:: Community ::
ForumsMessagesGroupsChat (1)Friends
 

Forums :: iPhone :: Strategy :: Thoughts on Galcon

You must sign in to post.

Page 3 / 3 1   2   3 

Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 2, 2011 @ 12:48am

Cabin Boy zmar01

Joined: Jun 6, 2009
Posts: 655

I didn't even read the last few posts because they all look the same. 

The average 3 way FFA sucks. If there is a chance that any FFA game can turn into a 3 way game then FFA sucks.
If FFA sucks don't play FFA. Play 1v1 various 2v2 modes and assassin. And if you arrange it 2v2 in an FFA lobby. That's fun. Alot more skill involved than a normal 2v2 game. Oh and if your talking about fusion then it's just teams rather than 2v2
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 2, 2011 @ 2:13am

Cabin Boy swollenpig

Joined: Jun 12, 2010
Posts: 951
Location: Colorado

Lol, if your going to argue for one side or the other, you can't disregard the other sides arguments. Neither of us are arguing that 3 player games are best, we are arguing that this aspect of the game shouldn't be changed. (Phil has precious few updates, I would like them to be for the more important problems.)
post updated on May 2, 2011 @ 2:14am
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 2, 2011 @ 2:47am

Cabin Boy leinator

Joined: Jan 12, 2011
Posts: 110

"Listen noob - you're so called 'strategy' is a very pathetic attempt to trick a opponent into being the kingmaker in your favor.  It is not even a good strategy.  Any experienced player can see through it.


It is possible to sacrifice troops and change the overall ratio of ships between each player without sacrificing all your troops or throwing the game.

It is also possible to move your ships when someone attacks you. If someone mass suicides you, move your ships and take his planets. If he relentlessly tries to eliminate you, find a small planet and turtle or fly your ships around. This isn't turn based strategy, you don't have to defend by default. It's just like boxing, stick and move, stick and move.

In any ffa game, it is possible for a player to make a move that favors a single player. In 4-man where I am A, I can send 50% to player B and 100% to C, make sure they take the full brunt, and surrender. Assuming it is a perfectly balanced game already and B and C don't simultaneously attack D, D has a very high chance of winning. 

Every free for all game involves holding planets and generating while other players cancel one another out, and often involves getting free planets after other players attack one another in an opportunistic manner. This becomes more complicated when the number of independent opposing forces is odd, but not impossible to manage.

I only explain this to point out what others in this thread already have. The "kingmaking" flaw exists because the game is free for all, and will exist in any free for all game. It happens more often in a three-man game because fewer people understand how to do anything but "finish a 1v1 and then finish another 1v1 or two weaker players," as this logic normally applies in a four player game.

A player can always choose to pointlessly eliminate another player and suicide in order to throw the game. Or, a player can always consciously make decisions that he/she believes will eventually lead to winning. As long as all players are doing the latter, then (barring miscalculations) the game will "work," in the way that any ffa "works," regardless of player number.
post updated on May 2, 2011 @ 2:49am
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 2, 2011 @ 4:32am

Cabin Boy zmar01

Joined: Jun 6, 2009
Posts: 655

*Ignoring last post*

Arguing here is not the place phil is never going to read this, im not going to read this.

Mail phil with a sort email with all your points summed up in less than 500 words. if the other side of the argument is never even mailed to phil then you have already won the argument. end of story.

But the fact is that if the benifits do not vastly outway the down sides in every aspect. then its not going to happen as phil is the only person making galcon. Changing galcon in any way will not make more people buy it.
What it will do is make people leave, they always do, people dont like change.

What if people like 3 way?
So what leave them be.

the fact is FFA players outnumber 1v1 and 2v2 players combined, i dont like FFA i complain a bit but im not asking phil to like get rid of every FFA server.



Im not sure if people are just putting down their thoughts or are they trying to argue points and suggestions.
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 2, 2011 @ 10:19am

Cabin Boy leinator

Joined: Jan 12, 2011
Posts: 110

I don't know if anyone is actually wanting phil to change something based on this, people are just throwing around "it should be removed entirely" as an arguing point to express their general frustration with 3-ways.

