Use gold to expedite production turn

[KGB]

LPhillips,

That sounds like a fine plan to me. I'd suggest implementing it in ladder games only. We want newcomers to have as few complex decisions to make as possible.

Actually I'd prefer it be another game option like selecting FOW. Just call the option 'Manually Select Starting Armies'. If it's selected players purchase their starting armies from the points. If it's not selected then it's the way things are now with everyone getting the same 4 armies.

As for the technical details: how would you establish the points? Is there perhaps a cash reward for not using all of your points? Should some units be unattainable? I would think so.

Initially to start, I'd suggest making each army price be the same as it is to buy that unit for production. Then adjust up/down for a unit as necessary. Some units will probably need to be cheaper than their actual production costs and some more expensive.

I agree some armies should unattainable or virtually so. With a 2000 point buy system a Red Dragon and Grand Archon are unattainable. Many others are so expensive (1800 for a Green, 1900 for a Devil) that they could initially be set to 1950 instead of their base cost to ensure that they force you into a 1 army start (or just make them 2100 so they can't be taken).

You get nothing from left over points. So if you use 1950, then 50 points get wasted. I don't think it's a good idea to have players trying to turn 500 points into +500 starting gold. Maybe a 1/5 gold conversion so that 50 points could be converted into +10 gold would be OK if you really hated the idea of wasted points.

KGB

[LPhillips]

Actually I'd prefer it be another game option like selecting FOW. Just call the option 'Manually Select Starting Armies'. If it's selected players purchase their starting armies from the points. If it's not selected then it's the way things are now with everyone getting the same 4 armies.
KGB

It still worries me that newbies will be turned off by this feature. They don't even know the units, now they're supposed to make educated guesses on the fly about what is good for expansion? There needs to be some buffer for the feature to prevent this problem (like having some sort of labeled newbie games auto-hosted at all times). I think that it's such a nifty feature, no one will host games without it.

I have the same objection to your proposal about bidding on the turn order. I loved the idea, as you know, but these elements have to be restricted somehow if they are included. Having multiple strategic choices to make before even playing the game is not acceptable for those who are new to it. They need a chance just to smash stacks together and see what happens, not lose before the game begins, or just get frustrated with being forced to make so many decisions completely in the dark. I still propose limiting the games new players can choose from, for their own good. After all, you generally can't be certain a player is new, and no one tries to go easy on others in ladder games.

In short: the main game should always be something a new player can basically jump into. That is one of the principles for the project.

Initially to start, I'd suggest making each army price be the same as it is to buy that unit for production. Then adjust up/down for a unit as necessary. Some units will probably need to be cheaper than their actual production costs and some more expensive.

This is all sensible. I would suggest some sort of scaling for the points awarded. I don't know how units are selected now, but small maps might need lower point limits, while a very large map might benefit from a limit high enough to allow dragons etc. Perhaps it should be another host option? Or map creator?

You get nothing from left over points. So if you use 1950, then 50 points get wasted. I don't think it's a good idea to have players trying to turn 500 points into +500 starting gold. Maybe a 1/5 gold conversion so that 50 points could be converted into +10 gold would be OK if you really hated the idea of wasted points.

KGB

What is the turn off for you about that idea? If someone wants to start with less units for expansion and turn the extra gold into a hero offer or better production, that option seems like a huge recommendation for this proposal. It's one more strategic choice to make, introducing an unpredictable variable into our games by placing something in the control of our opponents. It's the best sort of way to introduce the unpredictable and make the game more interesting.

[KGB]

LPhillips,

It still worries me that newbies will be turned off by this feature. They don't even know the units, now they're supposed to make educated guesses on the fly about what is good for expansion? There needs to be some buffer for the feature to prevent this problem (like having some sort of labeled newbie games auto-hosted at all times). I think that it's such a nifty feature, no one will host games without it.

An excellent point about newbie games. What would be nice is for games in the game lobby to have a 'beginner, intermediate, advanced' rating for a game. If all settings were beginner the game would be rated beginner. If even 1 intermediate or advanced setting was turned on the game would be labeled as intermediate or advanced.

Intermediate feature: FOW On, Bid for Turn Order
Advanced Feature: Select Starting Armies

Others options can be placed in the Intermediate/Advanced categories as appropriate. That way players will know whether a game is appropriate or not for their skill level. Auto-Hosted beginner games can simply be playing the AI a couple of times. That's something beginners should definitely do anyway.

The reason I am against restricting it to ladder only games is because you can't practice using/learning it without jumping into ladder play. Technically you should be able to use all the features in ladder play before playing ladder games so you have the right skill set.

This is all sensible. I would suggest some sort of scaling for the points awarded. I don't know how units are selected now, but small maps might need lower point limits, while a very large map might benefit from a limit high enough to allow dragons etc. Perhaps it should be another host option? Or map creator?

Seems reasonable to me. Could be 1000 points on 50x maps, 1500 on 100x maps and 2000 on 150x maps type thing.

