Forum
Advisor Blog
Reviews
Strategies
Ideas
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 9:46 AM, Saturday November 7, 2009 EST i honestly enjoy this community a ton and apologize if i offended any of you due to poorly-timed sarcasm or quickly-posted-but-not-thought-through posts.
<3 verms <3 das |
|
DoubleDogDareYa wrote
at 8:13 PM, Saturday November 7, 2009 EST Vermont's perspective is just that...a perspective.
From my standpoint, there are 3 types of flags and 3 types of truces. While an early flag can be misinterpreted as a truce, this is not always the case. A truce differs greatly from any flag in that both players who entered the truce agreement will work as a team without a specific place in mind. These two will fight as one till the death. Trucers will protect one another at any cost. In contrast, an early flag simply subordinates one player (flager) to another (flagee). While future attacks between the two are not likely, the rest of the board is not going to be threatened by their presence as in a truce. Here's why, the subordinate flagger, may flag under another player at any time, and the flagee is under no obligation to protect the flagger. Furthermore, additional players may flag under either player with the same respect. And most importantly, the flagee may flag under another player. Too often, people play soley by Vermont's logic to gain an advantage by counter-truce. While a counter is valid 100% of the time in a truce situation, I find that countering an early flag is only warranted about 30% of the time. So here are the type of truces and flags in my opinion. TRUCES 1) Hard Truce - Two players "partner up" and play as one to the death. 2) Contingent Truce - The truce is agreed upon with one person getting 1st and the other 2nd. And then play as described above. 3) Soft Truce - an unspoken alliance which is mutually beneficial to both parties survival. This is often mis-interpreted as PGA. An honestly, sometimes it is PGA. FLAGS Simple Flag - One player Vflags or real flags to another player. There is no obligation by either party to protect one another. There is no obligation by the flagger to stop attacking other players. Contingent Flag - One player Vflags or real flags to another player with the understanding that a particular place will be had by subordinating. For example, Green flags to Blue with the understanding that Green gets at least 3rd place. Passive Flag - A person flags to a flagee and sits in their territory and lets the everyone else fight. This person will not help anyone or interfere with anyone. These are the people who usually end up in a roll-off situation. So anyway... just my perspective. |
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 8:53 PM, Saturday November 7, 2009 EST I would add:
Peninsular truce: Two players agree not to attack each other while growing out of a wide peninsula, but no further obligations when that is done. |
|
japedol wrote
at 1:27 AM, Sunday November 8, 2009 EST My major pet peeve in this game is when your immediate neighbours flag to you early in the game, essentially boxing you in, and allowing someone else to win. Usually I'd ignore those kinds of flags, unless I'm not in the mood to be bitched at.
|
|
kokobongo wrote
at 3:21 AM, Tuesday November 10, 2009 EST one other problem about vflags - for the leader its better everyone to vflag, rather than flag out coz if the game ends before round 8, he will not take the bonus points ;)
|
|
Pat Whalen wrote
at 11:38 PM, Saturday November 14, 2009 EST Why thank you Verms/Monte.
|
|
Troy11 wrote
at 10:48 AM, Monday November 16, 2009 EST i find it easier to move on and flag 7th then waste my time if im struggling in a game
|
|
CriticalDog wrote
at 3:23 PM, Tuesday November 17, 2009 EST I have been linked to here a few times in the last week or so, most recently upon vflagging in round 4 to a clearly superior positioned player. I was purple, I had flagged to brown, and yellow immediately said "counter blue?". I replied that it wasn't a truce.
He shot me a link to this thread, and said stated that early flag is a truce. And I had to disagree.... I think it is largely dependant upon the situation. There can't really be a hard fast rule on it. Monte comes closest, I think. In our situation, I figured brown was going to pull at least 2nd (and I was correct) based on his stacks and position. I stated that it wasnt' a truce, in that I wasn't going to defend his position, nor did I expect him to defend mine. Blue appeared to agree (much to yellows annoyance). When I vflag to someone, I don't expect them to fight for my position. When folks vflag to me, often (especially at the lower tables) it's "CD, I flag 3rd", to which I'll replay I accept the flag, but can't guarantee any positions. So, tl;dr version: Verm- Nice post. Monte- I think I mostly agree with you about #3. |
|
Vermont wrote
at 7:57 PM, Tuesday November 17, 2009 EST Reread the updated version of the rule #3. It says it is _often_ an effective truce _offer_.
Certainly not always, and certainly not always accepted. However, it does need to be dealt with in a similar fashion a great deal of the time. |
|
dc2 wrote
at 10:22 AM, Monday November 23, 2009 EST I think thats an interesting point about vflags and effective truce etc, If it were possible to flag any position at any time in the game, would that get rid of vflags? and if so would that make the game better or worse? I have a problem with people flagging to an individual, this happens all the time and occasionally ends up getting complicated when the flaggee gets unlucky and ends up weaker than the flagger, sometimes this results in the flagger feeling compelled to defend the flaggee much to the annoyance of their opponent. This leads me to think that actual flags earlier in the game may be a good thing especially if you were able to flag any position.
|
