I am surprised how many strategic templates (e.g. so many in the MDL) use this setting.
Honestly I cannot find any added strategic value in not knowing who is moving first. So why is it so popular? Who likes it? Do I miss something?
By the way, to make it strategic, you may add some 20 OP cards at the beginning

Random move order has a slightly different strategy to cyclic/no-luck cycle.

With random move order, you could annoy your opponent for longer. There’s more of a risk management element, like how 16% luck is considered strategic and how 75% is just a pain to everyone.

It just adds that luck factor to some games. Some people like it because things being determined by luck adds excitement. It also adds realism, since in real warfare people don't take turns. If you don't like it, just don't join games with that setting. Don't ban what doesn't effect you.

"It also adds realism, since in real warfare people don't take turns."

i dont wanna break it to you... but.. random mover order or cyclic.. both are turn based.

"If you don't like it, just don't join games with that setting. Don't ban what doesn't effect you."

you dont seem to know what mdl (multi day ladder) is.
it uses many different templates wich, unlike 1v1 ladder, challenge you on multiple settings. Its also played by the most high skilled player so saying "just dont join it" wont rly do it if he wants to challenge other good players.


I also have to add that random move order sucks.

I prefer random move order. Why? Because you can't rely on having first order this/next turn, so you have to come up with a different solution for your situation. Yes, sometimes it bites you in the ass but on the other hand it saves your ass the same amount of time (accumulated over a longer time-period)

It still shouldn't be banned, because banning random move order because you don't like it would be like if someone who hates rasins made it illegal to grow and purchase them.

Wow goodgame, that’s exactly what I thought!

I for one always think of raisins when I think of random move order.

Wow Buns, that's exactly what I thought!

you could try to find some of the threads that talks about what is considered strategic, this is basically the same discustion as the ones about WR and NLC

Edited 7/23/2019 14:23:20

you could try to find some of the threads that talks about what is considered strategic, this is basically the same discustion as the ones about WR and NLC

I'm no fan of random move order, but it affects strategy and some people like it. It's a quirk that belongs.

Could look at reducing the number of competitive templates that use this setting, since so many people seem to hate it. It's true that there are other quirks - e.g. No Split, Army Cap (I don't mean extreme ones like Georgia and Bork), Extra Income for Territories - which are more interesting, are non-luck-based, but yet are much rarer.

Freedom for raisin-eaters, but adding salt to caramel should get you at least 5 years.

What Timinator said, but just go with goodgame's logic.

Well, I see there is not such a big consensus that random move order is so bad as I see it.

@timi: I may be still relatively too new to this game to appreciate the strategic aspects of random move order, still I basically never found anything strategic except hoping to get first move. I played Hannibal in the last CL and many turns I was just annoyed not to know who moves first as the success of many strategies was down to 50%.

Also, even in the long run, there will be actually disadvantaged players as in any statistical distribution, and a few players will be very disadvantaged. In any case it will bring the win% of a better player vs a weaker a bit (maybe not much) closer to 50%.

@goodgame: as joy said, I am talking about official competitions, CL, MDL, etc.
I do not really want to ban something simply because I do not like it. My point was checking what the community thinks about it, if there are strategic arguments in favour of it that I cannot see, and then yea... if consensus is about reducing random, then "democratically" consider to reduce/eliminate it from any strategic competition.
Totally far from my mind the raisins example! :)

Edited 7/24/2019 19:32:22

@Njord: btw I am not against random and I like WR. It may give some lucky progression, but it adds strategic considerations especially in the picking and expansion. So happy to play it sometimes.

And if by any chance you have any thread to link about random move order, please share it

All you need to know about random move order is that move order gets decided randomly decided each turn. It doesn't use a cycle and the move order from a previous turn doesn't make a difference to the next move order.

See https://www.warzone.com/wiki/Move_order for details.

what we really need instead of cyclical and random move order, is weighted random move order.

Sorry. I was put off by the title of this thread.

i've asked for that several times Njord, it has yet to come :(