[GO] Exponential Spoils
Moderator: Community Team
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
And don't forget to search for previously suggested ideas first!
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
And don't forget to search for previously suggested ideas first!
Re: Exponential Spoils
Thanks for linking that other thread though, the feedback and discussion in it was pretty good.
Re: Exponential Spoils
I think you're right on both points.72o wrote:That's why I reposted it. It's been more than 2 years, no one ever explained why it was a bad idea, most of the comments were positive.
Sorry if that is inappropriate, but I want to see this happen. It took "adjacent attacks" a couple of years to become "trench".
Probably rejected because it would be too hard to code, is my guess. But I still think it would be awesome.
Yes, it would be a very interesting new way to play the game.
No, I doubt if they will implement it because it would probably require a rewrite of a lot of code.
72o wrote:More feedback?
You worry too much. The suggs forum doesn't get a lot of traffic.72o wrote:Nobody wants to play with me
“Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.”
― Voltaire
― Voltaire
-
Funkyterrance
- Posts: 2494
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: New Hampshire, USA
Re: Exponential Spoils
Which is too bad, this is where stuff happens. I hope the bump will cheer you up 72o.Dukasaur wrote:I think you're right on both points.72o wrote:That's why I reposted it. It's been more than 2 years, no one ever explained why it was a bad idea, most of the comments were positive.
Sorry if that is inappropriate, but I want to see this happen. It took "adjacent attacks" a couple of years to become "trench".
Probably rejected because it would be too hard to code, is my guess. But I still think it would be awesome.
Yes, it would be a very interesting new way to play the game.
No, I doubt if they will implement it because it would probably require a rewrite of a lot of code.
72o wrote:More feedback?You worry too much. The suggs forum doesn't get a lot of traffic.72o wrote:Nobody wants to play with me
Re: Exponential Spoils
Thanks terrance. Appreciate the bump.
Agree that more people should read and respond to suggestions, especially good ones. It's obvious that the suggestions that get implemented are the ones that the "mob" says are good ideas.
Agree that more people should read and respond to suggestions, especially good ones. It's obvious that the suggestions that get implemented are the ones that the "mob" says are good ideas.
Re: Exponential Spoils
Is there any chance that Lack or someone who would do the actual coding can weigh in on how difficult it would be? Are we talking hundreds of hours, or are we talking ten?
Re: Exponential Spoils
I'm not sure that the coding difficulty is what would stop this from being implemented. The real question is whether or not lack thinks this would be something that would help out the site.72o wrote:Is there any chance that Lack or someone who would do the actual coding can weigh in on how difficult it would be? Are we talking hundreds of hours, or are we talking ten?
Re: Exponential Spoils
There have now been 2 threads about this suggestion with zero negative comments except how difficult it would be to code. I think the coding difficulty needs to be assessed.
It absolutely would help out the site, it's a spoil type that is dramatically different from the other proposals of "make escalating escalate more" that everyone else puts out there. The strategy in this game type is COMPLETELY different than traditional escalating, because you can cash at any time, or hold as long as you dare.
It absolutely would help out the site, it's a spoil type that is dramatically different from the other proposals of "make escalating escalate more" that everyone else puts out there. The strategy in this game type is COMPLETELY different than traditional escalating, because you can cash at any time, or hold as long as you dare.
Re: Exponential Spoils
More support ... and no your 15 posts in a 25 post thread don't count.
[EDIT: Seriously, 15?]
[EDIT: Seriously, 15?]
Re: Exponential Spoils
Yeah, I am trying to carry the torch all by myself apparently. There's been some positive response that wasn't mine, though.agentcom wrote:More support ... and no your 15 posts in a 25 post thread don't count.
[EDIT: Seriously, 15?]
This is my 16th and final post on this matter unless someone else comments.
Re: Exponential Spoils
i have my doubts. you say it would bring in more tactics, but to me it seems like this would be played as a no-spoils game, until someone can eliminate someone else, preferably while keeping 1-2 spoils, and then sweeping the board.
the advantage of the player to play first is basically too much, as - depending on map size - 32 troops won't be enough to finish anything, but the first one to play 64 troops will. or 128 troops. or 256 troops. and all the time the first one to try that will be the player who started the game.
the advantage of the player to play first is basically too much, as - depending on map size - 32 troops won't be enough to finish anything, but the first one to play 64 troops will. or 128 troops. or 256 troops. and all the time the first one to try that will be the player who started the game.