Forum
How to fix dom
|
ChristianSoldier wrote
at 11:10 AM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT
Make it based on total dice not on lands. Dice are a much better measure of strength.
|
|
kam|k2 wrote
at 3:04 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT man, you must be an expert, eh?
|
|
jurgen wrote
at 3:40 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT It might be interesting to have dom based on 50% lands/50% dice but I think it might be making tings too complicated
Factoring in total dice somewhere to allow a flag for 2nd/3rd might be a better way to give more importance to total dice. It would remove the possibility to ninja flag with a low dice/land |
|
ChristianSoldier wrote
at 3:55 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT Well I know more about game theory than sucking on cat appendages that's for sure.
|
|
kam|k2 wrote
at 4:26 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT first: you rly need some glasses, and maybe to grow up, cause i see no arguments at all.
but to the topic: you know what gonna happen, when you let dom count by dice? it gonna be a real boring game... ppl wont attack, cause they gonna lose dom, if they lose dice... but maybe youre right, it could be the perfect game for corner sitting fags like you. |
|
ChristianSoldier wrote
at 4:45 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT Knowing nothing else about the situation.. who is more likely to win if mid-point in the game two players have:
a) 10 lands and 30 dice b) 5 lands and 35 dice Who would you rather be immediately next to you in a game (assuming you aren't truced\pga'd)? |
|
jurgen wrote
at 4:55 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT players a clearly goes for good dom, maybe for a heroic but risky win
player b clearly just goes for a safe place, maybe for a win if he is smart enough to stay out of the other fights I wouldn't mind being next to either of them since there are good strategies possible against either of them. but kamik is right, dom was introduced to give an inscentive for attacking. If total dice becomes too important, people will play much safer (=less fun) |
|
ChristianSoldier wrote
at 5:00 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT You're wrong. Dom was introduced to keep people who were 1st place from getting garbage points when 2nd/3rd place truced up to beat them. I've been playing this game through about 4 iterations of scoring.
DOM was a momentum factor, intended to represent your average performance over the game rather than just the snapshot at the end. |
|
jurgen wrote
at 5:11 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT we are both partly right but why write "dom was"? it still is like that... and so far you haven't given enough arguments to change the current dom system.
again, a 50-50 dice/land based calculation might do a better job but imo dom(lands) >>> dom(dice) |
|
kam|k2 wrote
at 5:12 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT The Question is: do the other fight, do you have any enemies, how are the 30 dice stacked? the game is more then just fields and their dices. Especially 10 lands are quite nice restacks, and mostly a 1st-3rd in the late game. hard to decide - truly.
but just trust me cs: changing the dom, would just reward newbie player who sit on their ass - that cant be the goal of the game, gettin rewarded for playing lame. |
|
ChristianSoldier wrote
at 6:05 PM, Friday August 22, 2008 EDT In the short-term you have more to lose by attacking. You could lose 8 dice going after a land that produces dice at only 1 per turn. In the long-term of course you can't win without having enough land to produce enough dice to beat everyone else at the table.
I would agree that n00bies and some forum commenters may only see the short-term implications. |