I like to play 2.1 solo games with good players. These take time, months sometimes. I wish we could insert ingame NAPs and alliances even (i.e. transfer armies). I am not sure if there are relevant threads about this already. If so, please direct me to them.

Is there any way to have the capability ...

Very insightful Jackass. You can speak indeed. It is amazing what a 1st world education can do to an ass.

This would just cause people to suicide higher ranks to make sure they get out first + gain more points, even if they lose.

Maybe. I am not sure. You vet would have to weight these concerns. BUT, I think you misunderstood the concept. There is no point to "suicide" in pro-rata mode. In fact, this ...

Very good points! This is what I wish people to bring up. Now, my reply:

unlike what you said, it would harm the higher ranks, since everyone would go after them knowing even if they lose they will gain alot of points cause they teamed up on the higher rank

(1) I believe experienced players ...

I will be honest, I have been a member of the community for almost 1/2 a year now and I have not played a single terminator game. I will sign up for 5 or 10 of those this week to understand the concept.

But,

(1) Yes, it is a pool, and the vets should come up with a rational division of points to ...

I suggested this before. About 70% of the people showed some interest while about 30% were pretty sure they did not want it. I did not run a poll with my first post. I am doing so now. Please vote.

The idea in a nutshell:


[1] Basically creators of games have the option to choose "pro-rata" mode ...

it sucks to scroll down. Btw, can I change it? If not, can we be given the choice? Is just a matter of changing the skin. But whatver, I am not a techie.

I'll give you two more reasons why a pro-rata scoring system as a setting option is a good idea.

(1) Besides being an equitable concept, it is ALSO better grounded on reality.
Think post WWII. Was there a single winner? Was there a single looser? Was the U.S. the only nation who reaped ...

rewarded for doing nothing?

Is playing until the very end "nothing"? Is loosing a game by a move, "nothing"? What do you mean by "nothing"? Are two players doing "nothing" when for example they decide to team up in the middle of a game to beat the rest because they have realized that it WILL TAKE ...

SO, you are saying that poker players only have to fold all the time so they will neither win nor loose?

That logic is utterly flawed!

In pro-rata mode everyone would be on the same plane. At the end, some players will loose points, some players will win points. Who & how much is the question ...

this game is about conquering the world, or whatever map you are playing. if you are not the winner you are a loser. you should not be rewarded for losing.

I think now I understand what you are trying to say. Correct me if I am wrong. You are saying that

(1) "This game" is about defeating ...

mua ha ha ha. Not a chance. I read too much as it is.

I am not exactly sure what you are trying to assert. But you r hot!!! Although I am sure thats not ur pick

TaCk got it as well!

The kahn got right right

Bill, honestly, (1) you are right, I agree with you 99%. (2) I am a n00b, I haven't even played the terminator setting. I just thought the idea above could be a cool "extra" setting that "we" can all enjoy,"if" we choose to.

well, AS I SAID, better seasoned players than I (i.e. like you) would have to discuss minor details of the formulae.

(A) I am sure this has been proposed before. I am a n00b unfamiliar with this forum. I apologize for any inconvenience. I'll make it short, simple and sweet!

(B) I am talking about an "Equitable (Sin/Cos. whatever it is, I am not a geek ) Curve." The game-creator can turn on/off this Equitable ...

Thus, it should be like any other setting, the creator may turn the feature on or off.

Very good idea. Even chess players give up.