Forum
suggested change of distribution algorithm
|
Ryan wrote
at 1:24 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST
Currently dice are distributed randomly over your territories. The effect of this is that on average fuller territories get as many dice as empty territories. This makes the probability of fuller territories becoming full higher than less full territories.
The strategy that comes out of this effect is to wait with a full territory until its maxed and then move one by one most likely always getting filled up each turn. The reason this is bad is because if someone gets a large stack at the begining they have quite a bit more power than players with even stacks. This is a lot of power due to the random algorithm. THE SUGGESTED CHANGE: Instead of distributing dice one by one to a random territory number the algorithm should randomly distribute to an available dice spot. So if a territory only has one dice it has 7 available spots. If a territory has 7 dice it has one available spot. The less full territory is 7 times more likely to get a dice. When it gets one it is 6 times more likely...etc. The effect of this is that on average dice will even out across your territories. Its important to note that the distribution is still random. This change I believe would make a fairer game and I'm posting here to get some feedback first. |
|
Jen wrote
at 1:33 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST sounds great, and much fairer Ryan :D
|
|
Tang wrote
at 1:33 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST I Agree Ryan and Jen, sounds great!
|
|
fuzzycat wrote
at 1:34 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST I don't know, I think it should be tried out first.
For starting I like the idea, but a) why not use your own "ideas" section. Thats where I take a look for ideas ;) I would like an option to set a focus country, where dices will be more likely placed on it, and around it. This would the game give more strategy without complicating it much. For endgame it makes things really nasty if at one point you can fill up to 8 anymore, as it gets more and more likely, you are the only one with no 8ths on the board. Other suggestion, can the 8 dice/field max not be set assided? the 8 dice / field rule makes endgames rather boring. |
|
Capt_Cracker wrote
at 1:35 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST I'd vote against it, and here's my badly articulated reasoning:
In general, no one attacks until they have at least a 2-3 dice advantage. This advantage comes up more often with the current method of distribution. If the dice get more evenly distributed each turn, everyone will resort to the "build all territories up to 8" strategy at a much earlier point in the game. As I'm sure everyone can agree, the strategy aspect of the 8x8 game is severely reduced as compared to the first 7 turns or so. Therefore, based on this reasoning, I feel that this change would actually detract from strategy and ADD to the randomness. At least, this is my opinion after about 200 games and being 2266 for awhile. |
|
Overlast wrote
at 1:39 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST You are right. Especially in the beginning this is of major importance. I would support this change if it applied to the distribution of dices before the game takes place. But after the initial distribution I would advice to leave it be. Than it just adds to the dynamic of the game.
However, it affects the parsimonilty of the game. One of the beauties of kdice is its parsimonity. So this should be considered too. All in all I think it is worthwhile to change the distribution as proposed only in the first turn. For the rest the game is perfect. |
|
|
Capt_Cracker wrote
at 1:41 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST That's an idea I could get behind, Overlast.
|
|
|
Ryan wrote
at 1:50 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST Some good points!
I don't want to cause the 8x8 end game. And I see how this could make that happen earlier. But it sounds good for the first turn. Also, Fuzzycat is right. Lets try to get rid of the 8x8 end game. I can remove the maximum dice but I'm not sure how to render X dice. I can double the max to 16 too. I'll put up a sandbox server to test out these ideas. |
|
|
fuzzycat wrote
at 1:56 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST You can:
*) Draw some dices back to each other. So you see the first dice, then from the back dice you see only a part, and from another in the back you see again only a part. That can be the symbol for X dice. Write the number next to it. *) You can make big-daddy dices that count for 8. (It might be a funny strategy turn if this would always roll as one dice counting for 8...) |
|
TheGreenVole wrote
at 2:11 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST 1) To render X dice, just have over 9 dice be one big die with a number written on it.
2) I think that any changes should definitely be sandboxed before put into effect. 3) I think the random distributions are part of the game, and even distributions would hurt the game. Having a couple of big stacks is surely more fun than having many little ones. I am in favor of more fair starts, however, with more even distributions in the beginning. 4) I think that unlimited dice would be too crazy, and a really high die could be unfair. Also, "dice drains" would be impossible to get rid of. However, I am in favor of abolishing the 8x8 endgame, but perhaps in a different fashion. |
|
Cabalistik wrote
at 2:11 PM, Friday December 29, 2006 EST Sounds good, but I'm worried that it will turn out predictable and the excitement will go away. I'm also a hater of the 8 vs 8 endgame. It tends to be too much based on luck and it takes a while before the game is over.
|