What is the turn off for you about that idea? If someone wants to start with less units for expansion and turn the extra gold into a hero offer or better production, that option seems like a huge recommendation for this proposal. It's one more strategic choice to make, introducing an unpredictable variable into our games by placing something in the control of our opponents. It's the best sort of way to introduce the unpredictable and make the game more interesting.

Didn't want to have players turning points into gold on a 1-1 conversion basis because production is better than units since production comes every X number of turns.

However looking last night in a game where I got a hero + 1 Wizard offer and when I excluded the ally I realized the game was only charging 300 gold for the Wizard. By that logic a starting Wizard unit should cost 300, not the 1000 it does to buy as production. So you could have 3 starting Wizards and save 100 points for gold or save 1000 points for 1000 gold to buy Wizards. Other units would be similarly much cheaper as starting units than as production (425 points for 1 Dwarf is crazy, maybe 150 points for 1 Dwarf). In that case I have less issue with players saving points for gold up to a reasonable limit (say 500 tops).

KGB

[LPhillips]

Didn't want to have players turning points into gold on a 1-1 conversion basis because production is better than units since production comes every X number of turns.

KGB

This is one of those points that is highly map-dependent. If the map is wealthy and the travel distances aren't harsh, then early expansion units are more valuable than extra gold for production. Consider less than 8 players on Crescendo, where having a few extra units is better even than red dragon production. The most important thing there is grabbing everything you can as quickly as you can. You're not going to be starving for the gold to buy better units, and you're not going to be able to perform a quick execution of your opponent. Also, expanding quickly on such maps, for example Battle Field, provides up to 400 gold per turn in net income. I have ~220% the income of another player on that map simply by virtue of having expanded twice as quickly. He has a demon production city, but I get enough cash before ruins to build a demon city every 3 turns. Who would you rather be?

This is one of those mechanics that needs a great deal of consideration. It has the potential to remap the game. If we are going to exclude certain units from production as map designers, then we ought to also have some control over ally offers and starting units. Thematic terrains are popular with map designers right now, and the exemplary problem with sandworms is only exaggerated by introducing player-controlled unit selection.

[KGB]

This is one of those points that is highly map-dependent. If the map is wealthy and the travel distances aren't harsh, then early expansion units are more valuable than extra gold for production.

Absolutely true that it's map dependent. That's why this is an advanced option because you'll need to have a pretty good idea exactly what you should be taking with your initial points in terms of units and gold.

Also, expanding quickly on such maps, for example Battle Field, provides up to 400 gold per turn in net income. I have ~220% the income of another player on that map simply by virtue of having expanded twice as quickly. He has a demon production city, but I get enough cash before ruins to build a demon city every 3 turns.

400 gold? Must be early in the game I just finished a pair of 1v1 games on this map and by around turn 25 my net income was around +1500 gold and I had long since stopped searching ruins in favor of just getting more cities ASAP. I was buying 1 Demon city a turn for while. A bit later I was over 2500 gold a turn with 60 cities. I kept 4 heroes and simply got 3-4 allies a turn with a new hero offer then disbanded the hero. Once I had 40+ Demons I didn't even need the heroes any more (other than to hold items so my opponent could not get them) as they were not as good as pure Demon stacks. I literally could not spend it all. Interesting map for playing with VERY high end units at least in 1v1 mode. Not sure what 4 players would be like.

This is one of those mechanics that needs a great deal of consideration. It has the potential to remap the game. If we are going to exclude certain units from production as map designers, then we ought to also have some control over ally offers and starting units. Thematic terrains are popular with map designers right now, and the exemplary problem with sandworms is only exaggerated by introducing player-controlled unit selection.

Absolutely. It's a big change so it can't be something added last minute into one of the beta's. I think excluding certain units from the initial buy list (like all 4 and 5 turn units) makes sense. None of the 1-3 turn units seems too good much to exclude.

And it's not just the Sandworm in desert problem. It's every bit as bad if you get Elves and are trapped in the hills when your opponent is in the forest and you can't afford Dwarves (need at least 900 starting gold which happens in only 40% of the games). Or you are forced to buy Elves due to getting Dwarves and you are in the forest. Ideally the game would remove ALL units with stack terrain movement bonus's (individual like Scorpion would be fine) from the initial 4 units. That would be perfectly fair to all players. Yes, it means no Sandworm, Orc, Elf, Dwarf, Giant etc but there are still plenty of other units to use.

KGB

[LPhillips]

It's a 4-player game with some good competitors. My net income was 400 at turn 10. Given the stiff competition, it'll likely settle around 600-800 net as contested territory and mounting upkeep maintain the balance. If I gain enough territory to reach 1000-1500, that would mean the game is practically over.

The map is a bit rich for 1v1, to say the least. It looks like it could be a treat for 2v2 or 4-player FFA, but it lacks interesting and challenging terrain. The "Horse Lord" hero would be a beast there