Conquer Club

[Q&A]

What happens when the Round limit is 20 rounds, and the game reaches end 20 rounds. How is it calculated who wins? Is the the number of troops? Or number of territories ??

[/Q&A]

Round Limit

With round limits, the game will automatically finish at the end of the specified round. The winner will be the surviving player with the most troops. If there is a tie, it will be broken based on the most regions. If there is still a tie, the winner is selected based on join order. When playing a round limited game with teams, the winning team will be based on highest individual troop count, not teamwide troup count. This option is great for avoiding stalemates and can add some spice to the game as the deadline approaches!

Round Limit

With round limits, the game will automatically finish at the end of the specified round. The winner will be the surviving player with the most troops. If there is a tie, it will be broken based on the most regions. If there is still a tie, the winner is selected based on join order. When playing a round limited game with teams, the winning team will be based on highest individual troop count, not team wide troop count. This option is great for avoiding stalemates and can add some spice to the game as the deadline approaches!

GeneralRisk wrote:Round Limit

When playing a round limited game with teams, the winning team will be based on highest individual troop count, not teamwide troup count.

Why is this the case? It would seems logical to award the win to the team which has the most troops, since that team was obviously the best team.

Forza AZ wrote:

GeneralRisk wrote:Round Limit

When playing a round limited game with teams, the winning team will be based on highest individual troop count, not teamwide troup count.

Why is this the case? It would seems logical to award the win to the team which has the most troops, since that team was obviously the best team.

Now that is a very good question!!

Forza AZ wrote:

GeneralRisk wrote:Round Limit

When playing a round limited game with teams, the winning team will be based on highest individual troop count, not teamwide troup count.

Why is this the case? It would seems logical to award the win to the team which has the most troops, since that team was obviously the best team.

Because..........CC wants to add some spice to the game as the deadline approaches!

thanks!!

Hmm that does seem silly that it is decided by one players individual troop count as opposed to team vs. team troop count. Team vs. team makes more sense since it is a TEAM game.

Jippd wrote:Hmm that does seem silly that it is decided by one players individual troop count as opposed to team vs. team troop count. Team vs. team makes more sense since it is a TEAM game.

Actually it is not really silly but rather logical when you consider the fact that in team games one of the players often ends up being the engine of the team while the other members of the team prop him up or drop troops to him.

That player may change with the different stages of the game but in order to get the job done right, players have to drop to that one player who is in the best possible position to get the job done. If play is done like this then they are playing as a team. When everyone is dropping to themselves then they are not playing as a team but as four individuals.

So then the best team is the one where one of the players is receiving troops from the others. So it would be logical to only count the one player in both teams with the highest troop count in order to determine which is the best team.

Viceroy63 wrote:

Jippd wrote:Hmm that does seem silly that it is decided by one players individual troop count as opposed to team vs. team troop count. Team vs. team makes more sense since it is a TEAM game.

Actually it is not really silly but rather logical when you consider the fact that in team games one of the players often ends up being the engine of the team while the other members of the team prop him up or drop troops to him.

That player may change with the different stages of the game but in order to get the job done right, players have to drop to that one player who is in the best possible position to get the job done. If play is done like this then they are playing as a team. When everyone is dropping to themselves then they are not playing as a team but as four individuals.

So then the best team is the one where one of the players is receiving troops from the others. So it would be logical to only count the one player in both teams with the highest troop count in order to determine which is the best team.

Do you feel that 6 completed team games makes you an expert on team strategy? I have a lot more than 6 completed and don't consider myself an expert.

I agree that on some maps it is beneficial to boost up one player. On other maps it is not and everybody needs to do attacking. Especially if it is a spoils game then dropping one player doesn't work.

So that is why I say that it seems silly.

If I lost to a team that had 25, 4, 4, 4 troops and my team had 24, 24, 24, 24 troops. I would consider it unfair that the other team won because their lead player had one more troop than our lead player, when we had 59 more troops than their team combined.

I never said anything about being an expert. I am simply trying to explain the logic behind team scoring in round limit games.

Also it occurs to me that if any one of the 24, 24, 24, 24, had just pushed over all of his troops to any other player in the final round, then the 24's would not have lost. That would have been team play in action. The fact that it did not occur to anyone to do so means that they were all playing for themselves and not for the team.

So the best team was the one with the 25 troops regardless of how many troops the rest had.

As to my games; I don't even have one hundred games completed yet. So I guess that I am not an expert yet.

...But I am learning!

I'm sure not every player is aware of this (illogical) rule, so most players in team games would not deliberately load up 1 partner in the final round(s) when round limit is approaching.
And certainly in Fog games where you can't see the exact troop count, why would you risk losing bonusses by dropping all on 1 player just to give 1 partner the highest troop count.

