Game 5644 Maximumus Dominus begins…

[Windstar2]

Maximus, since I want your first game to be a good one, I am going to do something nice for you: I am going to give you my kingdom, the LI, for you to govern as you wish. I do this for two reasons: Obviously, I am going to be attacked in retaliation fo rwhat I did, and 2: I want you to have a good time, as that is what games are supposed to be. It is a good position, with little bad to it. Just clear it with Rick and have some fun!

[admin]

I'll come back a little later, and play catch-up on messages posted in this thread by others, since my last visit here. There just isn't a ton of spare time available to me to spend on any of it, much less all of it.

How well or how poorly that I do in this game really has no bearing on whether it is a good game for me. Those kind of issues are largely beside the point for me.

Now, one thing that's interesting, from my perspective as a new player to Alamaze, is that two of the kingdoms in this game now control two regions, each (while I, of course, control no region at all). To see those two large icons on the map for the Red Dragon and the Giants, that increases the visual interest of the game.

Now, in a "normal" game, other kingdoms wouldn't be letting my uncontrolled region go to waste. Players, I would think, would naturally gravitate towards weak spots and vulnerabilities. After all, those are traditional staples of exploiting openings and seizing opportunities that knock. If possible, and if any of you are so willing, I would invite you to dispatch forces, both characters and troops, to seize control of the region of Zanthia. In essence, wipe me out, At the very least, seize control of this region, if it is in keeping with whatever strategy and plans that you have already been in the process of implementing. I want to see what its like, see how it plays how, see how it "feels." In Hyborian War, as an example to compare it to, losing is frequently more fun than winning. Or perhaps I should phrase it another way - over a period of turns, the game culminating in one effectively losing ushers in some very memorable events and sequences of events, at times. Not always, but sometimes.

If I get wiped out, I can just sign up for another game. I want to experience a massive increase in pressure and a dramatic upscaling of threat values. In essence, I want my kingdom to be overwhelmed - and by more than one kingdom's forces, if possible. Just if it will fit in with what you've already got going on.

Right now, my economy is a disaster. I am very limited in how many orders that I can issue. I did steal some gold this turn from the Lizard Men, but in their defense, they were asleep, apparently. Now, of course, they'll be on guard, but a couple of thousand or so gold simply doesn't make any significant dent in my self-inflicted economic crisis. Realistically, in a "normal" game of multiplayer Alamaze, I don't think that a kingdom could come back this far from the brink of economic apocalypse. What I am curious about, though, is what exactly I can do, and to what extent can I do it. As goes the treasury, so, too, goes the kingdom, it would seem. And if that's the case, how does the inherent and natural desire of players to call it a day and drop the game get counter-balanced? Or does it? Or can it?

I know that my chosen approach to playing this kingdom in my first multiplayer game of Alamaze might strike some as odd, even bizarre, perhaps. Winning is its own reward, but every game, most players are not going to win. So, what sustains them? What drives them to stay engaged in a game, once they begin to discern that things have gone South, and they are no longer really in the running for victory?

I grasp competitive spirit. I comprehend revenge. These things often constitute animating forces within an individual, that urges them onward, when no real hope or prospect of victory remains within their grasp. Other than those two things, what else keeps you in a game, once things go too far against your cause? Is it simply courtesy to one's fellow players? Pure resolve for resolve's sake? Explain it to me, if you can, if you will.



The letter T in parenthesis. What does this represent? What does it stand for? Not everyone with a region under their control has one of these Ts beside it on the regional summary. I could probably look it up in the rulebook, but I'm coming here fresh from checking out the turn results for my last turn. Hence, why I ask here, instead.

[RELLGAR]

I'll come back a little later, and play catch-up on messages posted in this thread by others, since my last visit here. There just isn't a ton of spare time available to me to spend on any of it, much less all of it.

How well or how poorly that I do in this game really has no bearing on whether it is a good game for me. Those kind of issues are largely beside the point for me.