If I was actually going to e-mail phil, I'd much rather get a lot of people together and and try to implement a more stable form of percent control as an option for those who have slightly cheaper android touch screens that don't register directional swipes as well in the corner of the screen.
post updated on May 2, 2011 @ 10:22am
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 2, 2011 @ 11:03am

Cabin Boy marmot

Joined: Jan 10, 2011
Posts: 22

.. (marmot saw that there wasn't enough marmot in this thread, maybe that is why everyone is arguing.)
post updated on May 2, 2011 @ 11:05am
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 2, 2011 @ 12:17pm

Cabin Boy LjuboM

Joined: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 4085
Location: 1v1 & 2v2

i think that Galcon doesn't need antidopping test control!

this is picture from G. Fusion :D
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 16, 2011 @ 5:14pm

Admiral ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 229
Location: Florida

Nobody is asking Phil to get rid of anything. We are simply asking him to fix the srevers so that 4-player gamers get the same opportunity as 1v1 and 2v2 players - rooms specific to our preferred game.   Even when a 2v2 room has only three players there are four starting planets...   Not so in FFA...   We want a room where each and every game is a four player game.  Let the three-tards have their own room too for all I care...

I think that it is unlikely that anyone would ever intentionally join a dedicated 3-way room... But given that passion of a few here I will admit that I could be wrong about that.. There is only one way to find out though...
post updated on May 16, 2011 @ 7:27pm
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 16, 2011 @ 5:21pm

Cabin Boy main_gi

Joined: Dec 13, 2010
Posts: 1056
Location: Everywhere

Counquer_Barrass: I shall not be embarrassed!
LjuboM embarrassed Counquer_Barrass
Counquer_Barrass: I shall not be conquered!
LjuboM conquered Counquer_Barrass

Imagine.
post updated on May 16, 2011 @ 5:22pm
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 17, 2011 @ 8:15am

1 Stripe Admiral diebkstabber

Joined: Dec 2, 2009
Posts: 700
Location: under my bed

I find it extremely weird when I go to look for a server to join, how many FFA servers are active with only three players in them. Obviously someone likes to play this way. It's totally stupid in my opinion, but I guess that is the only way some people can win. Wait for two people to fight each other then pick them off when they are weak. BACKSTABBERS.!!
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 17, 2011 @ 11:38am

Captain ipcress

Joined: Feb 7, 2009
Posts: 1887
Location: Get off my lawn!

This is a ridiculous discussion.
ALL 4-way FFA games revert to 3-way almost instantly, at which point movement stops and you have a three-way stalemate.

Get it?

That's why you have twenty FFA rooms with three people doing nothing but sitting around.  Most of them started as 4-way games.

Petitioning for "dedicated 4-player" rooms is pointless.
FFA simply sucks.  The "solution" is not to play it.  

Real players play 2v2.  
Losers and idiots play FFA.
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 17, 2011 @ 11:39am

Cabin Boy LjuboM

Joined: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 4085
Location: 1v1 & 2v2

i love ffa.
i never had a logner game then 10 minutes exepct few of them here on iphone.
and 20 minutes game is a limit for me =)
i play for a 1 hour same game on fusion wich is cool too.
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 17, 2011 @ 11:49am

Captain ipcress

Joined: Feb 7, 2009
Posts: 1887
Location: Get off my lawn!

FFA is for kids.
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 17, 2011 @ 6:31pm

Cabin Boy machotoo

Joined: Apr 20, 2009
Posts: 43

5 phases you will experience in Galcon.
 1. You buy the game and become intrigue on the outcome.
 2. You get excited after you learn some tricks and put them in practice.
  3. You start worrying about ranking and become a rank whore. You do whatever it takes including cheating to achieve your goals.
4. You get obsessed in getting GA! This is dangerous because you spend half of your time trying to achieve it.
5. Once you achieve your goal "GA" you become a solitary master player mostly playing 1vs1.
 These are my thoughts about Galcon!
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: May 19, 2011 @ 5:21am

Admiral ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 229
Location: Florida

If a FFA devolves to a 3-way it is most often because at least one player did something incredibly stupid - usually camping.  On the rare occasion it occurs is a game I am in I either suicide the player who did something stupid or I resign.  If the stupid player doesn't learn after I do this a few times I leave.
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: Jun 6, 2011 @ 11:20am

Cabin Boy leinator

Joined: Jan 12, 2011
Posts: 110

This is a terrible way to play, and the FFA games that most often have a 3-way phase have talented players who recognise when to expand and balance out the overall ratio as soon as the first player has been eliminated. Not doing so often means ceding the game to the longest camping player or the first aggressor.

