Change to Round Limits in Team Games?

[Ace Rimmer]

From the Instructions page (highlighting done by me):

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!

Should this be changed or left as-is (see poll)? Vote and discuss. Or just vote. Or just discuss. Or ignore the thread.

Disclaimer: Unofficial poll with no guarantee of being changed. However, [player]lackattack[/player] loves me so I have faith he'll make the change if there is a lot of feedback.

[squishyg]

Honestly, I'm surprised it wasn't thus way to begin with. What's the point of playing as a team if it's about the individual? This is capitalism at its worst.

[The Voice]

I voted other because it's the closest thing to kittens, and I'm letting you know because it told me to explain.

[craig84]

I don't think there should even be a round limit but if there is, I don't see why it's not already based on a team as a whole. After all there is no "I" in team.

[Ace Rimmer]

Thank you to The Voice for explaining his other vote. I almost put ponies in, but decided against it. I would never had put in kittens because honestly, who would vote against kittens? I love pussy myself.

[AndyDufresne]

I think the reason it was coded the this way is that it gets more complicated to combine data from multiple players into a winning round condition. But in general, I've always been in favor Team 'winning' conditions for Team games, and I like to pester Lack about them sometimes.


--Andy

[Ace Rimmer]

Oh please it's not difficult. I was going to write some pseudocode but it's time to go home. I could do it in about 20 minutes.

[Namliam]

The question is, will anything be changed as a result of this poll?? I predict over 90% support in making the change to total team troops deciding the winner. It will be interesting to see if it makes any difference though, since this has been an issue from the beginning of round limit games. I can only hope the changes are made.

[trinicardinal]

I'd say for team games its more appropriate that the total team count determines the winner other wise its not a team game... its supposed to be a team effort and therefore it should be the team count

[Mageplunka69]

I'd say for team games its more appropriate that the total team count determines the winner other wise its not a team game... its supposed to be a team effort and therefore it should be the team count

Mageplunka Liked this

[Jippd]

I think the reason it was coded the this way is that it gets more complicated to combine data from multiple players into a winning round condition. But in general, I've always been in favor Team 'winning' conditions for Team games, and I like to pester Lack about them sometimes.


--Andy

I figured that was the reason was because it would require more coding. Could possibly borrow some of the code that bob uses to calculate team troop totals and then have the winner decided by that.


Thanks ace for making the poll...I would have but I'm lazy

[darth emperor]

I voted for other, because deciding who wins based on the troop counts is propesterous, it would be more accurate to decide the win based on the strength force (wich BOB calculates), and for team games.... BOB also calculates Team strenghth

[Namliam]

I voted for other, because deciding who wins based on the troop counts is propesterous, it would be more accurate to decide the win based on the strength force (wich BOB calculates), and for team games.... BOB also calculates Team strenghth

Does the average CC player understand how BoB calculates this number? Total troop count is easy to see/calculate and would therefore be a better measure of who is winning at any given point in the game.

[Paddy The Cat]

i voted for keep the same, because i like the idea of the trop leader determining the winner... makes the strategy of team games a fair bit different in that case and i think thats exciting!

i mean, both teams entering are aware that to win, the leader of troops must be on their team. so it is a bad team effort to not ensure that. a good team would ensure this to happen (or eliminating all opponents before the end of the game)

its a team effort either way, i dont understand the opposition here. its just a different kind of strategy. is it that hard for most players to adapt their gameplay accordingly?!?!

[Pedronicus]

What sort of a wimp creates a round limit team game?

[darth emperor]

I voted for other, because deciding who wins based on the troop counts is propesterous, it would be more accurate to decide the win based on the strength force (wich BOB calculates), and for team games.... BOB also calculates Team strenghth

Does the average CC player understand how BoB calculates this number? Total troop count is easy to see/calculate and would therefore be a better measure of who is winning at any given point in the game.

It's easy

also, the strength is Troops + troops Due - (Regions*(2/3))
i believe the region number gets counted as negative because for each region there's an army which can't be used to attack with, so that army counts only for 1/3rd.

Of course if it's implemented this way, there's need of 2 things:
1-Show the strenght in statistics
2-Explain, like you explain the points in the rules...

There are many users who still don't know how the system point works, but they'll learn, it's the same with BOB strenght, people will learn to use it, and become better... I know is not easy, but is fairer and more accurate

[macbone]

I'd vote for Team Strength if it were coded into the site, but since not everyone uses BOB, I went went overall troop level for the whole team. But Team Strength would be better.

The winner of a round-limit game (say, for instance, No Spoils Hive quads) ought to be determined by a rubric that measures how you've been playing as a team, not an arbitrary number like the team with the player that has the highest number of troops or largest number of terts. Sure, size matters, especially in Feudal or Pelops, but not in classic-style play.

[Jippd]

Doing it by strength would only mean last turn could drastically over extend to get the troops due number up which increases there strength...but if it was them taking something they couldn't hold only because they got the advantage of having last turn and couldn't be retaliated against then I wouldn't consider that fair.

That is why total troops would be better then strength.

Why would a team that has a stronger strength not have higher overall troops anyways? Only way I could see that happening is if they made a last ditch effort to overextend in the final round or go lucky dice to bring their drop up.

[darth emperor]

I'd vote for Team Strength if it were coded into the site, but since not everyone uses BOB, I went went overall troop level for the whole team. But Team Strength would be better.

It's easy to coded in the site, easier than code overall troop level for the whole team... so that's not the problem

Doing it by strength would only mean last turn could drastically over extend to get the troops due number up which increases there strength...but if it was them taking something they couldn't hold only because they got the advantage of having last turn and couldn't be retaliated against then I wouldn't consider that fair.

True, but getting this is more difficult than to get only 1 troop more that the other team, and is the something, is not fair.

[Ace Rimmer]

Current status:

46 votes
5 to keep
40 to change
1 other

That's pretty overwhelmingly in favor of change.

[drunkmonkey]

I think the reason it was coded the this way is that it gets more complicated to combine data from multiple players into a winning round condition. But in general, I've always been in favor Team 'winning' conditions for Team games, and I like to pester Lack about them sometimes.


--Andy

I would think the code for determining a team winning condition would be nothing like the code determining who has the most troops at the end of the game. I also agree with keeping the map-specific winning conditions as-is. I always thought they were coded that way because it's much easier for a team to take a winning condition than a single player, not because it was too complicated to write.

[trinicardinal]

so can we get this moved across to Suggestions then?

[Ace Rimmer]

I thought you'd support this, trini Moving to suggs is the kiss of death.

[Ace Rimmer]

bump

6 no change = 11%
50 change = 88%
1 other = 2%

[tkr4lf]

I don't understand why it wasn't this way to begin with. It makes sense that the troop count of the whole team should be considered, not just the person with the highest troop count. It sucks when, in a team game, the last 10 turns or so before the round limit hits everybody spends the whole time forting their stacks to the person with the highest troop count to try to inflate that number. It's counter-intuitive.

Good suggestion.