Forum
Why Flagging for Place is Bad
|
Dudeface wrote
at 11:48 AM, Tuesday July 8, 2008 EDT
To let everyone know where I stand, and to avoid name calling later, I start every game by posting the same message: “flagging for place is lame, m’kay”
About one in five times, someone call me a name, or tries to explain why flagging for place is good. In either case, we spend the game discussing the pros and cons of flagging for places (as apposed to flagging out when you are in last place). My point is simple. KDice is a battle game, and flying a flag that says “I’m happy with second or third place, please leave me alone so I can prey on weaker players” is contrary to the spirit of a game that has domination and surprise reversals at its core. Most of the time the discussion ends with everyone at least understanding why I don’t honor flagging for place. Sometimes I will convert the person. Sometimes it will degenerate into name calling. Occasionally, players will gang up on me “to teach me a lesson”. And once I won with a single space when the person in forth place got tired of watching and flagged out. Today, during one of these discussions, someone countered with a phrase that crystallizes my point on this topic: “You are not going to win this argument, because being a wuss pays in KDice” Flagging for place has become yet another way to farm points. In every other example of this practice, I shrugged, thinking that no game can be perfect. In this case I can’t just shrug it off. Flagging for place encourages players to wuss out. It is counter to the spirit of a battle/war game. And flagging for place is sucking a lot of the joy out of playing KDice. Thoughtful commentary anyone? |
« First
‹ Previous
Replies 31 - 38 of 38
|
moondust wrote
at 1:48 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT Thanks Johnson, very good point!
|
|
Ryan wrote
at 2:11 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT @dudeface - If 1st doesn't respect the flag then the dynamic hasn't changed... a lower player can still get the flagged players position or even first! Right? The game continues as if there were no flags. I think you're assuming that a flagger is guaranteed his position when he is only guaranteed no higher position.
|
|
Forrest III wrote
at 5:29 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT I prefer the old kdice when it was blood and guts and no rules. And moondust, in your example player (A) gets into first by skill. What about someone who gets it by luck? How could any system differentiate between the two? I say we go back to the old flagging. I miss the offal.
|
|
|
Dudeface wrote
at 6:22 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT I have to disagree with you Ryan, the dynamic has changed. In the situation we are discussing, the player who has flagged, is no longer a threat to player currently in first place. First place doesn’t have to honor the flag, but first no longer has to worry about the flagged player taking first either. There is no meaningful chance at a double cross. It is that dynamic change that dooms lower players and sucks the fun out of the game. All in the name of finishing the game quicker, and preventing some fringe problems with farming points.
I am not against Alliances. Diplomacy and Ally Making and Surrendering and Double Dealing and Back Stabbing is what made this a great game. What makes KDice a little less now is that some of that diplomacy is missing; replaced by automation. |
|
Johnson213 wrote
at 9:31 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT I don't understand how you can disagree with the creator of the site...if anyone knows what the flagging system is abt...it's the creator.
|
|
Earl Grey wrote
at 9:47 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT Yawn, yawn, f*ck**g yawn.
Someone plase call the Department of Instant Gratification.... ...totally fed up with the number of games that don't get played out. |
|
AlphaMeridian wrote
at 10:44 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT I'm generally anti-flagging, so I suppose that's an open invitation for all flaggers to disrespect the 1% of the time I flag for something other than last place (whether that be 7th, or 3rd or whatever). That's fine, and I can respect that.
I *just* had a game right now which underscores flagging's idiocy. There are 5 of us or so on a very dynamic, but 8 stacked board. One guy flags for like 4th, and attempts to treat his flag like a CLOAK OF INVINCIBILITY despite the fact that the other 4 players (myself included) were very much attempting to play for first, and that included acquiring more territory - even if that meant the territory was in the center. Needless to say, when he started to complain in chat, the 3 major players gave him a solid thrashing before taking *all* of his territory and went on our merry way. As to the "it makes the game shorter" argument; if you want the game to be short, why are you playing anyway? I suppose one may enjoy the earlier rounds more than the later rounds, but I certainly can appreciate a complex, 8 stacked endgame, and I'll generally not shy away from such an endgame if there's even a SLIVER of a possibility I can move up a place. I suppose the TL;DR of this post is: 1) AlphaMeridian will generally *not* respect your flag, get over it. 2) If you want to flag, flag for last place and go and play another game 3) Don't treat your flag like some kind of invincibility cloak - you are STILL in the game, and other people might have plans for your territory even if you don't. |
|
|
Dudeface wrote
at 10:50 PM, Wednesday July 9, 2008 EDT While I appreciate the KDice site, and acknowledge the effort it has taken to develop the game to level it is at.... Ryan isn't god.
I am pointing out what I see as a logical flaw that is effecting the enjoyment level of the game. And, I'm doing it in a forum designed for just that purpose. Arguments like "No game is perfect" and "Ryan's decisions shouldn't be questioned" are invalid. Posing questions and asking for discussion is how grievances are addressed and problems are solved. If I was in Ryan's shoes, I would like the seeing the details of the game discussed and challenged. Because, in the end, all choices as to the games status are Ryan's. |
