Points system ruined two games so far.

[Joho]

First off let me say that I love this website and as soon as I get paid Friday was planning on becoming a premium member, and now I am not as sure. I have only one MAJOR problem with this game so far. In two games a player in it completely disregarded trying to win or even maintain being in the game and burned everything they had simply to ensure that the highest ranking person wins the game. I was told both times that they were doing it because if myself or the other guy in the game won they would lose too many points, and would rather it be the higher rank to win.

I was told by both people that this is common and not considered a bad thing. Now my question and glaring concern is why? Why is it considered "OK" that when someone figures they will probably not win that they tank out and just attempt to ensure the highest rank in the game wins simply to save a cpl points? I consider that alot like a poker game played for no money. If you have one guy at the table playing crazy and not giving a damn about bets made since it is not real money it ruins the game. The same goes for this when you have one guy that decides he can't win and he is gonna spend every army he has to ensure one person wins and they could care less whether they get taken out right after that.

If this is actual common practice and majority of people care more about their points/rank than actually playing a good game then I will probably save my 20$ and deal with it in 4 games instead of alot more. I don't know how this could be fixed other than making the points only pertain to team games or 1v1's, but this particular strategy I have seen really leaves me with a bad taste for continuing this game.

Opinions?

[Optimus Prime]

I don't think it is as common as they seem to think it is. I can think of far more instances where the higher ranked player gets targeted more than the lower rank player.

In my opinion you can do a couple of things.

1. Put those players on your ignore list and then you won't have to deal with that kind of lame strategy from them again (not saying you won't have to deal with it from others though)

2. Just ignore it, and know that if you do pay for a premium membership there are going to be far more good things that happen in your games than bad. For instance, you'll be able to join tournaments a little easier and the players in those I have never known to do such a thing as you were describing above. The win matters too much.

[Coleman]

This is interesting for me because I do what you are talking about sometimes. Usually though, I only start employing the strategy after I've lost so badly that it has no real effect on the outcome of the game.

I think your poker analogy is flawed though. These people do care. They see that they are going to lose and start calculating how much it will effect them. While it is your opinion that the spirit of the game is trying to win at any cost, when you have played enough to know the statistical probability of your winning is outrageous, you begin to play to lose, and in their opinion it still fits the spirit of the game.

I think, mostly, I've been lucky to avoid most of this behavior. This is probably because I play very few 'public' games. I play mostly with other cartographers and in tournaments. Most tournament players play just for the sake of playing, which I believe is what you are looking for.

Anyway, I wouldn't let these experiences shape your opinion of the site or the community as a whole. There are many different kinds of players here. Many of whom see points as just some extra thing, and they don't really care what their rank is, they just like to play. With the exception of the rank obsessed most people are here to play a good game like you are.

[oVo]

Optimus Prime pretty much covered it...

3. With the premium membership you can create password protected Private Games,
allowing you to invite a select group of players to participate.

[Coleman]

Well, when you've only been here since the 9th of August and you have one post I don't know how aware you are of who would be decent to invite to private games. I'm sure feedback helps with that, but a lot of people who employ the strategies he deplores don't have negative feedback for it.

So I don't see that being able to host private games would be much of a draw to him. I know I barely use that feature.

I do agree that Optimus mostly covered it. I started writing my post before his was submitted. Hopefully this player isn't already gone.

[Joho]

I did not believe that their way of thinking was the norm, but I had to at least try and find out. I know after playing awhile I will be able to get in with people I have met along the way and that I know would not do something like this. I just think that if this has happened to me in the 6-7 games I have played twice already that it might have been a normal thing and I personally was upset that this fun new game I had found was ruined by a ranking system.

Like I said before I always enjoyed the Risk game and I think that the designers on these maps and this site have done a terrific job in keeping with the same basic principal but adding so much more. I just think it should be known that new players like myself who might otherwise be interested in joining might be having their experience tarnished by dirty strats such as this. I was wondering if there were any non-rated game options so I could avoid this type of thing, but that is not available that I have seen anyways.

I will withhold final judgement on things for abit, at least till I do a tourny or something. However I really cannot see this being longterm enjoyable if there will be times I am gonna spend 2+ days playing a game only to have one person decide it all by playing wrecklessly just to save a cpl points.

[Coleman]

I will withhold final judgement on things for abit, at least till I do a tourny or something. However I really cannot see this being longterm enjoyable if there will be times I am gonna spend 2+ days playing a game only to have one person decide it all by playing wrecklessly just to save a cpl points.

It's a lot less noticeable when you have 20+ games at once.

Jokes aside, hope to see more new players like you, good luck with figuring out if premium is worth it to you.

[Nephilim]

joho, if you stick around very long and make some acquaintances, you'll get past this problem. i never encounter such dishonorable play in my games. hope you go premy and enjoy the site.....

[HayesA]

One of the games he's talking about is the one with me in it. Yes, I am such a player. I do play for the win/or the less points.

Yes, I swung the game in the direction of the player with the most points. Because at the time I decided, I had little options. Green was going to win no matter what: his position was far too fortified for any of us to really get in. Two super powers, and i'm like a little terrorist state.

It's how the world, and how risk works. It's strategic planning, and deciding who best to have my points. It's who I want to win, and i choose green to win. I think you should stop crying about it, because you know what? It happens. You should be prepared for it in the future.

[Optimus Prime]

One of the games he's talking about is the one with me in it. Yes, I am such a player. I do play for the win/or the less points.

Yes, I swung the game in the direction of the player with the most points. Because at the time I decided, I had little options. Green was going to win no matter what: his position was far too fortified for any of us to really get in. Two super powers, and i'm like a little terrorist state.

