<< Back to General Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 12 of 12   
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 17:18:55

DagenDaDragon (ReTIRED OF WARLIGHT) 
Level 34
Report
Hey!
So you can go check out the [WM] VS ReLite thread to see where this threads origins are.
But basically the point that large teams games (3v3+) were simply not strategic, or barely strategic(I could be getting it wrong, I dunno I'm too lazy to reread the thread) I personally disagree with that as I see large team games requiring just as much strategy, maybe a different type of strategic thinking, but still a completely valid strategic type.

However as other people pointed out, the amount of starts makes the pick order luck simply too great for it to be strategic, at least when compared to the amount of "good bonuses".
So I was wondering if people would be interested in discussing ways in which large team games could be made strategically viable. Sze and Gui I know you both have quite a bit of experience making strategic settings, perhaps you'd be willing to put in your input?

Some setting considerations.
Low luck? 16% 0%?
Cards? Airlift, or gift cards? Both, none?
Reinforcement cards and sanction cards? Or keep it simple?
Map/map size?
How may picks?
I'm in favor of 1 or 2 max (assuming warlords or random warlords)
1 would keep the total picks nice and low, 2 would allow for combos, but would also make it even more busy and luck dependent. So perhaps auto is better? Or even (call me crazy) various presets? problem with presets is there will always be 1 or 2 best ways to play it, with causes stagnation.

I'd be interested to hear your ideas about it, if you think there is no possible way to make it strategic, thats cool, maybe put a suggestion in anyways?
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 17:28:47


[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Report
o% luck for sure
also card change much game, i am usually against card.
on pick, 1 absoluty no, 2 still low, maybe 3 is good if map is 400/500 territory.
if is a 7v7 on troll's eu, yeah only 2 pick can work.
autodistro isn't better, is only luck.
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 17:45:39


Aranka 
Level 43
Report
Make it cities for sure....not warlords.

Warlords would just make the whole thing a lottery
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 17:48:25


☨ DriveByPsy
Level 56
Report
For a 7vs7 i could see something like that :

Medium East Asia map by gui

Manual Random Warlords 2 spots of 4 armies
Base income 4 armies
Luck 0%, why not straight rounds

1 and only 1 Airlift card available for the whole game, same for Gift card.
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 17:56:18


Aranka 
Level 43
Report
Random Warlords Emergency ?? Really ?
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 18:05:17


☨ DriveByPsy
Level 56
Report
With this map and the other settings suggested, yes definitely Aranka.
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 18:08:20


Aranka 
Level 43
Report
Still think the amount of territories (28) is larger then the amount of good picks on that map.
Would still be a lottery thus with regards to who gets the good picks. Straight round is an improvement but only a few guarantee a first turn bonus.....even the 10/11 territories would require 3 turns to complete this way.
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 18:11:50


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
4vs4 can be decent. For example classic europe cities works very well, rise of rome is very good for 4vs4, but for larger games there are hardly any big enough maps to work with. IMO 0% luck is definitely required, with only 2-3 gift cards on the start and possibly a single airlift (or no airlift). One of the main problems in big team games is the lack of influence of every player on the whole board. I'd definitely avoid Sengoku or other more "lenghtened" maps and try my best with full or cities distribution. Rise of Rome might be a good start to find strategic settings for 5vs5 (maybe work your way up from there). For example:
- Rise of rome full distribution 5vs5
- 3 starts of 4 per player
- 2 gift cards
- 0% luck straight round
- 4 base income
That's just of the top of my head, map topography might be good enough to handle such a game. Of coure one of the other problems is in order to try it out real-time you'll need `0 decent players, and I know it's not that easy to find people for 3vs3.

That setting might be good enough, because the map is fluid enough despite being big. Also with 3 starts you will have to spread out.
http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TemplateID=294108
I am not entirely convinced because of single 1-bonuses, so you might even consider lowering base income to 3.
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 18:15:41


☨ DriveByPsy
Level 56
Report
Aranka, to be sure the map i'm talking about is this one :
http://warlight.net/Map?ID=8137
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 18:17:31


ps 
Level 60
Report
it depends heavily on the map and the settings. warlords can still work if it's a big enough and well balanced map. i prefer full distribution though. and a few cards to allow some players to stall slightly when having a 1on1 disadvantage.

that being said, i have played some pretty decent and competitive 6vs6 and 7vs7 random warlords distribution with no cards and it works ok.
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 18:19:26


Aranka 
Level 43
Report
Ah oke Emergency, I was imagining a different Asia map. In this case your settings indeed make sense.
Large team game strategic settings.: 3/28/2013 18:32:44


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
To be clear, warlords will not ever work in big team games... Maybe it might in auto, but autodistribution is not strategic by its very nature.
Posts 1 - 12 of 12