Conquer Club

This will hide everything.
1. You will not be able to see whose turn it is (unless it is yours)
2. The amount of spoils the other players have will be x?
3. The game log will appear
sailorseal: ?
sailorseal: ?
It will not say if they assaulted, cashed, reinforced, just a ?

sailorseal wrote:This will hide everything. You will not be able to see whose turn it is (unless it is yours), the shape and name off non-bordering territories, the amount of spoils the other players have, the game log will appear
sailorseal: ?
sailorseal: ?
No hints at all

Having "the shape and name of non-bordering territories being hidden" would be thoroughly useless, as someone would only have to bring up another copy of the map to know what was where.

The rest of the suggestion I like, however.

Woodruff wrote:

sailorseal wrote:This will hide everything. You will not be able to see whose turn it is (unless it is yours), the shape and name off non-bordering territories, the amount of spoils the other players have, the game log will appear
sailorseal: ?
sailorseal: ?
No hints at all

Having "the shape and name of non-bordering territories being hidden" would be thoroughly useless, as someone would only have to bring up another copy of the map to know what was where.

The rest of the suggestion I like, however.

Agreed and removing

Nice touch!

There would be an advantage for thoe that see the map earliest in the game. e.g. if we played 1 v 1 and I took your only tet in a region, you'd have no info as to whether there were any neutrals in that region.

Is there a way around this?

E.G.

GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Nice touch!

There would be an advantage for thoe that see the map earliest in the game. e.g. if we played 1 v 1 and I took your only tet in a region, you'd have no info as to whether there were any neutrals in that region.

Is there a way around this?

E.G.

Nope that is why I suggested it, you are blind in the dark

sailorseal wrote:

GenuineEarlGrey wrote:Nice touch!

There would be an advantage for thoe that see the map earliest in the game. e.g. if we played 1 v 1 and I took your only tet in a region, you'd have no info as to whether there were any neutrals in that region.

Is there a way around this?

E.G.

Nope that is why I suggested it, you are blind in the dark

I really like playing fog. This pea soup idea is a nice extension its just that that early look at the map makes such a difference.

I wonder if it could be programmed so you ONLY know which tets you have lost.

No negative feedback?

sailorseal wrote:No negative feedback?

Now didn't you know that nowadays there only constructive criticism. Which is just a polite was of saying negative feedback but without any spite.

GenuineEarlGrey wrote:I really like playing fog. This pea soup idea is a nice extension its just that that early look at the map makes such a difference.

I wonder if it could be programmed so you ONLY know which tets you have lost.

....or some other tweak to the game to reduce the massive* advantage in joining a game last or going first.

E.G.
*O.K. massive might be an exaggeration, but everyone** else does it.

**O.K. everyone might be an exaggeration, but most*** people know what I mean.

***O.K. most might be an exaggeration.

been suggested and shot down. search my name under suggs and buggs and you'll see my own interp. I see now why it is useful, however, to have the info given. play feudal and you'll see what I mean. I'm still pulling for "FoP" or "fog of player" though, because I've noticed to much targeting of higher ranks as I climb...

sailorseal wrote:No negative feedback?

it sucks... how is that? i have NO idea, i don't play fog games, just trying to help you out with your request... and only 2 people answered, it is hardly a CC Majority!! ha!!! good luck, and you are welcome for the negative feedback...-0

I don't like the idea. That's not to say it shouldn't be implemented. Just that I would never play with it, and I would not join any tournaments where it was even an option.

If you have no information about the game, what would you be expected to base your strategy on?

Timminz wrote:If you have no information about the game, what would you be expected to base your strategy on?

If you were in a war with limited communication, no spies then the Super Fog idea would be like walking in the dark. Super fog is CC on the edge!

What is the minimum info you'd want to ensure there was strategey involved in a super-fog game?

Part of the skill in this game is knowing that you can take all your opponents out in one turn. So I'd like to know

• how many regions/tets they have.
• Whether they hold any bonus regions.
• Whether they gain a spoil.

I can live without knowing whether they play their spoils as I can keep track of this on screen.

E.G.

Timminz wrote:I don't like the idea. That's not to say it shouldn't be implemented. Just that I would never play with it, and I would not join any tournaments where it was even an option.

If you have no information about the game, what would you be expected to base your strategy on?

That is exactly it, you have nothing, a whole new strategy would be created

owenshooter wrote:

sailorseal wrote:No negative feedback?

it sucks... how is that? i have NO idea, i don't play fog games, just trying to help you out with your request... and only 2 people answered, it is hardly a CC Majority!! ha!!! good luck, and you are welcome for the negative feedback...-0

Thanks owen

sailorseal wrote:

Timminz wrote:I don't like the idea. That's not to say it shouldn't be implemented. Just that I would never play with it, and I would not join any tournaments where it was even an option.