It's how the world, and how risk works. It's strategic planning, and deciding who best to have my points. It's who I want to win, and i choose green to win. I think you should stop crying about it, because you know what? It happens. You should be prepared for it in the future.

Last time I checked the point of this game was to win. Not to pad an ego by losing less points because they got spanked by a lower ranked player.

[HayesA]

Yes, the point is to win. But what about the meta game? Surely, not everyone thinks the same, and considers the same outlooks of a decision.

I never said I don't aim to win; I aim to win whenever i can. Note whenever. Furthermore, I do consider what I did a form of winning. It's damage control, in which I look after my self, and only my self.

[Optimus Prime]

It's always been more fun for me to go all out. Win or go home. Go for the glory or don't go at all in my opinion.

[HayesA]

Two people, two different opinions on play.

[Joho]

[quote="HayesA"]

Yes, I swung the game in the direction of the player with the most points. Because at the time I decided, I had little options. Green was going to win no matter what: his position was far too fortified for any of us to really get in. Two super powers, and i'm like a little terrorist state.

quote]

I controlled more of the board at the time and was fighting off Green/Blue 2v1. Green was fortified in africa but could not even complete controlling it until you went on a wreckless blitzkreig into mine and then blues territories. THAT is when green was unbeatable and you know this. I would honestly have no problem with this if you just decided to romp me because you had no options, but Europe and Asia where ripe for the taking especially with the 50 armies you had stacked and the fact that 80% of that area was populated with singles. You had a good chance of taking and fotifying either of those areas while I duked it out with those two, but it would have been a good struggle. You instead chose the route you did, but don't try and make it sound like you had no options.

Your rediculous coveting of the extra 10 or so points you get to keep wasted alot of mine as well as blues time. I was posting this simply to find out if your way of thinking was normal, and found that it was mostly considered a crap tactic. You are saying that in FFA group games I should keep my eyes open for losers that are gonna tank it simply to save face/points? Well here is to hoping I don't bump into anymore shitstains of your color, and happy trails to you.

[HayesA]

Life aint fair, bud.

Plus, you have yet to experience the worst player of them all: The dead beater and multi. Trust me, they're far worse, and time wasting than me.

OH! and have a good night. I'm leaving work now, so I won't be able to respond for another hour or so. Cheers buddy.

[Optimus Prime]

Two people, two different opinions on play.

Touche, me dear friend, touche!

[MeDeFe]

It's not ok, and I certainly hope it's not common.

Oh, and Hayesa, you're a bloody private after 59 games, you should worry about winning to gain points, not about not losing them.

Oh well, case for the ignore list I guess.

[douglasefresh]

I'mplaying in this game - I'm the player who has been 'handed' the game by the actions of the meta-gamer. A decent poker analogy would dictate that you minimise loss - but at what cost?

I'm sure some of you have played 'Lux' before - a faster paced Risk style game that the actions of the 'offending' player would be commonly called 'suiciding' and is very frowned apon. It happens all the time, but it goes against the spirit of the game.

All I can say is that while I don't condemn HayesA's actions as such - it has certainly made the game less enjoyable... and my impending victory? something a little less to savour.

My philosophy is to play each game to win and learn from your losses. You cannot learn from your losses if you hand it to someone on a plate.

[HayesA]

It's not ok, and I certainly hope it's not common.

Oh, and Hayesa, you're a bloody private after 59 games, you should worry about winning to gain points, not about not losing them.

Oh well, case for the ignore list I guess.

Except what happens when you're going to lose the game? If i had taken Asia like Joho had suggested, I would have stretched my self far too thin. Thus, eventually, leading to my demise; I would have became a target either way.

This way, I assure that I do indeed, loose less points. Like you said, I should be playing to win, and I just won a 5 player world 2.1 for 99 points. And to be honest about all this, you people are getting upset about a players' playing style/opinion. This leads to such things like police brutality, hate, bigotry... it leads to doors that you don't want to enter.

Stop crying about losing games due to tactics you may disagree with.

[comic boy]

HayesA

If you manage to progress you will find that the better players will not tolerate suiciding and you will get frozen out of games. If you have no real chance of winning you should remain neutral and simply let the game take its course,of course in escalating games nobody is ever completely out of the game so it doesnt really happen.

[HayesA]

... but it's suicide ither way. :\ you're still going to loose.

[comic boy]

... but it's suicide ither way. :\ you're still going to loose.

Im just giving you sound advice,its up to you if you heed it or not.

[Robinette]

Every so often unexpected things can happen in a game that can turn everything around... It is simply delicious to win a 'lost' game... and I've won quite a few games that were 'lost'...

My point is, never give up.... always play for the win, and when all is lost, hold your head up high and continue to fight with honor, because at CC we don't take prisoners...

[El Scorcho]

your poker example is biased and shows that you are a bit stupid. With the comparison....it would be if you lose to player A (high rank) you only loose $20, if you lose to player B (low rank), you lose $50.....now only a dumbass would want B to win, so if you were to think you cant win, go for after B
I just read up to that, then couldnt read anymore because your whole statement is bullshit and that point you made actually supports what you are trying to bash.

nice

[oVo]

How many points does a private lose to a private anyways? The feedback says you had 50 armies massed, is that at all close to accurate?

I have been in a no card game where I was down to a single army on one territory, three on another and still managed to pull out the win. So all is not always lost when things are looking bad.

Maybe it's a Pennsylvania strategy. In a current game a PA guy just exterminated himself by taking his fortified 28 --the largest army on the map-- and breaking a subcontinent while losing 2/3 of that force. He declared it "productive" and was eliminated by another player before his next turn. A weird tactic.