Could neutrals be optional?

by **sailorseal** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:33 pm

Could neutrals be optional? Sometimes I am playing 1 on 1 games and it takes forever to make the game exciting because of all the neutrals. If it were made a option then...

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

by **Artimis** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:12 pm

Neutrals are handy:

They take up the leftover territories that won't divide evenly among the participating players.
They provide a 3rd party to contend with when playing 1 v 1.
Some maps like AoR 1, 2 and 3 require neutrals to function as the map author intended.

All in all, neutrals a good and should be here to stay!

by **The Neon Peon** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:23 pm

Firstly, the lack of neutrals would greatly uneven the drop.
1. Bonuses would be more likely to be obtained
2. The territory bonus at the start of the game is increased, so the player to move first has a larger advantage

Not only that, but unlimited fortifications would give the game away to the player who goes first seeing as they could connect all of their territories.

Too unbalanced play to have it as an option.

by **sailorseal** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:39 pm

I am not saying EVERY game has to be no neutrals but maybe if you want a little unbalance?

by **The Neon Peon** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:44 pm

sailorseal wrote:I am not saying EVERY game has to be no neutrals but maybe if you want a little unbalance?

Farming. The faster person gets a much larger advantage. And there is no point in making the game more unbalanced than it is. That destroys the scoring system even more, as it gives more luck into the game rather than actual skill.

by **sailorseal** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:15 pm

Alright I guess your right

by **hecter** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:26 pm

Ya, just join a bunch of freestyle 1v1's with no neutrals and your score will skyrocket.

by **SuicidalSnowman** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:33 pm

I think this should be an option. When I used to play a similar board game, I rarely used neutrals. It should be an option.

I don't think that unbalancing games is a problem, Quads Freestyle games are unbalanced in favor of the second team to join. You can play them or not. Same with no neutrals! I support this option for those who want it.

by **oaktown** on Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:38 pm

The reasons in support of 1v1 games including neutrals given above are all valid. Straight 1v1 games without neutrals would create uneven drops, and the first player to move would win 75% of games; we'd see a lot of newb-farming if you could eliminate the neutrals.

The reason this is the case is that the current crop of CC maps was not designed specifically for 1v1 games; 2 player games weren't even an option when many of our maps were designed. However, more recent code updates have opened up some new possibilities, and the Foundry has begun talking about creating some maps that would be uniquely suited for 2 player games.