I still think it should be total troop count for all players, since the team that collected most troops is clearly the best team in that game.

For example when in a Quads game 1 team has taken out 3 of the 4 players of the other team (for that you should not always drop on the same player) and the 1 remaining player just has 1 troop more then the "leading" player of the other team, it totally doesn't make sence to award the win to the 1 player.

mindbogling. i never realized this..wow

I never thought about this before either. And I'm sorry Viceroy, that explanation doesn't do much to make a case for this being the way things are. A TEAM strategy for any given map, settings and situation will be different. Sometimes it involves deploying almost everything on one player. More often, it involves a MUCH more equal distribution of troops. I'd be very surprised, if after you've played 100 team games with good partners, you still feel that this is the best way of doing things.

agentcom wrote:I never thought about this before either. And I'm sorry Viceroy, that explanation doesn't do much to make a case for this being the way things are. A TEAM strategy for any given map, settings and situation will be different. Sometimes it involves deploying almost everything on one player. More often, it involves a MUCH more equal distribution of troops. I'd be very surprised, if after you've played 100 team games with good partners, you still feel that this is the best way of doing things.

I may not have played too many team games but I am pretty sure that the team that does the most damage to the other team in the first few rounds is the team that continues to do the most amount of damage and goes on to win. In most cases including spoils settings. That being said then, the team that does the most amount of damage to the other team is that team that passes it's troops or reinforces the next color up on the team. For example Red plays and forts to Green. Green then uses those troops to attack the enemy but forts the remainder to Blue. On Blues Turn he does the same until eventually Yellow forts back to Red. Each color on the team benefiting from the troops reinforced to them by the previous color. This is how the maximum amount of damage is inflicted onto the other team right from the start and throughout the game. If I am not mistaken?

[Note]
The logic for this is simple. If you assault with 3 dice then you have better odds then when you attack with just one die. If your team mate reinforces to you 2 troops then those are 2 extra troops to maintain the maximum number of dice (3) for as long as possible. Thus when you get to just 3 troop to attack with, you cease your attack and pass those 2 troops over to another team mate so that he could put them to good use as well. This way you maximize your attacks by using 3 dice in your attacks for as long as possible.
- End Note.

At any given point there is an unbalance of troops with only one color having the most amount of troops at any time. If everyone just plays for themselves and holding an equal number of troops then the maximum amount of damage that could be done is not being done. It all comes down to who is in the best position to take full advantage of the damage being inflicted and they can not all be in the same position to do that at the same time. Obviously throughout the game different players will be in unique position to inflict the most damage and that is the player that should be dropped on with troops by the rest of the team. It is not even always the next color to play but just a Player who is in position to break a bonus or prevent a bonus zone situation from being broken. This is team work. Even the sacrificing of one's troops at a crucial moment so that the team may win, this is what determines the best team and not how many all have accumulated.

So the way that I see it, if there is an unbalance in troop count between good team players then the best team in a tie situation should be the team with the single color that has the most troops.

"And certainly in Fog games where you can't see the exact troop count, why would you risk losing bonusses by dropping all on 1 player just to give 1 partner the highest troop count."

I don't know too much about Fog games but I imagine that you can see your team colors. So you can always fort to the next color up from you knowing that they can at least use those troops on that "??" right next to them.

[Note]
When there is good communication in Team games then even in a fog you can understand just how many troops there may be in any given "??" region. Where there is no good communications then even the best and most passing of extra troops simply won't help. But when there is good communication then Forting troops to where they are need the best becomes child's play, even in a fog game.
- End Note.

But why would you risk losing a bonus?

Because the maximum Damage that you can inflict on the opposing team more then makes up for any bonus situations. If Team "A" inflicts more damage on Team "B" than 'Vice' a Versa, Then guess what? Team "A" is going to find it a lot easier to form an hold on to it's BZ's than Team "B" will.

Again; I am no expert (Not yet) but this is all so logical. Consider two boxers for example. Who normally wins the fight? At the end of the fight (Discarding the rare Knockout punches), the punches thrown and landed and missed are all counted and Usually the winner is the one who landed the most punches because he did the most damage. The winner perhaps landed 288 punches and the loser landed perhaps only 250 punches. It's all so logical. Why should it be any different in this game. Regardless of the setting.

If the round limit is 20 rounds, why can't a team transfer all troops to one play starting from Round 18 or something? I mean, its just a gameplay, doesn't matter if its silly or logical. Just train your team to have one player with the most troops in round limit games Problem solved!