As a general rule I also never play the game as if it is a sequential game in a series. Doing so leads to repetitive emotional play and grudges. I do not carry agression from one game to the other. I do not play emotionally or "target the high ranked player" or the "stupidest player." People like you break the game.

I'm sure most have experienced this if they play ffa, but once I had a player suicide me 100% every game for about 20-30 games. About halfway through all this I simply started floating my initial 100 waited for ships to start dying, then re-enter when I everyone else is within the same range. It isn't hard if you can manage a big fleet for a while, and I managed to win a few games that way. Eventually everyone except the troll left and I 1v1'd him until he ragequit.

I could have just left, which I usually do when someone is trolling, but it was interesting to stay and see if the parameters of the game allow for dealing with even the worst of trolls, which it essentially does by letting your ships float.
post updated on Jun 6, 2011 @ 12:00pm
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: Jun 28, 2011 @ 7:52am

Admiral ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 229
Location: Florida

diebkstabber said ...

I find it extremely weird when I go to look for a server to join, how many FFA servers are active with only three players in them. Obviously someone likes to play this way. It's totally stupid in my opinion, but I guess that is the only way some people can win. Wait for two people to fight each other then pick them off when they are weak. BACKSTABBERS.!!

________________________________

I seriously doubt that the proliferation of 3tard games is an indication that they are popular so much as they are an indication that there is a problem with the game.  
Two player games tend to be quick, so then too is the window for other players to join - and the liklihood of of one person joining is greaterbthan the liklihood of two - leading to a room stuck as 3tard land.   If you do get a 4 player room eventually one quits - 3tard land.  Now consider the 'standby' mode most players go into when they quit without exiting the room.  A 3tard room appears to be full from the lobby so a 4th player never joins. 
The average time for a two-player game is about 45 seconds.  The average time for a 4-player game is about 90 seconds.   3Tard games probably average 300 seconds or more - and easily longer.   Hence the lobby full of 3tards. 
The problem is that the lobby essentially forces 3tard games to start.  For many people it is a choice of 2 player, 2v2 or 3tard.   Four player games are the most difficult to get started.  That needs to be fixed.
post updated on Jun 28, 2011 @ 10:40am
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: Jun 28, 2011 @ 8:02am

Cabin Boy LjuboM

Joined: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 4085
Location: 1v1 & 2v2

in fusion you can play 3 way for two hours without getting bored
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: Jun 28, 2011 @ 8:58am

Cabin Boy zmar01

Joined: Jun 6, 2009
Posts: 655

you could just play assassin (3 and 4 player), 1v1 (all modes), 2v2 (2,3 and 4 player)

Which is what i do.

Also 2v2 in FFA lobbies, they are fun :)
but take some organizing.


Play fusion for 2 hours in 1 game!

i could play 100 in that time at least.
Re: Thoughts on Galcon :: Nov 9, 2011 @ 2:16pm

Admiral ipityu

Joined: Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 229
Location: Florida

Leniator said:
--------------------------
... the FFA games that most often have a 3-way phase have talented players who recognise when to expand and balance out the overall ratio...
--------------------------

Balance???  What the fak!  This isn't yoga!   Balance is stalemate - Balance is death.  Balance is for Tards   
The ONLY way to win Galcon is to tip the scale to your favor.  If you aren't willIng to move the scale and risk losing the you don't deserve to win.   
You want balance? Go buy a unicycle!
post updated on Nov 9, 2011 @ 2:18pm

Page 3 / 3 1   2   3 

You must sign in to post.