Forum
Advisor Blog
Reviews
Strategies
Ideas
Respecting Flags
Posted By: Grunvagr at 9:28 AM, Sunday June 8, 2008 EDT
***This post is subject to change, depending on the community reaction***
Not all flags need to be immediately respected. If you are the leader, consider the flag as a request for mercy, at which point you can choose to respect it or not.
- When is it polite kdice etiquette to respect a flag?
If someone has 8 stacks (especially) and is on the fringe of the board, has more lands than someone else on the board, and gives their flag and promise to not hit you.
(There are other examples: but generally, the player should have SOME tall stack on the board still, and thus a valid reason to at least put in a plea for mercy, instead of three lands with 2 stacks, for example)
- When is it okay to ignore a flag?
If someone has been fighting you all game (draining your lands, dice count and opportunity to win)... and they flag suddenly. ESPECIALLY if they are flagging after either:
1) attacking you with an 8v7 and losing (killing their chance to win).
2) attacking elsewhere, and leaving nothing but 1 and 2 stacks everywhere... (next to your 6+ stacks)
KEY NOTE: I would advise that you should always try to respect a flag so as to not wipe someone off the board COMPLETELY.
(unless you need to go through them to relink, or are rewarding an ally with place)
***Generally, use common sense***
If teal has 2 eigh stacks on the corner of the map and flags... and blue has one 5 stack - conquers two lands and flags next to your 8 stacks. Honestly, think about it. Does he deserve to place over teal? It's a ninja move, in essence, and you can make the call as to respect the flag or not. (I would 8v4, etc and mop up, but again, it is UP to you).
Just realize that not all flags need to be respected 100% immediately. A flag is a REQUEST for mercy, not 100% immunization from all attacks (otherwise it would be coded in the game that way). A flag isn't the equivalent of the immunity idol on "Survivor" if you catch my drift.
___________________________________________
Below is a message from Ryan, while discussing the flagging system, and how we can make it better:
"Honestly, I believe the currently flagging is the most balanced. Let's consider the different types of flagging:
1) No flags. Players battle until one player has every territory. Problem: games get draw out and last 1 hour. Even if 2nd has given up 1st must still keep rolling to win. This is the original reason for flags - to end the game quicker when the outcome has already been determined.
2) If everyone, except 1st, flags then the game ends. This was a good flagging system and lasted quite a while. The problem with it is you could farm dominance very easily and you could ninja flag. For example, 3 players left, 3rd doesn't want to flag, 1st wants more dominance points, 2nd flags. 1st has more incentive to attack 2nd. Ninja flagging meant if you were the last to flag you could make a couple of attacks on your turn, gain position and flag to end the game at a higher position.
3) Instant flagging. We tried having flags to make you instantly leave the game. The problem is that if you're in last and you know another higher player can flag then you'll probably wait. The outcome was that in many games people would wait until you had 3 or 4 players down to 1 or 2 territories - the player in first laughing and gaining dominance. This was frustrating.
4) Position flagging. This flagging fixes the problem with the previous type, lower players know that higher players can't flag out and will flag when they know they are finished. It also fixes ninja flagging - once you flag you can only flag for lower positions. If two players flag for a position they have to fight it out, negotiate, or the server determines the higher player based on territories and dice. It also acts as a contract with higher players and solves the problem of higher players farming. Higher players know that a flagged player can't unflag and isn't a threat.
The problem with #4 thats being mention in my opinion is small compared to the problems that it solves. People respect flags too much. End game negotiations is part of the game and has been with every type of flagging. The real problem is that the current flagging is so easy that we have become lazy with it, use it a lot, and accept most outcomes. The better players will realize this and use flagging to get the best outcomes and this will include not respecting all flags.
With all this said, the problem I think that needs to be solved, and has existed in previous versions of flagging, is to make sure everyone knows that flagging is not a sure thing. If it were it would be enforced in the game. Since flagging for 2nd doesn't always mean you get 2nd it means that its not a hard "rule" and is open to using however you like as a strategic tool. Of course when someone doesn't respect your flag you're going to get upset, but this is part of the game like getting upset when several players decide to focus on attacking you - its part of the game. When people complain about not respecting flags you can point them here - or maybe an advisor can write a blog post about respecting flags.
I think it helps to consider the history of flagging to understand where it's at. If you have suggestions for improvement please volunteer them."
_________________________________________
Grun's Commentary:
Play the game and have fun. Remember that the point is to WIN the game and have fun. Don't flag in round 3 because someone has an 8 stack. Try the chatbox to change the course of events or understand that 8v5s DO defend, and then there you are, poised to win the game and you can get no higher than 2nd due to premature flagging.
PS: Below is a relevant link.
http://kdice.com/discussion/topics/44760615?page=5
Not all flags need to be immediately respected. If you are the leader, consider the flag as a request for mercy, at which point you can choose to respect it or not.
