Forum
Common misconceptions about the current flagging system.
Posted By: Vermont at 9:20 AM, Wednesday November 19, 2014 EST
I've noticed that a good deal of the frustration with the game and with other players is consistently due to misunderstandings of the flagging system. This becomes pretty evident when you take a look at players' review pages and a large majority of the negative, and even positive comments, deal with flagging.
The initial flagging system was introduced solely as a way to help the game end faster. It was a simple checkbox, not related to place. When all players other than the one in first checked this box the game would end and each player would receive place based on their current position.
Incidentally, this system led to 'ninja flagging,' where a player would wait for everyone else to have their flag up and then quickly over-expand and then flag themselves, ending the game. They would then finish much higher than they should have otherwise. This led to some fun games as people would watch and try to respond, but it also cause some frustration. Anyone who uses 'ninja flagging' in regards to the current system is using the term incorrectly.
I bring this up because the current flagging system was introduced specifically to address the ninja flagging 'problem.' Some players that play in both systems find the old system preferable, some do not. To each their own; I don't think Ryan will be changing it back anytime soon.
The issue we have now is that flags are grossly misunderstood. You see people all the time expecting that when their flag is up they will not be attacked and thus they feel you did not "honor" or "respect" their flag if you attack them. This completely erroneous assumption has lead to a great deal of complaining, frustration, and negative review leaving.
Here are the flagging facts:
1. If you flag to someone, they have the complete right to still attack you, and often should. There is nothing 'dishonorable' about it. They may need to expand to fight for a higher position and your flag should not stop them from expanding to do so. They may want to earn more dom points - it is their right to do so as they have clearly earned a stronger position. Flags are ONLY there to help the game end faster; they are not magic invincibility potions to protect you when you otherwise should die.
2. People who over-expand and then throw up a flag should frequently be attacked. Just because you put up a flag does not mean that you can foolishly over-expand and leave little stacks lying about and expect to keep them. Again, a flag is not a magic invincibility potion that protects you from attack - it's just there to help the game end faster. You'll often see people over expand recklessly throw up a flag and have it 'respected' and thus earning a position higher than they should have gotten. Good strategy on their part if they think they can get away with it, but poor form on the other players' part to let them do so. Keep in mind that that over-expanding player is taking dominance points away from the other players when they do this as well; frequently from the person who is in the best position to take their smaller stacks.
3. An early flag is essentially a truce offer. If a player verbally flags in round two, it's a safe assumption that those two players are effectively truced and will not be hindering each other's play. The other players on the board need to actively counter this or will almost always end up losing to these two players. This is not very different from being observant and countering two players who says things like "I'm cool" or "how about we be friendly." If you don't fight this behavior when possible, those players will win. You will see some people that ignore or even purposefully attack early verbal flags. This is a reasonable solution to this problem. They're probably flagging early because they are weak, so take the land and dominance points if you are in a position to do so.
In review:
Flagging Rule #1 - Flagging to someone does not mean they cannot and often should not attack you.
Flagging Rule #2 - Players who recklessly over-expand and then flag for defense should often be attacked.
Flagging Rule #3 - An early verbal flag is often an effective truce offer.
I will state the most important part again: flagging was only introduced to help the game end faster. Your flag DOES NOT prevent you from being attacked - it is not what it was designed to do.
The initial flagging system was introduced solely as a way to help the game end faster. It was a simple checkbox, not related to place. When all players other than the one in first checked this box the game would end and each player would receive place based on their current position.
Incidentally, this system led to 'ninja flagging,' where a player would wait for everyone else to have their flag up and then quickly over-expand and then flag themselves, ending the game. They would then finish much higher than they should have otherwise. This led to some fun games as people would watch and try to respond, but it also cause some frustration. Anyone who uses 'ninja flagging' in regards to the current system is using the term incorrectly.
I bring this up because the current flagging system was introduced specifically to address the ninja flagging 'problem.' Some players that play in both systems find the old system preferable, some do not. To each their own; I don't think Ryan will be changing it back anytime soon.
The issue we have now is that flags are grossly misunderstood. You see people all the time expecting that when their flag is up they will not be attacked and thus they feel you did not "honor" or "respect" their flag if you attack them. This completely erroneous assumption has lead to a great deal of complaining, frustration, and negative review leaving.
Here are the flagging facts:
1. If you flag to someone, they have the complete right to still attack you, and often should. There is nothing 'dishonorable' about it. They may need to expand to fight for a higher position and your flag should not stop them from expanding to do so. They may want to earn more dom points - it is their right to do so as they have clearly earned a stronger position. Flags are ONLY there to help the game end faster; they are not magic invincibility potions to protect you when you otherwise should die.
2. People who over-expand and then throw up a flag should frequently be attacked. Just because you put up a flag does not mean that you can foolishly over-expand and leave little stacks lying about and expect to keep them. Again, a flag is not a magic invincibility potion that protects you from attack - it's just there to help the game end faster. You'll often see people over expand recklessly throw up a flag and have it 'respected' and thus earning a position higher than they should have gotten. Good strategy on their part if they think they can get away with it, but poor form on the other players' part to let them do so. Keep in mind that that over-expanding player is taking dominance points away from the other players when they do this as well; frequently from the person who is in the best position to take their smaller stacks.
