Posts: 2,149
Threads: 107
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
1
(04-19-2016, 04:01 AM)VballMichael Wrote: Hmmm, I think this is an error.
In one of my new games, 1006, I found Human controlled pop centers and neutral pop centers, suggesting we are keeping with one Human village and town per region.
But in game 1004, I found two Human villages in my region. Not sure UM can fix since he is my opponent in that game  .
Anyone else find multiple human control of same type of pop center in same region?
That's actually one of the changes in the final update to The Choosing. Every region now has one human town and two human villages.
Posts: 2,071
Threads: 70
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation:
0
(04-19-2016, 12:51 PM)unclemike Wrote: (04-19-2016, 04:01 AM)VballMichael Wrote: Hmmm, I think this is an error.
In one of my new games, 1006, I found Human controlled pop centers and neutral pop centers, suggesting we are keeping with one Human village and town per region.
But in game 1004, I found two Human villages in my region. Not sure UM can fix since he is my opponent in that game .
Anyone else find multiple human control of same type of pop center in same region?
That's actually one of the changes in the final update to The Choosing. Every region now has one human town and two human villages.
Cool beans
Posts: 260
Threads: 3
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
0
04-20-2016, 04:52 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2016, 04:55 AM by Ry Vor.)
Just thought I would say, planning early turns in a two player game on the Centauria map is pretty interesting. I'm guessing there have been lots of different approaches and lots of different decisions than players would make in a 12 player game.
Instead of feeling cozy like a first impression might be, its really more of a paranoia. The resource of order limitations (the third resource besides gold and food) seems much bigger.
Evaluating your own kingdom and its strategy as well as your single opponent where you know things will happen quickly is perhaps more intense. I think various matchups will be intriguing. The game I am in is Dwarves vs. Elves.
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
It is a very interesting dynamic, especially when you are playing against a top tier player! I am pitting the Black Dragons versus the Red Dragons. I hope that I don't have one of those 6-turn games so that I'll have plenty of time to learn from my opponent.
Even leaving out the players, I can't wait to see how the two kingdoms fare against one another.
I can see this format becoming a strong staple for Alamaze. "Got an opponent? Great! No waiting for others! Your game starts on Wednesday!"
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
Posts: 2,149
Threads: 107
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
1
04-20-2016, 12:49 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2016, 01:00 PM by unclemike.)
I could add the Most Artifacts victory condition be allowed for Duel games instead of just Conqueror. I had to create that special victory condition for a game some time ago (I think it was only used once too) but I could change the Duel code to accept it as a victory condition as well. That way, games should last longer than 6 turns and you'll get more out of your money. Or I could set Conqueror/Most Artifacts to have a minimum turn limit like how SVC had a minimum turn of 20 before issuing the action. That way, all Duel games would have a minimum turn limit of play before anyone could declare a victory...
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
(04-20-2016, 12:49 PM)unclemike Wrote: I could add the Most Artifacts victory condition be allowed for Duel games instead of just Conqueror. I had to create that special victory condition for a game some time ago (I think it was only used once too) but I could change the Duel code to accept it as a victory condition as well. That way, games should last longer than 6 turns and you'll get more out of your money. Or I could set Conqueror/Most Artifacts to have a minimum turn limit like how SVC had a minimum turn of 20 before issuing the action. That way, all Duel games would have a minimum turn limit of play before anyone could declare a victory...
I like both of those!
Most Artifacts would be a 'Lion's Share' condition instead of status points. This one would allow a larger variety of realistic kingdom matchups like Tyrant Vs Underworld.
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
Posts: 2,570
Threads: 39
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Why a turn limit to declare victory. If you take both regions how likely is the other guy going to want to stick it out to get to turn 12. Will be just as annoying to have to wait three turns if you already know you opponent quit before you can start a new game and use your slot.
With artifact being the lions share type award it still has no effect on why there is a need to wait until turn 12. It is a two player game should the two player be able to say when the game is over?
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
I think the point might be that the other player will have a chance to recover and come back from a near defeat.
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
Posts: 2,570
Threads: 39
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
It also give a player a chance to steal the win on T12 or make it actually impossible to win by T12. I am fine as long as rules are defined when game starts.
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
(04-24-2016, 01:19 AM)Jumpingfist Wrote: It also give a player a chance to steal the win on T12 or make it actually impossible to win by T12. I am fine as long as rules are defined when game starts.
Agreed, but the current games are all free Beta so UM has free reign for changing them up.
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
|