If you have no information about the game, what would you be expected to base your strategy on?

That is exactly it, you have nothing, a whole new strategy would be created

I think you're confusing the words "lack of", with the words "whole new".

Timminz wrote:I think you're confusing the words "lack of [strategy]", with the words "whole new [strategy]".

So what would you need to know to take Super fog from "lack of" to "whole new"?

GenuineEarlGrey wrote:What is the minimum info you'd want to ensure there was strategey involved in a super-fog game?

Timminz wrote:

sailorseal wrote:

Timminz wrote:I don't like the idea. That's not to say it shouldn't be implemented. Just that I would never play with it, and I would not join any tournaments where it was even an option.

If you have no information about the game, what would you be expected to base your strategy on?

That is exactly it, you have nothing, a whole new strategy would be created

I think you're confusing the words "lack of", with the words "whole new".

You've never played a strategic computer game that started out where you could only see your units and their immediate surroundings? I play them all the time and find them the most enjoyable, actually.

Not to mention playing Diplomacy that way...a total blast, as information and misinformation now becomes paramount.

sailorseal wrote:No negative feedback?

Well I don't really like it, way to restrictive IMO (not that I think fog as it works today is much better though). I think that the list of players (and thus the turn order) would have to stay for consistency and I also think that knowing who has/hasn't taken their turn yet is a vital part of freestyle strategy.

GenuineEarlGrey wrote:I wonder if it could be programmed so you ONLY know which tets you have lost.

I have been thinking about a fog that generates the game log as it happens so to speak (if it's programmable). That would show you your territ and from where it got taken over but not any subsequent attacks/reinforcements made there (unless you have another adjacent territ that is). Haven't given it much thought lately though, might have a look sometime soon.

Thezzaruz wrote:

sailorseal wrote:No negative feedback?

Well I don't really like it, way to restrictive IMO (not that I think fog as it works today is much better though). I think that the list of players (and thus the turn order) would have to stay for consistency and I also think that knowing who has/hasn't taken their turn yet is a vital part of freestyle strategy.

This would not replace fog. Also the change of strategy is the reason for this suggestion

sailorseal wrote:This would not replace fog.

I understand that.

sailorseal wrote:Also the change of strategy is the reason for this suggestion

I kind of have the same objection as Timminz about lack of info leading to lack of strategy, for freestyle especially I think that not even knowing who has/hasn't taken their turn yet will just be too much.

I think that you may have a good idea in the works here.

My only objection is that you haven't explained it in very much detail yet; your description is pretty vague.

Personally, I almost always play fog games because I know how to deduce things relating to strategy that others cannot deduce, which gives me an advantage. I don't need to see it with my eyes -- I use my brain to know it's there.

I'm all for variations on fog, especially ones that hide more information from my opponents, but until you provide full details about exactly what information will and will not be available, I can't say for sure if I'd want to play this new version or not. I'm thinking that if it hides more information than the present fog setting, then I'd probably switch over to it exclusively, but please see the confusion in this thread as to whether or not your new version would allow for strategy or not. That confusion reveals a lack of detail in your description. Until you lay all your cards (or spoils, if you will) on the table, I'm afraid that this thread won't go very far beyond bickering over untold details.

Unfortunately, none of your readers can really be sure exactly what it is that you're proposing.

I'm prepared to support this idea, but not until I know a whole hell of a lot more about the specific details.

Added detail

Yes, that explains a lot more.

Now that you have added detail, my question is: Without knowing basically anything about any of your opponents, on what exactly would you base your strategy?

You were asked this before, and you basically said that it would be a "new strategy." While this is true, it does not really answer the question. We know that it would be a new strategy, but the new strategy would be based on exactly what information?

You have explained what information will not be available, and I appreciate that. Please explain now exactly what information will be available about my opponents in this new fog version.

If there's truly no information available on my opponents, then it doesn't seem possible to employ any type of strategy.

If there is to be some information on my opponents, you have not yet explained what it is.

I'm just trying to picture myself playing a game with this version, and since my main focus is strategy and the information on which it's based, my mind keeps grasping for some kind of opponent info, but I'm not exactly sure what, if any, will be available to me on this version.

You can see how active they are if they are doing a lot, you can't see what they are doing but you can know how much also you can see territories like in regular fog

For me personally, that doesn't seem like enough information on which to base a real strategy.

This would reduce the game to a scenario of whoever gets the best dice rolls will win.

I prefer to use my intelligence and skills to overcome the dice rolls I get, so I probably wouldn't ever use this setting, but I do think that, generally speaking, the more settings available on the site, the better.

I like the idea of a fog that carries over to the game log. It would make playing maps like feudal war, city mogul and AOR a lot more blind since the log is what most people utilize to decide when to attack.