the good, experienced team flat rate players have to say (and yes, it does involve more luck than no spoils and escalating, which is why I don't play it much).

[lord voldemort]

simply if everything is accomplished out of a team game ie
you cant drop the other team down to the minimum deploy.
you cant kill them though
and you dont need the extra troops to help team mates from dying or to protecxt bonus etc
then you dont cash.

Statiscally you are will get more troops in the long run building to 5 cards each time. As then you are guaranted a set every 3 turns.
I think that made sense...

[lord voldemort]

oh found some more advice.....dont play flat rate

[nippersean]

I usually cash at the first opportunity, to get the geezers in the action, here you may be best to wait as you are in a way giving the opponents information that you don't need to give them.

Are you absolutely positive there is no advantage to cashing - setting up a kill, avoiding the opposing team lining you up before you cash? Worth a double check.

*Edit* Just read Commander's - I've never played in a game where you couldn't make anything out of the cash either. Are you doubly sure the question relates to a real game?

[natty dread]

Flat rate sucks stinky balls. Ever try playing it on a small map? Whoever gets the first mixed set is the winner...

In fact I can't even think of a map/setting that would be good with flat rate. Team games are best with no spoils, although 2v2 (and trips/quads I suppose) also work with esc...

[FlyingElf]

I would say no, generally I would not cash, unless I felt that I was in any danger of possibly being eliminated and having my cards go to my opponents.

[benga]

always cash mix set

[jrh_cardinal]

Okay, I've read all of your guys thoughts, and I will now voice mine (if you haven't made the connection I'm the one that started the thread). This was in a quads game on British Isles (in the ESS: British Isles Tourney, which is why I didn't know my teammates and why it was on weird settings), and I held West Country very solidly. My team was working from the South, they were attempting to come from the north, but nobody had a bonus besides me. Everybody had well under 12 regions, and their two weak players were well protected by their stronger players. A player on my team got a 3 card rainbow and played it right away, I started to argue then realized I probably shouldn't argue in game with a teammate , so came here instead.

I feel that he played it and was only able to attack on one side (up the main British Island), and didn't really accomplish much except push them back a couple of terts. We, as a team, were winning, more troops and obviously more bonuses as only one was held in the game. Since our bonus was safe, and they wouldn't have been able to eliminate any of us in one turn, I feel it would have been better to wait. Each turn, we would be getting farther and farther ahead, and it would have been up to them more and more to make the next move, to basically suicide. After they suicide, they are more spread out and most likely have fewer troops, which makes it easier for one of us to play a set and rip through them, hopefully eliminate somebody.

There are obviously very good players that disagree with me, so I'm not saying I'm 100% right, but I personally saw no reason to play the set right away rather than wait.

[SirSebstar]

may i propose another suggestion? that player should have placed his troops on you. you were the big fish. with +10 you can only get bigger.. playing on himself was indeed counter productive

[jrh_cardinal]

may i propose another suggestion? that player should have placed his troops on you. you were the big fish. with +10 you can only get bigger.. playing on himself was indeed counter productive

that would have been a good play, I agree

[Commander62890]

their two weak players were well protected by their stronger players.

Meaning they had to attack their allies to get more cards? Sounds like you guys had this game in hand

I feel that he played it and was only able to attack on one side (up the main British Island), and didn't really accomplish much except push them back a couple of terts. We, as a team, were winning, more troops and obviously more bonuses as only one was held in the game. Since our bonus was safe, and they wouldn't have been able to eliminate any of us in one turn, I feel it would have been better to wait. Each turn, we would be getting farther and farther ahead, and it would have been up to them more and more to make the next move, to basically suicide. After they suicide, they are more spread out and most likely have fewer troops, which makes it easier for one of us to play a set and rip through them, hopefully eliminate somebody.

If they can't eliminate any of you with their cards, and their sets would be "suicides," doesn't that mean you've basically already won? By cashing, you only push your advantage and make it even harder for them to eliminate any of you.

Why do you think that attacking them AFTER they cash is better than attacking them BEFORE they cash? If eliminations really are no issue (hard to believe with flat rate on a smallish map, but okay), then it really doesn't matter whether you hit them now or later. I like to hit first; just my personal tactic.

Not sure I agree with the whole philosophy of implying that an opposing team is "suiciding," unless they are crashing their 3s into your 3s, trying every single 2v1s they have, etc. What do you mean by "suiciding?" Even if they are hitting your 1s with their set, isn't that what you'll be doing 1 turn later? In that case, it really makes no difference when you cash.

Perhaps there is no right answer in this situation; maybe it would turn out the same whether he cashed it or not. Personally, like I said, I have never seen this situation; Therefore, I like to get those armies on the table ASAP to protect my allies or go after the opposition, which I can do in some way or another, every time.

I don't really have much more to say, as it is hard to imagine this situation... there are just so many different things that come into play that I would really have to see it for myself to decide what to do.

[MichelSableheart]

My experience with Flat Rate mainly comes from Free for all's. I don't know how applicable this is to 1 vs 1 or teams.

Personally, unless I have a significant reason to cash (grabbing a bonus region, eliminating a player, avoiding elimination), I won't cash until I have 5 spoils. The reasoning for this is that by waiting, I'll have more information available when I do cash, and are therefore able to use my troops to better effect. It also means that after cashing and taking a territory, I'll have 3 spoils, and my opponents will be forced to calculate in the possibility of me having a mixed set.

[Commander62890]

My experience with Flat Rate mainly comes from Free for all's. I don't know how applicable this is to 1 vs 1 or teams.

Personally, unless I have a significant reason to cash (grabbing a bonus region, eliminating a player, avoiding elimination), I won't cash until I have 5 spoils. The reasoning for this is that by waiting, I'll have more information available when I do cash, and are therefore able to use my troops to better effect. It also means that after cashing and taking a territory, I'll have 3 spoils, and my opponents will be forced to calculate in the possibility of me having a mixed set.

It is not applicable to team games, which is what this thread is about.

[ljex]

My experience with Flat Rate mainly comes from Free for all's. I don't know how applicable this is to 1 vs 1 or teams.

Personally, unless I have a significant reason to cash (grabbing a bonus region, eliminating a player, avoiding elimination), I won't cash until I have 5 spoils. The reasoning for this is that by waiting, I'll have more information available when I do cash, and are therefore able to use my troops to better effect. It also means that after cashing and taking a territory, I'll have 3 spoils, and my opponents will be forced to calculate in the possibility of me having a mixed set.

I agree with you, holding is sometimes good for 3+ player flat rate no teams as sometimes you can work it out that you will elim someone for a mid cash when you have 4 cards. This works especially well for small maps however it is completely different with team games. If i have a mixed set its is automatically cashed and even other sets will be cashed most of the time.

[squishyg]

i'm with benga, i always cash a rainbow set right away. couldn't you have helped knock an opponent down a little for a teammate to finish off?