How much of a troop lead do you feel it is safe to eliminate

[Donald Fung]

Say if you are in a 10-12 player escalating classic game (or any other normal map) and there is a player that you think you can eliminate to win. Say if you make it, the game is almost certainly yours since many other players have 3-5 cards stored up and if you don't make it, the game is almost certainly the player with the turn right after you since you both have the same target to eliminate and you would've weakened it for him if you don't make it. How much of a troop lead ratio-wise does it take for you to take this risk? 1.5? golden ratio of 1.618? Just interested in hearing other people's opinions on this.

[TheFlashPoint]

Depends on the particular situation of course (who else is poised to make an attack, how likely they are to succeed, etc.)

One could make a case that in a ten person escalating game, in the scenario you mentioned, you only need to be successful one out of ten times to give yourself the green light.

So basically, much fewer troops than feels right.

[jwiedlin]

I agree with TheFlashPoint. It most large FFA situations, you want to seize any chance of victory. Even a 4v3 situation, with less than a 50% chance of success, would be worth taking given the low odds of winning any given large ffa escalating game. Odds are, one of the other 9 players are going to take the gamble and be successful before your next turn anyways.

[Frank Martel]

...and even if the player 2 or 3 after you tries and fails, one of the following 6 will likely finish him off. There are two questions that mus be addressed - what are my chances if I go and what are the chances if I pass.

[Kaskavel]

And the big secret is to somehow succeed in being the "next" player to play, with 70% chances or something. Of course, this is very difficult to arrange

[Donald Fung]

And the big secret is to somehow succeed in being the "next" player to play, with 70% chances or something. Of course, this is very difficult to arrange

The mighty Conqueror has spoken!

Yes, that is the ideal scenario.

[EBConquer]

I will usually go for it if i have at least around a 50% probability to take the cards off the first guy. Especially if you can get the second kill. If I'm guaranteed the 2nd kill, i may even go for it w/ 40-50%. Otherwise you're dead anyway. Of course, there are circumstances where even if you make that kill, you still can't kill the 2nd guy. So in the latter case, i'll just cash and take an easy card. Usually it's a good idea to not throw the game if you're not set up right and hope to get lucky on the next turn and give the deserved person the win.

[Gweeedo]

No worries, No matter what or when you take a player out, he is going to pitch a bitch.
You should always go for it if you have a chance (if you are sure to lose anyhow) no matter how slim the chance might be.
If you have an opponent that is a bother to you and you see your chance...go for it!

[TheFlashPoint]

And the big secret is to somehow succeed in being the "next" player to play, with 70% chances or something. Of course, this is very difficult to arrange

I've noticed that the last player to join a multiplayer escalating game will often be a freemium.

Has anyone else noticed this? Maybe they want to get right into the action.

If this is true and some percentage of these freemiums are noobs who make more suboptimal plays than the average player, than being the one who started the game (the first to go after the last player) will ensure increased odds of being the "next" player to go after a blundered move.