Victory conditions

by **Halmir** on Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:30 am

Concise description:

Add a new configurable setting when creating games to allow games to finish early on conditions agreed in advance

Specifics/Details:

We've all seen suggestions about allowing resignation buttons and these regularly get scorned as it's suggested it's open to abuse. Instead let's add some options so game endings are all known about up front when you join the game. By joining a game with a 20 round time limit you're agreeing to the game finishing in that time frame. It'd be just a logical extension of this to agree that if one player controls 90% of the territory and 90% of the troops (as an extreme example) then the game is already over and we're just slogging through the end game pointlessly.

Possible ways of working:-

1) A tick box series for the victory condition is triggered when one player controls x% of territory (count the total number of permanently occupyable regions i.e. not those that reset each round), options on 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, 90%
2) A tick box series for when one player controls x% of troops (count all player troops, not AI or default 3 troops per region) options on 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, 90%
3) A further tick box option to say BOTH conditions have to be met for the victory condition to be triggered

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

Stop games that are clearly over from dragging on whilst the guy who is always going to win hunts down the last few troops tucked away in corners.
Adds further dimensions to existing maps

by **greenoaks** on Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:45 pm

i've won games with comebacks from just 1 troop on 1 terit.

by **Halmir** on Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:43 pm

Congratulations - for that 1 in a million shot where that might happen exceptionally rarely, I'm prepared to forgo the other 999,999 games though. Life's too short to carry on playing a game that is almost certainly over and we're wasting time.

If you have had this happen several times though, please pick 6 numbers between 1 and 49, and I'm off to the Lottery to place a bet ! :-)

by **bahrain** on Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:48 pm

it happenes alot in esc games, ive both won and lost that way.

by **greenoaks** on Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:39 pm

Halmir wrote:Congratulations - for that 1 in a million shot where that might happen exceptionally rarely, I'm prepared to forgo the other 999,999 games though. Life's too short to carry on playing a game that is almost certainly over and we're wasting time.

If you have had this happen several times though, please pick 6 numbers between 1 and 49, and I'm off to the Lottery to place a bet !

having very few troops/terits in Escalating and going on to win is quite common, & more common for those that play me.

by **TheForgivenOne** on Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:15 pm

Ehhhh, No.

by **Halmir** on Tue Nov 26, 2013 4:20 pm

greenoaks wrote:
Halmir wrote:Congratulations - for that 1 in a million shot where that might happen exceptionally rarely, I'm prepared to forgo the other 999,999 games though. Life's too short to carry on playing a game that is almost certainly over and we're wasting time.

If you have had this happen several times though, please pick 6 numbers between 1 and 49, and I'm off to the Lottery to place a bet !

having very few troops/terits in Escalating and going on to win is quite common, & more common for those that play me.

OK yes I can see that as a possibility in Escalating - I rarely play that game type so it's not at the forefront of my mind. But even in Escalating, if you knew there was a Victory condition set when you signed up to the game then it's agreed from the outset. There can't be any hint of cheating as it's there in black & white when folks are joining.

by **OliverFA** on Tue Nov 26, 2013 4:46 pm

greenoaks wrote:i've won games with comebacks from just 1 troop on 1 terit.

I suppose that was escalating, because otherwise I just don't believe it.

However for the rest of games (all but escalating) that's a very smart option, as it would save us the end game when it's clear who has won and is no longer entertaining not even for the winner.

by **OliverFA** on Tue Nov 26, 2013 4:47 pm

TheForgivenOne wrote:Ehhhh, No.

Why?

by **chapcrap** on Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:04 pm

OliverFA wrote:
greenoaks wrote:i've won games with comebacks from just 1 troop on 1 terit.

I suppose that was escalating, because otherwise I just don't believe it.

However for the rest of games (all but escalating) that's a very smart option, as it would save us the end game when it's clear who has won and is no longer entertaining not even for the winner.

There are other types besides escalating. Assassin it can happen. Standard, trench, nuclear games. Standard No Spoil games, where there isn't incentive to be the one who kills the guy with one troop, because he acts as a buffer, etc. So, I think there are various ways to eventually come back besides escalating.

