Conquer Club

If someone gets a bad drop, you think the person with the good drop will ever agree to take on that drop? That is some really wishful thinking. It has to have a rematch set before the game starts, not afterwards.

The Neon Peon wrote:If someone gets a bad drop, you think the person with the good drop will ever agree to take on that drop? That is some really wishful thinking. It has to have a rematch set before the game starts, not afterwards.

very, very, very valid point... hadn't thought of that before. maybe an option for people that want to play best of 3 or whatever on the same map... interesting problem pointed out here...-0

I like the idea of being able to play 2-player games again imediately, with the same person and the previous drop exactly reversed. Thats good. Kind of like swapping courts during tennis.

Rocket.

I would be happy with a rematch button that set up all the same players, of course they would have to accept it like an invite, but that would make it easier. Same map, same players, new drops.

I agree with Rocketry, but I would take it a step further. I like the idea of creating simultaneously a pair of 1v1 or games with identical drops and, in sequential games, an identical selection of the first player (red or green in both games), but with the players swapped. That is, the game creator would play red in one game and green in the other. The person joining the game would fill in the opposite slots. These games would be paired on the Join a Game page, so that you joined both with one click. It would be a great way of stopping the whining about the luck of the drop, and would go a long way toward making 1v1 competition more about skill and less about luck. Of course, people would still whine about the dice, but that is inevitable, I'm afraid. And fog of war would be pointless, as you would see the initial drop from both sides at once. Foggy fanfolk would simply have to set up two games with the same settings as can be done now, but they can't know that each person will get the chance to go first.

In fact this could be done for games with two teams of any size. It reminds me of the concept of duplicate bridge, and I feel sure other games run tournaments in this way, as well.

It might be interesting to extend this further to games with more than two players or teams, but you need n! (n factorial) games to ring the changes, so it quickly becomes unwieldy: 3 players need 6 games (which would be out of reach for freemiums), 4 players need 24 games, 5 players need 120 games, 6 players need 720 games, 7 players need 5040 games, and 8 players need 40320 games! Most of these numbers would be impossible to start with the current limit on the number of waiting games, and rightly so.

I don't know how the server would initialize these paired games (let's call them instant matches) but I don't think it would be impossible, if the database could link the two games and recognize that only one drop should be generated and replicated in both games.