Forum
Suggestion: Tables where verbal flags are not allowed.
|
wiggin1 wrote
at 5:05 AM, Sunday February 12, 2012 EST
A version like 16 dice. Where those of us who like to play the game out, and don't care primarily about rating can play.
|
|
seeb wrote
at 5:35 AM, Sunday February 12, 2012 EST good idea
|
|
Louis Cypher wrote
at 7:47 AM, Monday February 13, 2012 EST and so new and innovative and not heard a hundred times...
Take the chat/contact out of a social game, that makes it - nonsense? Enforce this rule with chat enabled - impossible? Forbid silenttrucing and -flagging, great plan.... Get a precise idea on how to realise it or drop it. |
|
wiggin1 wrote
at 10:13 AM, Monday February 13, 2012 EST What is it that you think people will do? Verbal flag anyway? If they want to do that, they would play at one of the normal tables where verbal flagging is allowed.
|
|
seeb wrote
at 4:02 PM, Monday February 13, 2012 EST @Louis Cypher; dont show enemy colors. every enemy is red, yours is green. enough information. everyone fights for himself. would be fun :)
|
|
Myst wrote
at 4:06 PM, Monday February 13, 2012 EST This is very good idea. One time we managed to agree not to talk at all in chat (no truces/no verbal flags) and it was really cool game.
|
|
Louis Cypher wrote
at 10:19 AM, Tuesday February 14, 2012 EST You can do it today if you like - no need for new tables. Just agree on no vflags like others agreed on no chat. I've played teams a couple of times because all agreed a priori. You don't need special tables for that, just people that want to do it.
As for all colors being red that would ruin the strategy of cutting, sparing islands and so on. You can not really fight the strongest oponent or kill the weak or whatever suits you best, as you can't distinguish them. This would be a very different game. |
|
Anfo wrote
at 1:16 PM, Tuesday February 14, 2012 EST Taking the chat out of a social game wont make it nonsense, it just shifts the conversation to body language (or dice language) and creates a new facet to the strategy. You would have to try more so to anticipate moves, and you could still have an mutual agreement, but it would be unspoken and able to be ended at either parties discretion.
|
|
deadcode wrote
at 1:29 PM, Tuesday February 14, 2012 EST No chat tables would make silent truces too strong. No one would be able to counter effectively.
|
|
MadHat_Sam wrote
at 1:59 PM, Tuesday February 14, 2012 EST A slightly more elegant solution to seeb would be fun, where you have fog of war, you only see the color of the lands bordering you. You would have less upside to be nice to a neighbor with only having imperfect knowledge of the board. I really think this would increase the skill required as well as decrease a simply chat focused strategy. You would have to try to pull information from people in the chat and determine what can be trusted and what can't.
|
|
Vermont wrote
at 2:12 PM, Tuesday February 14, 2012 EST I haven't made a conquer club reference in a long time...
|