And if that is problematic, then remember, its problematic for the opponent team as well! So its balanced out I guess. I don't see much luck factors involve in such gameplay most of the times. Avoid the maps that may involve luck factors I guess

You're missing one essential component: The troops that get passed along get used. Thus the player finishes the turn with about as many troops as he started with and hopefully the other team has fewer. He then usually picks A DIFFERENT territ to reinforce from. It's not like a team creates a giant stack of troops that it sends around the map like a roaming band of marauders gaining in numbers from enslaved men and illegitimate children of raped women along the way.

If you are playing your team games with this snowballing strategy, I can make some team games for you to join (against my team, of course).

lol no you're right, I didn't think about that

King, honestly I didn't see your post as I didn't realize this convo had moved on to page 2. My comment was directed to Viceroy. I do think that you are right about Round 18 though. At least in some circumstances, in a close enough game with some larger stacks, you could do what you are saying.

agentcom wrote:You're missing one essential component: The troops that get passed along get used. Thus the player finishes the turn with about as many troops as he started with and hopefully the other team has fewer. He then usually picks A DIFFERENT territ to reinforce from. It's not like a team creates a giant stack of troops that it sends around the map like a roaming band of marauders gaining in numbers from enslaved men and illegitimate children of raped women along the way.

If One is attacking down to the last troop then that one deserves to lose. One should only be attacking a region until One gets down to 3 troops because then One loses the odds of the attacking dice advantage. So if One is attacking appropriately then what is One to do in a team game with those extra 2 troops?

Answer is: One passes them on to the next player in succession.

What does it benefit one to hold on to 2 extra troops (here and there)? For what possible defense? If you coordinate your forts correctly then each team mate should be benefiting from those 2 extra troops some how to maximize the dice advantage.

agentcom wrote:If you are playing your team games with this snowballing strategy, I can make some team games for you to join (against my team, of course).

In the case of the Snow Ball strategy:

The point of the Snow ball effect, is to eventually use all of those troops some where to crush the enemy. If One is simply doing a limited attack with a compounded amount of troops (when one can do more) and not doing any serious damage but passing all of those troops around the board like some cheap hooker, then One is not really fighting with those troops at all. The time it takes to pass all those troops around and everyone use them just a little bit and passing those troops forward is wasted time and energy that can go into crippling the enemy forces in one key location and reinforcing from another. The logical conclusion of building up a certain amount of troops from an area is to eventually use them all up against the enemy. With the exception of those last 2 troops which get passed along for the benefit of the next attacking team mate.

In some cases there can be a limited use of compiled troops but eventually they find their spot and get used to the Hilt. And those cases Where those troops are passed around to every member of the team for limited use? are rare indeed. Normally, no sooner that the troops are compiled are they put to use at the first opportunity to cripple the enemy all the way and cause as much damage as possible before being reinforced to another. Eventually the "Snow Ball" Melts but it accomplishes it's purpose for being created even if only used by one player.

So again I state that if there is more or less an equal distribution of troops among team players then they are not causing the maximum amount of damage possible and not playing as a true team.

At least I don't think so.

I'd be interested to see the results of a poll on whether or not people think round limit team games should be decided by a total team troop count or a individual player troop count.

Viceroy, I think that we mostly agree. However, it is not absolutely better on all maps to have a single player holding all the troops. In many, many situations, you will have an approximately equal division of troops. Basic team strategy leads to this. I deploy on myself, attack the next opponent and pass to the next teammate who does the same. Of course, there are exceptions. In Pelo, for example, it is uncommon for a team NOT to have one player with a significant majority of the troops.

Jippd, I would put money and give you odds that the winner would be total team troops.

OK; I have to be humble here because the truth is that I have not played on too many maps and the one that you just mentioned I definitely have not played. So I really can't speak on all maps but only from what I have played thus far.

So I give this one to you. At any rate, the propose explanation is a logical reason for deciding a draw. Perhaps when the program was written for deciding a draw they did not have all of the different maps and map goals as they do now. Perhaps the tie breaker program does need to be rewritten to include the different game styles and maps.

I never played "Assdoodler" for example, (I just don't like how it sounds. Lol. ) and I seriously doubt that I will, but does any know if there can be a draw possibility in that map? I hear that you have to be fast to.

in round limit the winner of the game is determined by the player with the highest number of troops on the board.

doesnt matter if its singles, doubles, trips or quads. The player with the most troops wins. So if your team has the player with the most troops you win.

Think about maps with objectives on them like one player must hold 5 capitals to win. One 'team' cant complete the objective, it has to be one single player. Your aim is to make it one of your teams players who meets the objective.

In round limit the 'objective' is for a player to have the most troops at the end of the limit. This is true for singles or teams.

Simples

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=172014

Poll about teams.