Predict-a-move game design

[ConfederateSS]

------There is no harm in stating why it will not work either. To save the time that would be wasted. In a fool hardy venture. In Chess a player can only move one piece a turn. A view of the board,easy to predict a player's next move. That is the very nature of Chess. In Risk a player can do all sorts of shit....They can deploy troops and end their turn. They can attack once. They can attack in ten different directions on the same turn. Once again ..it all comes down to THE DICE. The game of RISK is unpredictable ....THAT IS WHAT MAKES IT AWESOME FUN... COKE found out what happens when they tried NEW COKE...WHAT did they do? ...COKE CLASSIC... Just play the game of RISK and enjoy THE FUN. If you find it boring. Stop trying to change the game of RISK. Maybe it's you who has changed. RISK just isn't your cup of tea anymore. ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

Now you're being helpful.

What if it was restricted to the smaller maps where the options open to a player are often much more limited?

[owenshooter]

What if it was restricted to the smaller maps where the options open to a player are often much more limited?

even on the smaller maps, what you can do on a turn is far more complicated than what you would be able to guess... deploy all on one terit? deploy one each on multiple terits? attack from here? attack from there? no attacks? move some troops over there... chess, you have ONE move... Risk, there are countless options... just doesn't make any sense and the more i think about it, the coding for this would be INSANE... BW would need more than a truck load of cajun chips to get this thing going (ohhh, that was a good one... yes, indeed... i hope someone got that!)...-Jésus noir

[ConfederateSS]

-----Still going to come down to THE ROLL OF THE DICE.... No Matter what map...No matter what setting... I know ...Instead of dice...Lets use a computer DECK OF CARDS. We cut for High Card to decide each battle. Ties still go to the defender. ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).

[csol4846]

luck can be factor in the short term, good strategy and tactics will win in the long run and elevate players to colonels and generals

[owenshooter]

luck can be factor in the short term, good strategy and tactics will win in the long run and elevate players to colonels and generals

but do you honestly think a group of players can come together and predict which ONE move someone is going to make in this game? never...-Jésus noir

[ConfederateSS]

-----(Chess...I count Castling as a King move..I know the rook moves as well.) I stand by my ..in Chess a player moves one piece a turn...... Not only is RISK unpredictable..AND ALWAYS COMES DOWN TO THE DICE..NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE.... Since Conquer Club started, as now. PEOPLE GET 24 HOURS TO TAKE A TURN IN A REGULAR GAME OF RISK.... WE CAN'T EVEN GET EVERYONE TO TAKE THEIR TURNS IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. I MEAN COME ON. If your in 4 games..,20 games..,100 games... 5 minutes/20 minutes... In 24 hours should be doable. NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE or WHAT YOU HAVE GOING ON...WE ARE IN THE 21st CENTURY ...I-phones and the like.THERE ARE NO EXCUSES FOR MISSED TURNS!!! So lets get people taking their turns in regular games. Before introducing more things people can miss turns in. ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).

[Dukasaur]

luck can be factor in the short term, good strategy and tactics will win in the long run and elevate players to colonels and generals

but do you honestly think a group of players can come together and predict which ONE move someone is going to make in this game? never...-Jésus noir

There may be thousands of possibilities, but most of them count as a wasted turn.

There's usually two or three best options. More on a bigger map, of course, but still a limited number. I'd say definitely you can predict what someone will do, not in all cases, but in many of them.

[owenshooter]

luck can be factor in the short term, good strategy and tactics will win in the long run and elevate players to colonels and generals

but do you honestly think a group of players can come together and predict which ONE move someone is going to make in this game? never...-Jésus noir

There may be thousands of possibilities, but most of them count as a wasted turn.

There's usually two or three best options. More on a bigger map, of course, but still a limited number. I'd say definitely you can predict what someone will do, not in all cases, but in many of them.

doubt it... typical turn for me: "drop on this guy, drop on that guy, drop some here.. no attacks... move 3 troops from here to there... DONE..." no way you would be able to predict the ONE move i am going to make in a turn, because there is not ONE MOVE in a turn on here, like in chess... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noir

[ConfederateSS]

----No, people are in nature,UNPREDICTABLE. I just finished a game..Where instead of attacking me the leader. Blue broke Green. causing a revenge factor. Green went after Blue. Leaving Yellow hanging in the wind....Then there are those who for some reason, just go crazy and suicide. Or the battle of points and ranks in a game. Where lower players are targeted to kept Higher ranks from losing points. Going away from game play totally. ONCE AGAIN THE GAME OF RISK IS UNPREDICTABLE...HUMANS are unpredictable.....JUST STOP IT....Most times in real life WAR....It is the GENERAL who goes WAY OUTSIDE THE BOX...that comes away ..THE VICTOR!!!!!!!!!.....HELLO!!!!!!HELLO!!!!..IN RISK, it ALL COMES DOWN TO THE DICE.....NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE!!!!!!!!!!!..PERIOD!!!!!!!!!... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).....

