Even Escalating Games?

by **Jamie** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:33 am

How about an option that's the same as escalating, except that every one's 1st set is worth 4, and than everyone's 2nd set is worth six, and so on. I've tried this in a real game on several occasions, and it works very well.

by **demon7896** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:47 am

that would be really good as an OPTION

by **blackraptor58** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:44 am

this would make games more fair

by **Kaplowitz** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:50 am

been rejected

by **Herakilla** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:15 pm

to clarify everyone has their own set values and if you turn in a set only your next set is worth more, other players are not unless they turn in a set too.

ive played this in real life and it TOTALLY changes the face of escalating since the games are slower and you have a huge incentive to get cards

by **Risktaker17** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:21 pm

You can never have to many options I guess....

by **Sir. Ricco** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:31 pm

I was thinking of posting that idea, but never got around to it. I like it.

by **Mr Unbeatable** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:35 pm

Yeah i love the idea, i currently don't play escalating games because of the way it is but if there was an option to have this i would defo play it. Great idea.

by **Risktaker17** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:38 pm

I don't really like it because it will make games last longer and kills worth less

by **sfhbballnut** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:17 pm

can we come up ith a better name for it?

by **Jamie** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:39 pm

Risktaker17 wrote:I don't really like it because it will make games last longer and kills worth less

ok, so why do we have a flat rate option? It's even worse. The option I suggested are for people who find flat rate too boring, and escalating too extreme. I personally use flat rate because escalating is just too crazy. By round ten people are turning in for 40 armies.

by **Jamie** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:40 pm

sfhbballnut wrote:can we come up ith a better name for it?

What would you suggest?

by **insomniacdude** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:52 pm

Jamie wrote:
sfhbballnut wrote:can we come up ith a better name for it?

What would you suggest?

Individual Escalating?

by **BaldAdonis** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:04 pm

Risktaker17 wrote:I don't really like it because it will make games last longer and kills worth less

Or kills would be worth more, because grabbing those extra 3 cards would put you one set ahead of everyone else for the rest of the game.

by **hwhrhett** on Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:16 pm

BaldAdonis wrote:
Risktaker17 wrote:I don't really like it because it will make games last longer and kills worth less

Or kills would be worth more, because grabbing those extra 3 cards would put you one set ahead of everyone else for the rest of the game.

that could make a huge difference in 8 player games.

by **cicero** on Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:29 pm

insomniacdude wrote:
Jamie wrote:
sfhbballnut wrote:can we come up ith a better name for it?

What would you suggest?

Individual Escalating?

Parallel Escalating

by **flexmaster33** on Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:34 pm

It sounds like an interesting idea, but isn't it pretty similar to flat rate? I know it's not exactly the same, but not sure if it's different enough to make another option.

I'm not opposed to trying it though.

by **Blitzaholic** on Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:08 pm

i like it

Even Escalating Games?

Do you like the idea of even escalating games?

Even Escalating Games?

Who is online