- When is it polite kdice etiquette to respect a flag?
If someone has 8 stacks (especially) and is on the fringe of the board, has more lands than someone else on the board, and gives their flag and promise to not hit you.
(There are other examples: but generally, the player should have SOME tall stack on the board still, and thus a valid reason to at least put in a plea for mercy, instead of three lands with 2 stacks, for example)
- When is it okay to ignore a flag?
If someone has been fighting you all game (draining your lands, dice count and opportunity to win)... and they flag suddenly. ESPECIALLY if they are flagging after either:
1) attacking you with an 8v7 and losing (killing their chance to win).
2) attacking elsewhere, and leaving nothing but 1 and 2 stacks everywhere... (next to your 6+ stacks)
KEY NOTE: I would advise that you should always try to respect a flag so as to not wipe someone off the board COMPLETELY.
(unless you need to go through them to relink, or are rewarding an ally with place)
***Generally, use common sense***
If teal has 2 eigh stacks on the corner of the map and flags... and blue has one 5 stack - conquers two lands and flags next to your 8 stacks. Honestly, think about it. Does he deserve to place over teal? It's a ninja move, in essence, and you can make the call as to respect the flag or not. (I would 8v4, etc and mop up, but again, it is UP to you).
Just realize that not all flags need to be respected 100% immediately. A flag is a REQUEST for mercy, not 100% immunization from all attacks (otherwise it would be coded in the game that way). A flag isn't the equivalent of the immunity idol on "Survivor" if you catch my drift.
___________________________________________
Below is a message from Ryan, while discussing the flagging system, and how we can make it better:
"Honestly, I believe the currently flagging is the most balanced. Let's consider the different types of flagging:
1) No flags. Players battle until one player has every territory. Problem: games get draw out and last 1 hour. Even if 2nd has given up 1st must still keep rolling to win. This is the original reason for flags - to end the game quicker when the outcome has already been determined.
2) If everyone, except 1st, flags then the game ends. This was a good flagging system and lasted quite a while. The problem with it is you could farm dominance very easily and you could ninja flag. For example, 3 players left, 3rd doesn't want to flag, 1st wants more dominance points, 2nd flags. 1st has more incentive to attack 2nd. Ninja flagging meant if you were the last to flag you could make a couple of attacks on your turn, gain position and flag to end the game at a higher position.
3) Instant flagging. We tried having flags to make you instantly leave the game. The problem is that if you're in last and you know another higher player can flag then you'll probably wait. The outcome was that in many games people would wait until you had 3 or 4 players down to 1 or 2 territories - the player in first laughing and gaining dominance. This was frustrating.
4) Position flagging. This flagging fixes the problem with the previous type, lower players know that higher players can't flag out and will flag when they know they are finished. It also fixes ninja flagging - once you flag you can only flag for lower positions. If two players flag for a position they have to fight it out, negotiate, or the server determines the higher player based on territories and dice. It also acts as a contract with higher players and solves the problem of higher players farming. Higher players know that a flagged player can't unflag and isn't a threat.
The problem with #4 thats being mention in my opinion is small compared to the problems that it solves. People respect flags too much. End game negotiations is part of the game and has been with every type of flagging. The real problem is that the current flagging is so easy that we have become lazy with it, use it a lot, and accept most outcomes. The better players will realize this and use flagging to get the best outcomes and this will include not respecting all flags.
With all this said, the problem I think that needs to be solved, and has existed in previous versions of flagging, is to make sure everyone knows that flagging is not a sure thing. If it were it would be enforced in the game. Since flagging for 2nd doesn't always mean you get 2nd it means that its not a hard "rule" and is open to using however you like as a strategic tool. Of course when someone doesn't respect your flag you're going to get upset, but this is part of the game like getting upset when several players decide to focus on attacking you - its part of the game. When people complain about not respecting flags you can point them here - or maybe an advisor can write a blog post about respecting flags.
I think it helps to consider the history of flagging to understand where it's at. If you have suggestions for improvement please volunteer them."
_________________________________________
Grun's Commentary:
Play the game and have fun. Remember that the point is to WIN the game and have fun. Don't flag in round 3 because someone has an 8 stack. Try the chatbox to change the course of events or understand that 8v5s DO defend, and then there you are, poised to win the game and you can get no higher than 2nd due to premature flagging.
PS: Below is a relevant link.
http://kdice.com/discussion/topics/44760615?page=5
|
boggle100 wrote
at 10:50 AM, Monday June 9, 2008 EDT What I usually say is that flags are advisory and not compulsory.