That being said, I'm not sure I have a big issue with this suggestion. I also don't see a big need for it.

by **greenoaks** on Tue Nov 26, 2013 8:48 pm

chapcrap wrote:
OliverFA wrote:
greenoaks wrote:i've won games with comebacks from just 1 troop on 1 terit.

I suppose that was escalating, because otherwise I just don't believe it.

However for the rest of games (all but escalating) that's a very smart option, as it would save us the end game when it's clear who has won and is no longer entertaining not even for the winner.

There are other types besides escalating. Assassin it can happen. Standard, trench, nuclear games. Standard No Spoil games, where there isn't incentive to be the one who kills the guy with one troop, because he acts as a buffer, etc. So, I think there are various ways to eventually come back besides escalating.

That being said, I'm not sure I have a big issue with this suggestion. I also don't see a big need for it.

plus any map that has a victory condition built in, for instance it is possible to win Realms 2 holding just 1 territory (the Sanctuary).

by **Gabriel13** on Wed Nov 27, 2013 10:41 am

Just play through the game.. It's not like it takes an extremely long time to end, and if you don't like having lingering games that take up your space, buy premium. I find hunting the last few troops down is very entertaining! It gives you that sense of an all-powerful being, and the knowledge that you will definitely win.

by **OliverFA** on Wed Nov 27, 2013 5:19 pm

Gabriel13 wrote:Just play through the game.. It's not like it takes an extremely long time to end, and if you don't like having lingering games that take up your space, buy premium. I find hunting the last few troops down is very entertaining! It gives you that sense of an all-powerful being, and the knowledge that you will definitely win.

With premium it just gets worse. Instead of having 4 games waiting to end you can have many more.

I don't doubt it's entertaining for you, but I can say it's not entertaining for me. I enjoy the challenge, and cleaning the rest of the board is no challenge at all.

Again, I trully don't understand the fierce opposition to options. That's why they are options, some people will like them and use them and some others won't use them.

by **greenoaks** on Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:11 pm

OliverFA wrote:
Gabriel13 wrote:Just play through the game.. It's not like it takes an extremely long time to end, and if you don't like having lingering games that take up your space, buy premium. I find hunting the last few troops down is very entertaining! It gives you that sense of an all-powerful being, and the knowledge that you will definitely win.

With premium it just gets worse. Instead of having 4 games waiting to end you can have many more.

I don't doubt it's entertaining for you, but I can say it's not entertaining for me. I enjoy the challenge, and cleaning the rest of the board is no challenge at all.

Again, I trully don't understand the fierce opposition to options. That's why they are options, some people will like them and use them and some others won't use them.

this option is about making life easier for freemiums to play more games.

by **deathcomesrippin** on Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:24 am

I dont see why making freemiums life easier is a bad thing. If there are more options to keep a freemium around then there is more of a chance the freemium will upgrade. If only 5% more freemiums upgrade because of implemented suggestions, this is a very good thing I would say.

by **OliverFA** on Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:27 pm

A game can take very long time until the victory conditions are met. Is not that freemiums will be able to play a ton of games thanks to this. They will just be able to skip the end of the game when most times (and under some settings, ALWAYS) the winner is clear.

And until the victory conditions are met, lots of turn will pass, each turn with each player taking up to 24 hours. Freemiums will still have plenty of time to get bored.

by **TheForgivenOne** on Sat Nov 30, 2013 3:52 am

OliverFA wrote:
TheForgivenOne wrote:Ehhhh, No.

Why?

I just don't see a need for it. Really, when you get to the point where you own, as Halmir pointed out, 90% of troops and terts, does it Really take that long to finish the game? (Minus Trench). By that time you're getting relatively big deploys that shouldn't take forever to eliminate the last player. And if not, it took you, what, 2 minutes of your time to take the turn?

I'm sorry, i'd rather have the Dev team spend their time elsewhere.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Thu Dec 05, 2013 4:02 am

I kind of like this suggestion, but victory conditions like that would seem to rob me of my satisfaction in murdering my enemy's remaining troops.

If this is an optional feature, then... okay, but (a) wouldn't a resignation button be cheaper to implement while basically fulfilling the same goal?, and (b) I agree with TFO in having the Developers spend their time on more valuable features.