Conquer Club

Concise description:

There can be an advantage to missing a turn when you have 5 cards in order to avoid being forced to cash in your cards.

Specifics:

• The following situation came up in a game with escalating card cashing when it was late enough in the game where taking out another player and getting their cards was a rediculously huge advantage. I positioned the board at the end of my turn such that player X couldn't take out the weakest player (player Y) even with cashing in his cards, which I knew he had to do since he had 5 cards (no other players were really in a position to take out Y). I was collecting so many more bonus armies than everyone else every turn that I would be able to take out the weakest player in 1 or 2 turns, depending on the dice. Player X wasn't collecting enough armies each turn to take him out before then so I liked my position.
  
  What happened was player X missed his turn so he didn't have to cash his cards until next turn. I rolled bad so had to wait one more turn to take out Y. Since other cards were cashed in between X's turns, player X had just enough extra armies to take out Y and then cashed again in the middle of his turn and ended up winning.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:
If you start a turn with 5 cards (so you have to cash out) and you miss your turn, then the computer cashes out the first available set you have and those armies get added with your other deferred armies. Bonus armies you receive for occupying a specific territory corresponding to one of the cards turned in are automatically placed in that respective territory, just like before.

One problem I see is this: If some yahoo decides to miss his turns because he wasn't bright enough not to take a territory when he only had four cards, then I may kill him to steal his five cards. But if the computer cashes for him - and since he missed the turn he doesn't pick up that third card - then I don't want to kill him, because killing someone with two cards doesn't allow me to cash mid-turn.

Missing turns with five cards in sequential games is a dumb idea. I know people do it, but it does more harm than good to that player for the most part.

I believe another strategy people use, similar to this, is to start the turn and do their deeds but not end the turn thus not getting a card. If anything is going to be addressed for abuse of stalling a cash-in it would most likely be that(I'm pretty sure that's still around at least).

angola wrote:Missing turns with five cards in sequential games is a dumb idea. I know people do it, but it does more harm than good to that player for the most part.

This.

Rarely, it will work to the turn-misser's advantage. The majority of the time, by that point in a game, sitting around with 5 cards (especially for 2 rounds in a row) is a sure-fire way to get yourself eliminated.

Player X only missed 1 turn. The advantage of missing a turn with 5 cards is that if enough other players cash in their cards after you miss your turn, but before you take your next turn, then you will be able to cash in your cards for more armies (and your opponents cash in for less armies). That increased difffernce in number of armies was just enough to take out the other player. If he didn't miss his turn then he would have been forced to cash in his cards for far fewer armies and others would have been able to cash in for more. This loophole obviously only works if you're in a strong enough position that no one will even bother to try to take you out before your next turn.

It's not very uncommon though. In high-ranked large fs esc games, you will see, around rounds 6-8, at least 1 or 2 people missing on purpose. I've even seen 5 out of 8 people miss.

If that's the case, has anyone thought of making the use of deferred armies a game option? Players could choose if they want to use the current rules or say that if a player misses a turn then all their future turns are automatically skipped (just like they were kicked out of the game).

So what happens to the players who legitimately miss a turn due to non-CC issues?

I am going through a similar problem now. A player legitimately missed a turn with 5 cards in an escalating game. Had he taken his turn, his cards would have been worth 8 armies. Now they are worth 25! Even though I am not accusing him of cheating - I checked his other games and he missed turns there too - he did gain an unfair advantage by missing his turn.

Suggestion: In an escalating game, if a player cashes in on the first play after a missed turn, the cash in is worth what it would have been worth had he cashed it in on the turn that he missed.

Resin8 wrote:Suggestion: In an escalating game, if a player cashes in on the first play after a missed turn, the cash in is worth what it would have been worth had he cashed it in on the turn that he missed.

Yes that's very smart... Make a rule that means that if you miss 1 turn than you also want to miss 2 turns. Yes that will certainly speed things along...

Resin8 wrote:I am going through a similar problem now. A player legitimately missed a turn with 5 cards in an escalating game. Had he taken his turn, his cards would have been worth 8 armies. Now they are worth 25! Even though I am not accusing him of cheating - I checked his other games and he missed turns there too - he did gain an unfair advantage by missing his turn.

Suggestion: In an escalating game, if a player cashes in on the first play after a missed turn, the cash in is worth what it would have been worth had he cashed it in on the turn that he missed.

There was a net increase of 17 troops for the player who missed his turn on the traded set. How many troops was he supposed to receive on his turn? Did he have any bonus armies coming? Take away a minimum of 3 (these troops are deferred)that he always receives the net increase is 14.

What about the player who missed a turn in round 3 or just deployed and ended turn without getting a card. Should they be punished also.

I think there is a suggest for escalating cards where it is based only on the set one player turns in. So all players first set is worth 4 then 6 and so on.

Now add the troops that the other players got between his turns at this stage of the game I don't think he got an advantage.

Evil Semp wrote:There was a net increase of 17 troops for the player who missed his turn on the traded set. How many troops was he supposed to receive on his turn? Did he have any bonus armies coming? Take away a minimum of 3 (these troops are deferred)that he always receives the net increase is 14.

What about the player who missed a turn in round 3 or just deployed and ended turn without getting a card. Should they be punished also.

I think there is a suggest for escalating cards where it is based only on the set one player turns in. So all players first set is worth 4 then 6 and so on.

Now add the troops that the other players got between his turns at this stage of the game I don't think he got an advantage.

Aside from deferred troops etc, had he cashed his cards as his turn required, they would have been worth 8. He missed his turn, then on his next turn his cards were worth 25. Net increase in card value of 17. When I saw he had 5 cards at the end of his previous turn, I conquered a territory bringing my card count to 5. I thought I was safe - that he would have to cash first. When I saw he missed his turn, I considered missing my turn too, but I didn't as that is against the rules. Had I done so, I most likely would have won the game.

There are times when not cashing in when you have 5 cards is an advantage. I stand by my claim that an advantage was obtained, and that it was a legitimate issue that caused him to miss.