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.
|
MadWilly wrote
at 4:03 PM, Tuesday October 27, 2009 EDT so we agree that kdice diplomacy is native to noone playing this?
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 7:30 PM, Tuesday October 27, 2009 EDT This thread is about misunderstandings of the flagging system [Verm, Sentence 1]. At minimum, reduce misunderstandings by using the correct form of whatever language you choose to flag in, whether it is your native language or not.
|
|
ffbsensei wrote
at 11:58 AM, Wednesday October 28, 2009 EDT Actually, one of my strategies is to call for a "counter" vs a non-existent alliance. Causes much confusion and consternation by all.
|
|
Kyinsky wrote
at 4:29 PM, Wednesday October 28, 2009 EDT I rarely play at tables with dom, since I simply don't gain the points to do so regularly. I recently did, and played in a 500-level table to try it out.
I had a good early game, was seen as a likely 1st, and most people v-flagged to me. I built in the northwest corner. Eventually, the only other three players had all v-flagged to me, and were deciding what they would fight for. Teal was northeast, brown was southwest, and red was southeast. I only neighbored brown and teal---red was at least three territories away. Teal flagged 2, and asked brown if brown wanted 2 or just 3. Red was relatively small and hadn't spoken, and flagged 3. Brown attacked teal and red, teal attacked brown, and red attacked teal. Red announced that he wanted to help brown kill teal, and brown stacked for two turns. Red continued to attack teal during this time, while teal made two attacks, one to red and one to brown. Brown then began to attack teal, creating a 2v1 against the player flagged 2nd. This bothered me, as red had flagged 3 and appeared to teal to be a non-threat. He hadn't said then that his flag was to brown and me, and I can't be sure if he had meant it that way. I asked the others in the chat box if there was typical etiquette for being in first and letting others fight for place. Teal responded that flags are for the state position, to the players with higher places at the time of flagging. I hesitated, not wanting to be a tyrant interfering with fair game play, and in the end teal flagged 4th and complained that the proper flagging system was ignored. He also claimed that red was a known pga-er, which may, based on red's conduct in another game, be entirely true. I suppose my question is, how does red's conduct fit into the flagging system? Would it have been better, for the integrity of the game, for me to have supported teal? |
|
fishnetangel wrote
at 1:25 AM, Thursday October 29, 2009 EDT oh vermy i am so glad you posted this. all the flagging confusion was burying the game itself.
|
|
davidhasselhoff wrote
at 8:43 AM, Thursday October 29, 2009 EDT Ninja flagging seem to be funnier than the game itself
|
|
Vermont wrote
at 10:01 AM, Thursday October 29, 2009 EDT "Anyone who uses 'ninja flagging' in regards to the current system is using the term incorrectly. "
|
|
|
davidhasselhoff wrote
at 10:29 AM, Thursday October 29, 2009 EDT i know i was talking about the old ninja flags. I wasn't around then but it looked fun when you explained it
|
|
|
Vermont wrote
at 11:52 AM, Thursday October 29, 2009 EDT Ah, my mistake. Sorry!
It was definitely fun at times but frustrating at others. I can understand why wanted to change things around but because people don't know why flags were introduced the new system has fundamentally changed the game. |
|
kokobongo wrote
at 3:57 AM, Saturday October 31, 2009 EDT i fully agree with vermont. its the natural conclusions after long time of play. one major problem is, for example, in rule #1 and #2, after you attack the one who flagged you in order to fight for better position, he often revengefully triggers a massive truce against you, which kills your game
damn noobs |
