Balance and Bidding

Have a suggestion or some feedback? Dont keep it to yourself - share it!

Moderators: AlexS, Run5 Staff, SSG Staff

Balance and Bidding

Postby Joel137 » Tue Feb 10, 2004 12:54 am

I think this would be a good suggestion for implementation. It is based on procedures of tournament games at many of the conventions.

This should be implemented as an optional procedure for starting a game. Namely a bidding system where you spot your opponent a certain number of VP's in order to choose the side.

This would alleviate problems of play balance as you only bid what you think something is worth. It would facilitate tournament play and ladder play. Naturally opponents could do this on their own and do their own math, however, it would be nice to have such a feature built into code.
User avatar
Joel137
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:19 am
Location: Brookings, South Dakota

Postby Twinkle » Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:21 am

How could anyone be able to judge a scenario during the first eight-fifteen times playing it (and playing against many different opponents)? Oh, well to a small part I agree that it could be an option to include, but I see no need for the developers to spend any time on this as it is so extremely easily done by the players themselves.

For games like EiA/EiH; yes, the bidding system is in that case an essential part of an unbalanced but historical 7 player game (giving nation like Turkey/Spain/Prussia a slight possibility to win). But why should it be needed in KP and the upcoming BiN? Should we start considering player skill? How can we even say that a game is unbalanced, with the exception of very obvious cases, e.g. 1st UK?

For ladder game: let your opponent pick side, and if you (after a couple of turns) believe that the game is very unbalanced, ask for a mirror game (my own way of doing it).

For tournament: mirror games are of course the best option. But not really needed for balanced scenarios like TAO3 (yes, I happen to think so).

For other pbem-gaming: it's just for fun, and if it makes you happy make sure to select side 50% of the games you play...

/twinkle
User avatar
Twinkle
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 2366
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby Joel137 » Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:58 pm

Twinkle wrote:How could anyone be able to judge a scenario during the first eight-fifteen times playing it (and playing against many different opponents)? Oh, well to a small part I agree that it could be an option to include, but I see no need for the developers to spend any time on this as it is so extremely easily done by the players themselves.


Statistics is how one can judge. A bidding system, particularly in tournaments where it counts as opposed to a poll on a discussion board, is probably the best way to find out the what the community consensus is regarding the balance of a scenario. And I imagine that the true nature of a scenario won't take that long too divine (about 6 months to a year as a WAG)

I wouldn't want it as anything other than as an option. And the fact that it is easily implemented by the players themselves makes it something I wouldn't ask for as a high priority item from the developers; but I imagine it wouldn't be that hard to set-up in the code either.


For games like EiA/EiH; yes, the bidding system is in that case an essential part of an unbalanced but historical 7 player game (giving nation like Turkey/Spain/Prussia a slight possibility to win).


It also gets used alot in tournament play of two player games. I'm most familiar with it in "Victory in the Pacific" and "War at Sea" where the bids are done in VP's.


But why should it be needed in KP and the upcoming BiN? Should we start considering player skill? How can we even say that a game is unbalanced, with the exception of very obvious cases, e.g. 1st UK?


Same reason its used in other two player games in tournaments, see above for some examples.

For ladder game: let your opponent pick side, and if you (after a couple of turns) believe that the game is very unbalanced, ask for a mirror game (my own way of doing it).


Not a bad way of doing it, though I don't always like mirror play due to the extra time committment. But a bidding system isn't a bad way to go either for ladder play.

For tournament: mirror games are of course the best option. But not really needed for balanced scenarios like TAO3 (yes, I happen to think so).


Here's where the bidding system has some very definite advantages. It evens things out, players have equal chances at the bid and it makes the tournament last half as long. I saw your post on the poll for the next tournament where you expressed a preference for longer scenarios, that's my preference as well; but mirroring that will make the tournament last a long time.

You then can start running in to problems with vacations if the tournament is being run on a tight schedule. Though, that is really in a sense another issue.

For other pbem-gaming: it's just for fun, and if it makes you happy make sure to select side 50% of the games you play...


For me its all for fun :D
User avatar
Joel137
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:19 am
Location: Brookings, South Dakota

Postby Pawlock » Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:48 am

I think bidding has its merits, in what are percieved to be unbalanced scenarios.

Mind you, I love plying the Germans in ATD, even if I may be up against it. But for some, winning is everything( oh I do like to win) and if they percieve thier chances are less than 50/50 they may be reluctant to play.

If it means I get to play more games of ATD Im for it, give me 500-1000 points to be Germans and I'll play anyone, time schedule permitting:-)

Joel, you did say 1000 points for being Germans did'nt you :D

On a side note, Im not sure about mirror play for tournaments for 2 reasons.

1. Time and

2. What happens when a mirrored game yield the same level of victory for appropriate sides? ie say the Russian Player gets overwheming win in both cases.
Back to square one with nothing conclusive decided, and its taken you twice as long.
Pawlock
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Bristol, England

Postby Twinkle » Wed Feb 11, 2004 3:19 am

for tournament mirror games: compare total score, it should be most unlikely that they are the same.

and as for bidding: I can't say that I like any kind of bidding system for this kind of system/game. It is appropriate for games like EiA, in which we have (independent of scenario) a very weak Spain and Turkey compared to France and so on..., and players battlefield skill etc. is a relative minor issue as it is mostly about diplomacy between seven players.

That is not the case for KP and the upcoming BiN. Skill in planning and executing an attack or defense (using the parameters given by the system) is rewarded as well as gaming/scenario experience. A bidding system might just make easier for the more experienced player to win.

/twinkle
User avatar
Twinkle
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 2366
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby Joel137 » Wed Feb 11, 2004 4:45 am

I suppose we will just have to disagree in a friendly way and live with a diversity of opinion on this one. :cry:

Though I do have to admit to being very curious as to what the bid amounts would be from some of the very experienced players for some of the scenarios.
User avatar
Joel137
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:19 am
Location: Brookings, South Dakota

Postby azcat » Wed Feb 11, 2004 5:22 am

Most wargamers are stat freaks; is there currently a (voluntary) system where ladder and/or non-ladder games are reported? A willing victim if not? All it takes is an Excel spreadsheet and more than a bit of free time (notice I'm not raising my hand).

With the significant amount of head-to-head games going on I think it'd be interesting to see by scenario: wins by side, avg points per side, avg margin of victory, avg # killed units, etc.

Remember, I said voluntary reporting of game data.... :)
"When I am King you will be first against The Wall." - Radiohead
User avatar
azcat
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2004 3:17 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA

Postby Arnvidh » Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:11 am

There already are a large reporting of played games going on, the ladder, so if its not to much jobb maybe the one who made the ladder could fix better statistics (there are already a statistic page so its seems like it was part of the idea from the beginning).

I would like it to show not just win loss but which types of victory, especially on the "played games" page. And a feature where you could click on a scenario and get statistics for it. How many vicories of what type for which side etc.
User avatar
Arnvidh
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 4:36 am
Location: Sweden


Return to Feedback/Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron