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.

« First ‹ Previous Replies 191 - 200 of 220 Next › Last »
Vermont wrote
at 3:51 PM, Friday September 16, 2011 EDT
Original intent is important to consider for just about anything.
Dribbit wrote
at 1:06 AM, Wednesday September 21, 2011 EDT
so why is it every single table I play at everyone gets mad if I attack some early flagger and then gangs me because I didn't respect someones flag? had a 4 on 1 like that today.
montecarlo wrote
at 9:38 AM, Tuesday September 27, 2011 EDT
Dribbit, that isn't always the case. on low tables, i bet its common for a table to get pissy if you hit someones weakass early flag, and then they will revolt. however, on high tables, if you respect the weakass early flag, chances are the table will get pissed and revolt because you didnt hit it.

the whole flag situation is fucked up. newer people dont understand it, older people abuse the shit out of it. it seriously needs to get changed somehow (which is a whole new discussion...)
Loo Moo wrote
at 2:42 PM, Tuesday October 4, 2011 EDT
basically from this text I read that if you are threat to someone and he put the white flag to you, you can and often should shot him in head and this is completly right.
Don't want meet you on the street mate

Just turn off chat system and problem solved.....
mr Kreuzfeld wrote
at 6:22 AM, Wednesday October 19, 2011 EDT
not exactly Loo Moo.

he is talking about a person at the lower position offering a flag.

the equivalent situation would be;
if you are robbing a person in their home, and they offer to admit that you have won over them and promise not to try to bitch slap you, that does not mean you should let them keep the million dollars in the safe that you already cracked, and was why you came in the first place.


if a player threaten another player to flag, that usually means that the player don't want to fight the player he wants to flag. and then ofcourse the flag should be respected.

this thread is about what it means to offer a flag, or receiving a flag, without anyone asking anyone to flag. But using the flag as a "please don't attack me" or "please stop attacking me".
Dribbit wrote
at 11:50 PM, Wednesday October 19, 2011 EDT
Loo Moo, are you seriously comparing a strategy board game to real life- life and death- situtations. or were you just babbling mindlessly. oh ok.
ntw04 wrote
at 8:45 PM, Wednesday November 9, 2011 EST
As much as I agree its unfortunate that the majority doesnt play that way
DentArthurDent wrote
at 12:07 AM, Wednesday November 23, 2011 EST
Vermont; I appreciate your posting this entry! It is very informative and is a great place to point players who misunderstand the flagging system (which is everyone, including at times myself).

This article seems to be mainly about the expected behavior from the player who has been flagged (and the other plays) toward the flagger; not flagging to compensate for over expanding, still attacking after being flagged if it is strategically beneficial, etc.

Would you consider writing a follow-up delineating the behavior expected from the player who flags?

For instance, I was recently in 2nd in a close 3-way game, and chose to vflag the stronger of the two players fighting for 1st due to our positions. His rival spent a good bit of time trying to convince us that I should check my flag at 2nd because I agreed to finish behind the player I had flagged (2nd or 3rd if he emerged victorious; 3rd if he did not). Obviously this would not have benefited me or the player I vflagged (unless I were dishonest). Nonetheless, it is a common enough type of misunderstanding.
jona_vicente wrote
at 2:15 AM, Wednesday November 23, 2011 EST
199
jona_vicente wrote
at 2:15 AM, Wednesday November 23, 2011 EST
200
KDice - Multiplayer Dice War
KDice is a multiplayer strategy online game played in monthly competitions. It's like Risk. The goal is to win every territory on the map.
CREATED BY RYAN © 2006
RECOMMEND
GAMES
GPokr
Texas Holdem Poker
KDice
Online Strategy
XSketch
Online Pictionary