Page 1 of 1

A new way of winning [rejected]

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:01 am
by jakejake
perhaps a new way of winning could be: owning 66% of the map


some problems could be:

that some maps wouldnt be fair/good with this idea...
starting positions could give a very unfair advantage...
theres probably many more but if people give feedback that would be good :D

this is probably a crap idea and someone may have suggested it before, but i forgot to look throught - sorry!!

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:09 am
by DiM
1. use the form
2. crap idea.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:52 am
by yeti_c
DiM wrote:1. use the form
2. crap idea.


Spot on as ever DiM...

Of course you could've also pointed out - that you could make a map to do this already...

C.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:00 pm
by Plutoman
DiM wrote:1. use the form
2. crap idea.


Gotta agree with that.

In a game with flat rate cards, and a decent drop, first person with a mixed set could go crazy and take the territories needed.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:06 pm
by wcaclimbing
doodle earth:
you would only have to kill 12 countries :roll:


AoR Might, Magic, and Feudal Wars:
those maps are huge.... that is a ton of neutrals to kill.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:35 pm
by jakejake
thats why i said it would only work on some maps....i knew it was a shit idea but i just wanted some other points of view!! :lol:

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:00 pm
by jakejake
thinking about it now...>> its such a shit idea!! with hindsight - its just an easier way of winning :roll:

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:20 pm
by TaCktiX
You could advocate more objective maps that had that as the objective, but making that a generic victory option is just stupid, as you have agreed.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:21 pm
by Herakilla
would have to restricted to maps geared toward it. for example like you said many things would make it unfair but what about escalating games? ive seen people come back from having nothing to winning

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:39 pm
by jakejake
i think we can rule this 1 out!! ah well - worth a try...lol :lol:

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 3:19 pm
by Coleman
I'd support this if the win condition was 2/3 of all the owned territories. Then neutrals owning stuff wouldn't matter.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 3:28 pm
by Risktaker17
I would say it has to be at least 75% of terrs

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 3:30 pm
by cicero
Maybe just a 1/4 ?
So, in a 4 player game, if you went first you'd win ?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 3:35 pm
by Twill
I'm going to reject this one.

It can be done on a map by map basis with objectives but would just be a lottery on other maps (Like doodle earth) where the first person to go could pretty easily win.

Thanks for the suggestion - but rejected :)

Twill