Not respecting flags is perfectly reasonably. imo 'respecting' ALL flags, even ninja flags & early flags is completely unreasonable. |
|
bildo wrote
at 4:57 PM, Monday June 9, 2008 EDT I respect the dice. You gott'em, I respect. Flags let you out of the game before you get handed some respect. There is no handy set of rules that is going to cover all situations, or even most situations. In every situation, the dice will determine the rules of engagement.
|
|
crapdude wrote
at 7:32 PM, Monday June 9, 2008 EDT I respect every flag except:
[1] a higher or lower ranked flagged player that attacks you, [2] a player flagged for the same position as you [3] an away player. Respecting a ninja flag or a bullshit flag from someone who's been hitting you all game is difficult to do but leaves no ambiguity in the rules and enforces more sportsmanlike play. The main reasons people don't respect flags is vendetta and selfish points accrument which are both traits of an unsportsmanlike player. Who is any player to decide who 'deserves' 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th or 7th? How you play and the rules should determine your placing - not the arbitrary ethics of a random player who had a better start and lost less 4v2s than you. |
|
Bugaboo-X wrote
at 7:48 AM, Wednesday June 11, 2008 EDT I feel that the flagging system is fine as is it. The nature of the game now forces each player to question his own attitudes and expectations on a case-by-case basis, and to learn to manage his response to others' as well. That level of complexity is a benefit to interesting social play, not a detriment. If the rules about flagging (and by extension, ally-making) are more strictly defined, we might as well be playing by ourselves against AI programs.
What I find frustrating about the system is actually one of its tangent elements: Very few players seem to be studying other players' profiles UNTIL they get pissed off and go on vengeance attacks. If you have some idea of how your opponent plays, flagging decisions won't be nearly as surprising and problematic. |
|
jaquibosox wrote
at 4:21 PM, Wednesday June 11, 2008 EDT I agree with Grun wholeheartedly, people need to learn what a flag does and doesn't mean.
Thraxle, what you speak of only allowing last place to resign is a different form of the instaflag, except worse. With the instaflag, you would be able to immediately quit and take your dom points with you. With your suggestion, you would have to wait until your in last place and slowly get your dom sucked away. I agree with Johnson, in that whoever is in first place should let the next highest players fight it out, and take the role of onlooker. A ninja flag will typically be respected as long as the other players it affects has a chance to fight for the place. If not, I will almost always take out the ninja flagger. |
|
Snews88 wrote
at 11:41 AM, Thursday June 12, 2008 EDT FlaggersNeverWin writes:
> The problem is that others have the goal of getting the most overall points. While this certainly makes sense, unfortunately the flagging system allows them to do so at the expense of actually trying to win the game at hand. This is a fallacy. There are many reasonable strategies; it's integral to what makes the game fascinating (and sometimes maddeningly so). The goal cannot always be to win. Starting position, combined with results on early turns, often dictate top players' strategy. Knowing and understanding one's odds of placing 2nd (or 3rd, or 4th...) are key to successful play. If your odds of finishing 1st are slim, attacking the leader may be the worst possible play. If you and your neighbor are 3rd and 4th and each have tall stacks, not attacking each other could be to both your advantage—even if this means you will eventually cede 1st to your neighbor. A fatal dom-grab can actually be a winning strategy (in the sense of losing as few points as possible) when a player is in a weak position, perhaps after losing an "invincible" roll like 7v3. Knowing there is no chance of winning and little chance of bettering one's place should definitely cause a change in strategy. With so many strategies for winning (or collecting points), many of them changing as often as the position, the idea that everyone can or should "play to win" becomes something of a non sequitur. Whatever its weaknesses, the flagging system does take into account the reality of the game: Most of it is random. How you work with what you get, combined with how you work with other players, largely determines your final flagging position. Over time, the cream rises to the surface. |
|
adtsm wrote
at 3:12 PM, Thursday June 12, 2008 EDT ALL LEGIT FLAGS SHOULD BE RESPECTED NO MATTER WHAT, SO MANY PEOPLE THINK THEY ARE GOD AND CAN JUST DISRESPECT EVERYONE'S FLAGS. DON'T SCREW OVER OTHERS FOR YOUR OWN LACK OF INTEGRITY. DEFINITELY FLAGS OVER TRUCES-ANY OTHER WAY JUST SCREWS PEOPLE OVER.
|
|
Improv42 wrote
at 5:21 PM, Thursday June 12, 2008 EDT Agreed with Grun, Ryan and most of the forum.
Flag = no guarantee. |
|
|
Improv42 wrote
at 5:34 PM, Thursday June 12, 2008 EDT Excellent post, crapdude, though I disagree with respecting ninja flags. If you can't reallistically hold what you've taken, that flag is near meaningless to me. I wouldn't expect anyone to honor a flag that I put up after leaving myself wide open.
|
|
FemmeFatale wrote
at 6:54 PM, Thursday June 12, 2008 EDT adtsm, your post would make a better argument if you explained what your idea of a legit flag was.
|