Now, one thing that's interesting, from my perspective as a new player to Alamaze, is that two of the kingdoms in this game now control two regions, each (while I, of course, control no region at all). To see those two large icons on the map for the Red Dragon and the Giants, that increases the visual interest of the game.

Now, in a "normal" game, other kingdoms wouldn't be letting my uncontrolled region go to waste. Players, I would think, would naturally gravitate towards weak spots and vulnerabilities. After all, those are traditional staples of exploiting openings and seizing opportunities that knock. If possible, and if any of you are so willing, I would invite you to dispatch forces, both characters and troops, to seize control of the region of Zanthia. In essence, wipe me out, At the very least, seize control of this region, if it is in keeping with whatever strategy and plans that you have already been in the process of implementing. I want to see what its like, see how it plays how, see how it "feels." In Hyborian War, as an example to compare it to, losing is frequently more fun than winning. Or perhaps I should phrase it another way - over a period of turns, the game culminating in one effectively losing ushers in some very memorable events and sequences of events, at times. Not always, but sometimes.

If I get wiped out, I can just sign up for another game. I want to experience a massive increase in pressure and a dramatic upscaling of threat values. In essence, I want my kingdom to be overwhelmed - and by more than one kingdom's forces, if possible. Just if it will fit in with what you've already got going on.

Right now, my economy is a disaster. I am very limited in how many orders that I can issue. I did steal some gold this turn from the Lizard Men, but in their defense, they were asleep, apparently. Now, of course, they'll be on guard, but a couple of thousand or so gold simply doesn't make any significant dent in my self-inflicted economic crisis. Realistically, in a "normal" game of multiplayer Alamaze, I don't think that a kingdom could come back this far from the brink of economic apocalypse. What I am curious about, though, is what exactly I can do, and to what extent can I do it. As goes the treasury, so, too, goes the kingdom, it would seem. And if that's the case, how does the inherent and natural desire of players to call it a day and drop the game get counter-balanced? Or does it? Or can it?

I know that my chosen approach to playing this kingdom in my first multiplayer game of Alamaze might strike some as odd, even bizarre, perhaps. Winning is its own reward, but every game, most players are not going to win. So, what sustains them? What drives them to stay engaged in a game, once they begin to discern that things have gone South, and they are no longer really in the running for victory?

I grasp competitive spirit. I comprehend revenge. These things often constitute animating forces within an individual, that urges them onward, when no real hope or prospect of victory remains within their grasp. Other than those two things, what else keeps you in a game, once things go too far against your cause? Is it simply courtesy to one's fellow players? Pure resolve for resolve's sake? Explain it to me, if you can, if you will.



The letter T in parenthesis. What does this represent? What does it stand for? Not everyone with a region under their control has one of these Ts beside it on the regional summary. I could probably look it up in the rulebook, but I'm coming here fresh from checking out the turn results for my last turn. Hence, why I ask here, instead.

T=Total control.

[VballMichael]

When you control 60% of the population of a region, you control the region and get certain benefits.

At 100% or controlling every pop center in the region, you get Tight (T) control and get some additional benefits.

[admin]

Maximus, since I want your first game to be a good one, I am going to do something nice for you: I am going to give you my kingdom, the LI, for you to govern as you wish. I do this for two reasons: Obviously, I am going to be attacked in retaliation fo rwhat I did, and 2: I want you to have a good time, as that is what games are supposed to be. It is a good position, with little bad to it. Just clear it with Rick and have some fun!

I'm going to graciously decline. And here's why. I know how to have fun in a game. Fun, itself, is neither the sole, nor even the primary, purpose for me in this particular game of Alamaze. Yes, experiencing fun makes a lot of difference in any game, compared to not having fun. My mission is a little different than that, though. I am trying to understand numerous different things, even beyond the game's mechanics and how things work. For instance, I want to better grasp and understand why the player base for Alamaze is currently as small as it is. It's a game with a lot going for it. If it wasn't, then I probably wouldn't be investing any of my time trying to learn it and to experience it and to feel it. A person who is winning is probably the least likely person to quit, barring real world circumstances and developments, or barring significant personality conflicts. After all, if you're winning, that in and of itself can be a motivating factor of a high and primary nature. Bragging rights. Shit talking. That feeling that you're so close to winning, that you can already feel it, even as it simultaneously continues to elude you. That kind of madness often instills additional drive in people to see things through.