3. An early flag is essentially a truce offer. If a player verbally flags in round two, it's a safe assumption that those two players are effectively truced and will not be hindering each other's play. The other players on the board need to actively counter this or will almost always end up losing to these two players. This is not very different from being observant and countering two players who says things like "I'm cool" or "how about we be friendly." If you don't fight this behavior when possible, those players will win. You will see some people that ignore or even purposefully attack early verbal flags. This is a reasonable solution to this problem. They're probably flagging early because they are weak, so take the land and dominance points if you are in a position to do so.
In review:
Flagging Rule #1 - Flagging to someone does not mean they cannot and often should not attack you.
Flagging Rule #2 - Players who recklessly over-expand and then flag for defense should often be attacked.
Flagging Rule #3 - An early verbal flag is often an effective truce offer.
I will state the most important part again: flagging was only introduced to help the game end faster. Your flag DOES NOT prevent you from being attacked - it is not what it was designed to do.
the full monte wrote
at 2:50 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST nonono, im not saying there is no right and no wrong here. i would say rule #1 is correct. rule #2 is correct 90% of the time, and rule #3 is incorrect based on confused terminology.
concerning #2: sometimes they should NOT be attacked (but only like 10% of the time), because if you attack the flag the offered you, they will get pissy, and then eventually you are facing a table where its 1v1v1v1v1v1 (with a dead vflagger). on the other hand, if you were to respect that vflag, you could let them win the game for you. sure they might take a lot of your dom, but the extra points that 1st gets over 2nd more than makes up for that loss in dom. again, though, this happens like 10% of the time. 90% of the time you should attack that flag. concerning #3: i agree with whoever stated earlier that accepted vflag =/= truce. i base this on experience. if i am smaller, and i vflag to someone and they say ok, they are under no obligation to help me (esp if everyone else immediately shouts that they vflag too). he can sit there and let everyone fight for 2nd, and i can die a horrible death. however, if i somehow get him to truce me instead of just accept an offered vflag, then he should help me, and i will probably get 2nd. so, in my experience, when i am weak (and maybe this is just how i play), i analyze the board. if i think the dude im considering flagging to would NEED me to not fight him in order to get 1st... then i offer a truce, and will say im cool with 2nd after he accepts the truce. but i make sure to use the word TRUCE and NOT vflag. however, if he is strong enough that he doesnt need me to win the game, then i offer the vflag, but will also look to either 1) vflag to someone else, so that no one gets pissy and tries to counter a nontruce, or 2) offer someone else a mini-truce (definition = truce that doesnt want 1st), again, so that the rest of the table wont try to counter a nonexistent truce. so i think there is a difference between an accepted vflag and a truce. |
the full monte wrote
at 2:54 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST and i think this is a great topic and discussion. if only you had the ability to delete other peoples posts that didnt pertain to the thread topic. (i.e. get rid of this annoying transitive verb discussion).
also i enjoyed reading you and the Brains discussion of vflagging, but was irritated when it devolved into a debate on how to debate. |
Vermont wrote
at 3:00 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST monte, make up your mind.
"...i also tend to agree with the Brain (sorry verms) that there is no right/wrong in this discussion..." |
Vermont wrote
at 3:22 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST Also, monte, I originally reworded the third rule per your request:
"...i would add to flagging rule #3 the exception that IF the flag is respected, then it is a truce." |
the full monte wrote
at 3:28 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST sorry, what im trying to say is: there is no absolute right/wrong here.
i agree 100% with #1 i agree 90% with #2 i agree 80% with #3 overall these are a good framework of rules (90% right according to numbers i picked out of my brain). but they are not perfect, and shouldnt be considered a golden rule, like never attack the penguin. in the end situations will present themselves in which i would choose to respect a vflag, you would choose to eat a couple, but still respect, and Brain would choose to completely destroy the vflagger. in those cases, there is no right and no wrong. similar to how sam's style is hyperaggressive, and accept the results, whereas my style is conservative and whine about results. he has higher dom, lower placement, i have higher placement lower dom. in the end we both succeed. and neither of our methods is right or wrong. |
the full monte wrote
at 3:34 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST ya, i appreciate the change in rule #3. however, upon further thinking and reading of others posts here and playing the game more... i think rule #3 is 20% incorrect because of the basic rule that 95% of people agree on: truces > flags.
if someone accepts a vflag, that means everyone else can still kill that vflagger without the dreadful knowledge that the person who accepted the vflag will try to save said vflagger. whereas if two people truce, that means that there will be help. what i mean is: accepted vflag = you can still get 2nd. truce = your best shot is 3rd. i.e. youre on equal footing with the vflagger. but 80% of the time, an accepted vflag is in fact a truce, and you better counter that shit. |
the full monte wrote
at 3:36 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST sry, that was in bad order:
accepted flag = you still have a shot at 2nd, so youre on equal footing with the vflagger. truce = your best shot is 3rd. |
the full monte wrote
at 3:38 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST but tbh, this is an excellent post for newer players who are the ones that need to be educated the most. the following discussion about intricate situations and dirty dirty das habits... noobs dont need to learn all that, they just need an intro to what this flag feature means. so i applaud you for an excellent original post.
|
Vermont wrote
at 3:46 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST Nice try at a make-up post monte. Really.
|
dasfury wrote
at 6:09 PM, Friday November 6, 2009 EST Really?!?! Any chance to get a shot in you will take it, wont you monte?
I guess its ok since the Titans are 1-6, i'll let you have that one. |