Multiplayer Hub Logo  
  Powered by Noble Master Games, http://www.noblemaster.com Multiplayer Dragon
  Forums Twitter Dev. Blog ⊕  
Home > Forums

MultiplayerHub.com
» Forums|New Posts
» Twitter
» Dev. Blog
» About
» Contact Us
Showcase
» Age of Conquest
» Demise of Nations
» Retro Commander

































Multiplayer Forums


Board index » Games » Age of Conquest (AOC) » AOC: Feature Requests


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 15:21 
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2009, 10:17
Posts: 229
Today, the first player to move is the last one in the standings. Especially in games with kings, this is a good advantage to the weaker player. I suggest that instead of ordering players by the rank, we order players by territory only. Right now, good players often reject alliance requests so that they can have lower standings and move first.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 15:52 
Uber Moderator
Uber Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2007, 23:22
Posts: 3326
Yeah, whenever it was suggested to let the weaker players move first, I thought it would go by territory. +1 from me.

_________________
This is the internet! Doesn't mean you are required to be an ***.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 15:38 
Peasant
Peasant

Joined: 16 Oct 2015, 01:09
Posts: 23
+1 for me on that. Something to consider with this is, players will not know where they rank unless they want to take the time to count territories. Not sure if that is good or bad, just something that will be different.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 16:45 
Game Developer
Game Developer
User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2005, 02:34
Posts: 8147
Location: Honolulu
Ranking and number of provinces is the same/similar in most cases. Does this really change much? With the rankings, it's clear at what point someone's movement orders are updated, switching it to province-count only will make it not clear who has priority. If two players share the same province-count it's hard to tell. Also, could that not be used as a game-play strategy. Don't make alliances but wait. You get a small bonus by being to move earlier but it might bite you back later once everyone can attack you.

Also, keep in mind this wouldn't work for sea-battles where players own no provinces. Have yet to see a game like that though...

_________________
play: Age of Conquest IV


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 21:13 
Freeman
Freeman

Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 21:04
Posts: 136
noble is correct here. relying on verbal agreements just to lower the ranking may come around in a bad way later on in a game.

another tactic to fiddle about with the movement order is to temporarily abandon provinces, which would be done much more often, if the ranking would be declared by nothing but the number of provinces. depends on whether you like that scenario or not :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 29 Sep 2017, 12:21 
Serf
Serf

Joined: 20 Jul 2017, 19:24
Posts: 7
You could make the game order simply based on population size. Smallest population goes first. I can't see people deliberately keeping their populations down just so they can go first.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 29 Sep 2017, 18:32 
Peasant
Peasant

Joined: 28 May 2016, 03:18
Posts: 43
Meera has a point, and it makes sense that with lower population, it's actually easier for to move around in real life (more mobile).

In order to gain 1st move, it has to be something that players wouldn't sacrifice, but still truly gives the weak nations the advantage.

I think population can be a key factor here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2017, 00:10 
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 04 Mar 2016, 07:18
Posts: 101
+1 for population size determining turn order. I've never liked that since the switch everyone goes out of their way to make verbal alliances rather than real ones. In my opinion this circumvents the point of official alliances. It also hurts newer players who form alliances without realizing that using the built-in alliance system is a disadvantage.

I also don't agree with the argument that verbal alliances might come back to bite you later on in the game. Sure with unknown players it [i]might[i] be a risk, but I've never experienced it. My standard procedure nowadays is to make verbal alliances as much as possible.

If we don't change the determining factor of turn-order, I do believe it is important that we encourage using official alliances as much possible. Perhaps significantly increasing the happiness bonus that comes with making an alliance so that it is more appealing of an option.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Suggestion] - Turn Order
PostPosted: 20 Oct 2017, 13:20 
Serf
Serf

Joined: 19 Mar 2017, 16:17
Posts: 16
Mmm. Not sure about population on move order - I usually have high population/low territory count as part of my strategy.

Like idea of happiness boost for Alliance, but think whole Alliance thing needs some tweaking. Gold Alliance vs Standard with different benefit and effects ? Who are my real Allies?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
cron

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Green Smilies by http://www.greensmilies.com/

Home  |  Forums  |  Twitter  |  Dev. Blog  |  About  |  Contact