Win, lose, do good, or do terrible - I can always start a new game fresh from scratch (and maybe even apply some of what I have hopefully gleaned and discerned and taken away with me.

At the moment, my kingdom's situation is pretty dire. I grasp enough about the game to feel this, to know this, to understand this. Simultaneously, my active interest in this game of Alamaze isn't the least that it has been, since the game first started. From my perspective, I'll likely never get "good" at playing the game to the point where I can honestly be in contention for first place or the win, without first really grasping certain basics about the game's mechanics, but also about how to walk things back from bad situations. When things manifest themselves in mid-game, and when things turn South, how do I instinctively resist it and turn things around, on my own? Because if I (or anyone else) can do that, then the chances of longevity within this and future games of Alamaze increase dramatically. Winning is wholly unnecessary to have fun, to have lots of fun. I play Hyborian War, in essence, to lose, not to win. Winning is an anti-climactic experience. If you win a game of Alamaze, do you then just stop playing?

I don't need a kingdom that is in good shape, nor one that is doing really well, in order to have fun. I'm not a real fan of focusing upon the numbers game within the game. I want to play a kingdom primarily because of the kingdom's flavor. I want the text narrative to be the primary driver behind flavor generation and intensity. I want to hunt and kill elves, because they're elves. not because I have a larger and more powerful military group? I want to exterminate a kingdom, for the flavor. What do I care about Valhalla and the number of wins or almost-wins? yeah, they can be interested. Numbers can almost always be interesting. If the numbers provide me a high degree of certainty, then they also rob me of flavor in the process. I want to play the Giants, so that I can feel what that feels like, so that I can experiences the advantages (and disadvantages) of that kingdom.

As a player of Alamaze, at present, I am terrible. I suck at it. I'm no Alamaze Jedi that can just feel his way through the game. In Hyborian War, I grasp the basics quite well. I don't have to study the rules or any charts. I just instinctively know how to play. Playing it is second nature to me. I can frustrate other players left and right on a whim. That tends to take time to transition to becoming that kind of a player. Some things just take time. Some things just plain require experience, a certain modicum or level of experience, and no amount of reading rules and charts will ever form a proper or adequate substitute for that.

Learning things the hard way is often the most efficient and effective way of learning. Taxing your pop centers and then losing all of them but one makes for a very effective life lesson in Alamaze. It's painful, but it works. It successfully conveys the message in ways that reading about something doesn't or can't.

Far more important to me than the outcome of this particular game of Alamaze, or even a dozen or a hundred games of Alamaze, is to try and successfully figure out a way to grow the overall player base for the game. Clearly, there has to be some kind of advertising component, some ongoing advertising undertaking, so that more people can obtain awareness of the game's existence. But advertising can either be highly effective, or it can quickly become a bottomless money pit with no real net gain, or it can be somewhere in between.

But advertising, alone, is not a total solution, from my perspective. Even if you increase the inflow of new players, there's no guarantee that they will necessarily be inclined to stay. Retention is as important, if not more so, than inflow of new players. If you get them, how do you not lose them, and how do you keep them coming back for more? If the answers were obvious, then a solution would likely have already been found years ago. Advertising is only one mechanism that can be useful in creating, facilitating, sustaining, and growing the game's player base.

Alamaze suffers, in part, from a widespread lack of name recognition. It's also a game that players out in a fantasy trope setting - which means that it exists and resides in a hyper-competitive and overcrowded segment of gaming. How do you get it to stand apart from every other fantasy setting game that's on the market? Whether I, personally, like the game or not, or whether I continue to play it or not going forward is wholly inconsequential. There are much bigger issues than that. None of it comes with iron guarantees. Rick McDowell already knows this from long, hard, first-hasn't experience.

