Random/Anonymous Opponents
Moderator: Community Team
Random/Anonymous Opponents
I suggest to have an option when creating the game, of having the names of your opponents be hidden from you. That way, in a 1v1v1v1v1v1 game, that idiot in your office who holds a grudge against you for stealing his girlfriend won't constantly be hounding you when it makes no sense tactically, effectively creating an alliance against you.
I've thought about this a bit, and cannot find any negatives. It would be cool at the end to have it revealed who was who, etc.
Again, this would just be an option. Thoughts??
EDIT: Oh, I forgot the "random" part. You might want to force random colors with this, too, since the game's creator will always be red.
I've thought about this a bit, and cannot find any negatives. It would be cool at the end to have it revealed who was who, etc.
Again, this would just be an option. Thoughts??
EDIT: Oh, I forgot the "random" part. You might want to force random colors with this, too, since the game's creator will always be red.
AK_iceman wrote:How about you just stop stealing girlfriends?
Edit: I dont like the idea because i like to know who i am up against when i join a game.
You will know who you're up against when you join a game, you just won't know what color they are (unless they tell you outside of the game) while you're actually playing said game.
- cyberdaniel
- Posts: 281
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 10:31 am
say you were randomly chosen to be the green color, but nobody knew it was you who was green. When you talk on the game chat, should it be:
green: i think red is winning, lets have an alliance blue.
It would be okay, but you are not going to be able to leave feedback til the end of the game, and some will just announce their name in the chat, or make some comment where you'll KNOW its them. However, this option would change the strategy in a tournament game cause then you don't know who is who, and who has how many points to give to you, so you don't go after specific people.
green: i think red is winning, lets have an alliance blue.
It would be okay, but you are not going to be able to leave feedback til the end of the game, and some will just announce their name in the chat, or make some comment where you'll KNOW its them. However, this option would change the strategy in a tournament game cause then you don't know who is who, and who has how many points to give to you, so you don't go after specific people.
- lackattack
- Posts: 6097
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:34 pm
- Location: Montreal, QC
- Fireside Poet
- Posts: 2671
- Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:49 pm
Just add 'Anonymous' to your ignore list - that is so simple.
I would also see it as a problem with those that are concerned with their scores to create games in which all deadbeat and then all points go to the account they want to have the points with.
I just don't see this one working ... though I could be wrong, not uncommon.
I would also see it as a problem with those that are concerned with their scores to create games in which all deadbeat and then all points go to the account they want to have the points with.
I just don't see this one working ... though I could be wrong, not uncommon.
lackattack wrote:I don't like the anonymous idea. It goes against the social aspect of the game, namely developing positive and negative relationships with your opponents. Also, without access to your opponents' pofiles you would not be able to put abusive members on your ignore list.
Well, the idea was that, whenever the game ended, everyone would be unmasked. Then you'd be like, "ahh, so that was YOU?????"
Oh well, thanks for listening...
