|
|
Post by sparrowhawk on Mar 5, 2004 13:10:34 GMT
Would you all be interested in completely random start positions? A parameter could decide how far apart the mnimum distance would be between players.
Let me know.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladyhawke on Mar 5, 2004 13:13:51 GMT
That sounds like a very excellent idea, JY.
I give you my blessing. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by celebaglar on Mar 5, 2004 13:26:39 GMT
Would you all be interested in completely random start positions? A parameter could decide how far apart the mnimum distance would be between players. Let me know. In all honesty. I'm not sure. I can see a lot of potential pifalls there, and a lot of games that will be over in less than 10 days. A lucky starting position will become absolutely critical. I would favour retaining a quadrant approach, but with random quadrants*, as I believe has been discussed somewhere hereabouts. * Random quadrants:Random quadrants would be obtained by taking the current quadrant divider (north-south and east-west lines intersecting at the center of the map), and turning it a random number of degrees between 0-90. |
|
|
|
Post by premis on Mar 5, 2004 20:20:29 GMT
No. It would be nonsense that the vicinity of player to The Spider or Dreams decide the winner immediately on the start of the game
|
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Mar 6, 2004 10:39:39 GMT
In any event, starting positions need to be fixed and distance between them increased, to accomodate the recruiter's hours option. In my latest game, on day 1 I barely managed to reach the nearest lord, but the night fell, and I was unable to recruit him, only to find an enemy lord (not king) on the spot the next day. I can't stay and fight, because I have to recruit, but my opponent will have two lords in the area, and my chances to win this 4p game are nil, if indeed I will survive more than a week.
Now that is a very bad thing for the game, in my oppinion, to find yourself in a lost position at the very beginning, and needs to be addressed ASAP.
|
|
|
|
Post by premis on Mar 6, 2004 12:18:04 GMT
Are you talking about Poker of Kings maybe? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by celebaglar on Mar 6, 2004 13:29:03 GMT
I agree with Matija in that I have noticed a marked increase in very close starting positions. While these are still thechnically in different quadrants, they're far too close together to make the game fair. The result is that whoever has the earlier turn has a big advantage. I realise this may just be a matter of luck because I have not heard of any changes to the code that allocates starting positions, but it can get very frustrating early on.
However, I would not want to have everything fixed, regimented and scrupulously equal. If I wanted that sort of experience, I'd go and play chess!
Sometimes we get good starts, sometimes bad ones. I don't think I'd like to see that eliminated.
|
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Mar 6, 2004 14:13:22 GMT
I agree, different starts give much variety to the game. But I have nothing agains a fixed start game option. Only, in that case, might it not be better if even in that case, the starts would be selected randomly from among a set of predefined starting positions.
If the last is adopted, perhaps every beta tester could compile, say, 10 sets of starting positions for both 3p and 4p games, and all of them added together might make the desired variety.
|
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Mar 6, 2004 14:14:56 GMT
Are you talking about Poker of Kings maybe? ;D No, it's Showdown at the Targ Corral, and I have decided to resign this game, giving the others a chance of a decent 3p game. |
|
|
|
Post by celebaglar on Mar 6, 2004 14:23:13 GMT
No, it's Showdown at the Targ Corral, and I have decided to resign this game, giving the others a chance of a decent 3p game. It's a shame, really, but you did cross into another quadrant, even if it was your nearest lord. With the current fixed quadrants, you should have known that doing so carries risks, and that heading the other way would have given you a safer start. |
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Mar 6, 2004 14:41:42 GMT
Never really bothered to determine where the quadrant borders are. An oversight, that just prooved to be.  |
|
|
|
Post by celebaglar on Mar 6, 2004 14:56:12 GMT
Never really bothered to determine where the quadrant borders are. An oversight, that just prooved to be. ...and I will grant you that it is sometimes not easy to make out which quadrant things are in unless you actually count the locations. Most people would not consider Kumar to be in a northern quadrant, but it is. So is Gorgrath, though it is rarely taken by northern starters. |
|
|
|
Post by ladyhawke on Mar 8, 2004 15:32:00 GMT
What about the posibility of during the creating of the game to choose 'random' starting position or 'quadrant' starting position?
Chalk up another dumb idea by Andrea! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrowhawk on Mar 8, 2004 20:37:37 GMT
What about the posibility of during the creating of the game to choose 'random' starting position or 'quadrant' starting position? Chalk up another dumb idea by Andrea! ;D Actually that's what I meant, so not dumb at all! Of course the quadrant option would remain too. |
|