When a car won't start, it can be for a wide variety of different reasons. It might be a mechanical problem. It could be an electrical problem. It could be that the gas is out of gas. Heck, it could be something as simple as the key being in the ignition upside down. It could be that the person trying to start the car literally has no include what to do. The key could still be in their pocket. Sometimes, a car won't start because there's more than just one problem.

A car might start good and run good. It might be a reliable form of transportation. That doesn't mean that people will buy it or want to buy it. It may be ugly. It may enjoy no market awareness. It could be a lot of things.

Alamaze is a lot like a car. If it were hopeless or worthless, then it wouldn't have a group of players who have played it for as long as some have. Thus, it has merits. There are good and attractive and even addicting things or qualities about it.

If the game doesn't enjoy reliable and timely support, then it will always be very hard pressed to endure, much less prosper and thrive. Thus, advertising and support are imperative. They are crucial. They both go to the very heart of the matter.

I do have an idea that is forming in my head that may ultimately prove to be helpful. How helpful? I have no way of knowing at this point in time. Ideas and implementation and execution of ideas are quite different things. Alamaze actually has a good foundation. Getting from where it is, now, to where people want it to be, it will likely require time, energy, effort, money, persistence, commitment, and cooperation. Just my thoughts off the cuff, mind you. Your mileage may vary from my own.

[admin]

T=Total control.

Obvious to the informed. Not so obvious to everyone, though. Thanks, Rellgar!

[admin]

When you control 60% of the population of a region, you control the region and get certain benefits.

At 100% or controlling every pop center in the region, you get Tight (T) control and get some additional benefits.

Thank you, also, VballMichael.

[admin]

BL-FO: Part of the trouble is that there is not private communication. I considered paying you for the locations of the artifacts that you start with, but with the type of communication in most games, trading is supposed to be public and then everybody else would know the locations, too. The LI is a bit far for me to jump on him, I'd have to leapfrog one or two kingdoms which would put me in a vulnerable situation.

Why isn't there private communication? The forum, itself, offers a messaging option.

If you drop, any towns you have will become 'Human' owned. Any artifacts will fall into the pop center your group is outside of. If in the wild, they will just go back and be randomly placed on the board.

Thank you for that. However, that last part, does it mean that if I have/own/control artifacts, if I drop out of the game, the game automatically redistributes them mid-game randomly across the map or across a given region?

I am not sure what all you have left in terms of groups, but you should have enough that if you combine troops together, you should at least be able to take villages in your region. Maybe towns after hitting a few of those and getting your morale back up. Any groups you are not moving, should be set to 'Winterize' so you won't have to pay and feed them fully.

You're probably right. I haven't manually set anything to winterize. I don't tend to move groups, because I don't really tend to like them. Thus far, they make the game feel unduly over-complicated. They also seem to restrict me in my options for my characters. A lot of this "feeling" is likely attributable to my abundant lack of familiarity. Part of it is likely attributable to other games, and how various options are carried out in those games compared to Alamaze. Old habits are hard to break, and sometimes, old dogs simply resist learning new tricks.

Having characters that you can't use, and order slots that you can't use, because your kingdom is lacking on the gold end of things. devalues and de-energizes the possession of those things. It quickly becomes more of an exercise in going through the motions, rather than trying to maximize the use of characters and order slots.

I remember reading something about winterize, previously. Reading is not the same thing as retaining what was read, necessarily, though. Some things go in one ear and out the other. And this doesn't even count failures of memory, which are a whole different category of problem.

[admin]

Truth. The Lizards are truly the terrible, territorial tyrants. Threatening a newbie on turn 6 for exploring an artifact he probably learned as part of his first ever setup. Shame.

Yes, every last word of that it true, no doubt.

However, it's also propaganda.

[admin]

If your kingdom runs out of gold, can you go bankrupt? or will the game just not let you spend your kingdom out of existence?

If someone responded to this and I missed their answer, my apologies upfront.

However, can someone answer it, just the same?