[csol4846]

back to some of the basic assumptions I set out. small maps, limited possibilities. experts, no random or revenge moves. trench, no long sequences.
It would be possible to give part scores to the top 3 candidate moves as stated by the expert. Maybe ignore drops and forts and choose from only attcking moves.
Missed turns, who cares. if you miss your affecting your score, no one else.
I think rapid play, 1 minute would keep people attentive. over in an hour

[WILLIAMS5232]

I don't like this idea, it's not something I would be interested in playing, and I think the logistics of getting a game off the ground would be a nightmare, (think speed tournies, rodians attempt at a draft tourney, the foundry, etc. ) maybe if this site had it's old numbers I could see that it may get some use, but how things are now, my opinion is this would be a big flop. sorry, not trying to pick, just don't have much faith in it. mainly because I don't think it would be fun I guess, but having to organize several people on a online gaming site where real life takes priority is tough. I used to run tournaments and I know as the numbers started dropping so did the flow of the tournaments.

if anything I think we need to start removing most of the rarely used portions of the site (including maps) and try to streamline things a bit so the ones that are still here can get some enjoyment at least. regardless of the reason for it happening, the current trend is basically going like this; more options=less players.

[isaiah40]

... the current trend is basically going like this; more options=less players.

I agree and disagree here. Yes all of CC's options are driving players - both old and new - away. More options is also a good thing, as you get to choose what style of game you want to play. The problem is this, there needs to be a way of allowing players to filter their game-play options, maps etc. I believe this will only help the site. Will it happen, probably not as I'm pretty sure - not 100% mind you - that the current owner has lost interest in the site. Why? Who knows. Maybe because of how discombobulated the code is? We'll never know.

[Metsfanmax]

regardless of the reason for it happening, the current trend is basically going like this; more options=less players.

[WILLIAMS5232]

regardless of the reason for it happening, the current trend is basically going like this; more options=less players.

so you're mind is made up then. flood the site with different playoptions even though finding players is getting harder and harder so you can see if you like option x or not. meanwhile player d conjures up option r.

[csol4846]

lemons, i like lemons.
choice overload may be the cause of disinterest in the site. put that on you graph, number of options vs time vs membership.

[Metsfanmax]

regardless of the reason for it happening, the current trend is basically going like this; more options=less players.

so you're mind is made up then. flood the site with different playoptions even though finding players is getting harder and harder so you can see if you like option x or not. meanwhile player d conjures up option r.

That graph is not a statement of the wisdom of adding more options. It is a statement of the lack of wisdom in the hypothesis that the site lost players because it added more options.

[WILLIAMS5232]

regardless of the reason for it happening, the current trend is basically going like this; more options=less players.

so you're mind is made up then. flood the site with different playoptions even though finding players is getting harder and harder so you can see if you like option x or not. meanwhile player d conjures up option r.

That graph is not a statement of the wisdom of adding more options. It is a statement of the lack of wisdom in the hypothesis that the site lost players because it added more options.

well, i'll admit that there are a lot of factors in the cause of the decline. I believe too many options to be a cause, tho' that's not why I posted that above, i'm just saying that while we have lower and lower numbers, adding this suggestion doesn't seem sensible. it doesn't take a wise man to understand the problem of fewer players having more options creates less activity. that's why you can't buy clear pepsi anymore.

[Metsfanmax]

well, i'll admit that there are a lot of factors in the cause of the decline. I believe too many options to be a cause, tho' that's not why I posted that above, i'm just saying that while we have lower and lower numbers, adding this suggestion doesn't seem sensible. it doesn't take a wise man to understand the problem of fewer players having more options creates less activity. that's why you can't buy clear pepsi anymore.

I am not fundamentally opposed to limiting the scope of options that don't add much to good gameplay; if we have maps that satisfy a particular theme or strategic idea, it is not good policy to add multiple redundant maps of the same type. However, this has its costs: namely, people are signing up to play games of those types because they want to play them. Limiting the number of options means taking things away from them, things they want, so that they can play other options they enjoy less with people who are satisfied merely playing the vanilla options. That is to say, it is not the fault of the people who like complicated options that you don't have games to play, and it seems unfair to burden them with the cost of this. Still possibly justifiable given what has happened to the site, though. But will they leave if they know that this is what is going on, or will they simply accept the limitations on their liberty? I honestly don't know.

[gimil]

For anyone that is interested in the opinion of an old CC dinosaur...

Back in the day Conquer Club was a behemoth of a game that could successfully compete in the days of web 2.0... The internet has moved on but CC has not. A few years ago I would of agreed with Metsfanmax that there is to many options, maps, settings etc. I semi-regularly check in to see what is happening around these parts and every time I come back I notice 2 key trends. Less active members and no reals change to this site as a whole. Sure these are new features wedged in here and there and some design tweeks. But it's still the same old Conquer Club.

Where CC is really missing out in the trends of the current web is a presence on the Google Play and Android. Those markets are the biggest, most lucrative game markets in the world, bigger than PSN, bigger than xBox live, bigger than Steam. There is no reason CC couldn't be a huge success on the mobile platform.

Also as a software person myself I know that all the key functionality for expanding CC into a mobile based app is all there and it doesn't have to give up its traditionally web based format to do it.