Conquer Club

[GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Suggestions that have made it through the grind, and have become integrated into the site!

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Dukasaur on Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:33 am

koontz1973 wrote:I am still at a loss here. How is having spoils increase after 100 going to stop stalemates? And are stalemates now an unaccepted part of the game? Players have always found ways round stalemates before, even Dukasaur in the OP has said in a game he was stalemated in got resolved.

Let me try to cover all those points.

How is having spoils increase after 100 going to stop stalemates?
Won't stop them, entirely. It should reduce them. At present, there is a window of opportunity, when the size of the cash is roughly comparable to the size of armies on the board, for escalating sweeps. One of the SoC training documents states that kills usually start happening when the size of the cash is approximately equal to 50% of the weakest player's troops. On the Classic map, and most maps of that size and bonus structure, that typically is when the size of the cash is somewhere from 15 to 25, and the size of the weakest player's army is somewhere between 20 and 30.

From then on, for a few turns the cash continues to outpace the growth of armies. If the killing didn't start when the cash was 20, it might start when it's 40, or 50. However, if that window of opportunity is missed, you get to a plateau where the size of the cash starts losing ground against the size of existing armies. If the cash gets to 75 and nobody has started the killing, then it probably means that everybody has now cashed a few times and the size of the typical player's army is somewhere in the 150-200 range. From here on in, instead of the cash getting larger relative to the armies on the board, it is getting smaller. By the time the cash is in the 100s you may find that there are armies of several hundred sitting around.

When the cash is not large enough that someone can plausibly score a kill and re-cash for enough to replenish his losses, he naturally is reluctant to go for a kill, because in killing someone else, the player will weaken himself out of contention. The longer the game goes on, the greater this tendency is, and it is increased by several factors:
  1. Today's larger maps make scoring a kill harder than the old 42's.
  2. Complex, generous bonus structures make mean that the size of armies increases faster and outpaces the cash sooner, and
  3. Fog-of-war makes people hesitant to pull the trigger because they're not quite sure what they will find.
My intention is to make sure that the plateau is never reached, that the size of the cash continues to increase as fast as the growth of armies on the board.

And are stalemates now an unaccepted part of the game?
I guess we will all have a different opinion of how bad things have to be before we call them unacceptable. Stalemates in escalating games are not common, but they do occur. It's happened to me maybe three or four times in the 3200 escalating games that I've played. "Wow, one in a thousand, that's pretty rare!" you might say, but the frustration of being in those games is extreme, and even if they are only one in a thousand it's some pretty bad memories that really poisoned my CC experience for months at a time.

What has been even more frustrating for me has been not only the games that I've played in, but the games that I've overseen as a tournament organiser. When a tournament is put behind schedule because of a game that won't end, it creates a ripple effect. Other people get bored, quit, don't renew their premium, etc., and that one game can make a big mess in the tournament schedule.

"Use round limits" is most people's answer, but I'm sure you've noticed that round limits come with their own pitfalls. Halfway to the round limit if the game hasn't been won, people stop looking for kills and start stacking in preparation for a round limit victory. These games are crushingly dull, and although not technically stalemates they are "almost stale" or "temporarily stale."

Avoiding stalemates was the main reason why the original board game switched from flat rate to escalating, and for the most part it works well on classic-style 42-tert sunny games. But larger maps, more available bonuses, and fog, have all contributed to making the existing escalation inadequate for the job. My bigger, badder Hyperbolic Escalating Spoils are needed.

Players have always found ways round stalemates before, even Dukasaur in the OP has said in a game he was stalemated in got resolved.
Nothing is forever. Even the Sun and the Moon will one day cease to be, and so it goes with games on Conquer Club. Players eventually give up, deadbeat or suicide or resort to breaking the rules and engaging in secret diplomacy. The games do end, but in sad and unsatisfactory ways. It would be far preferable to make them end as they should, with blazing-hot end-game battles!
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.
User avatar
Colonel Dukasaur
Entertainment Coordinator
Entertainment Coordinator
 
Posts: 13530
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 162
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (44)
General Achievement (15) Clan Achievement (9) Training Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (5) Tournament Contribution (31)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Metsfanmax on Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:36 am

Dukasaur wrote:"Use round limits" is most people's answer, but I'm sure you've noticed that round limits come with their own pitfalls. Halfway to the round limit if the game hasn't been won, people stop looking for kills and start stacking in preparation for a round limit victory. These games are crushingly dull, and although not technically stalemates they are "almost stale" or "temporarily stale."


I want to emphasize this specifically. Round limits are not a solution to escalating stalemates, they are a band-aid (and one that arguably just shifts the problem).
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 5273
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 43
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (7)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:29 am

So here is the crux of the problem for me with this. I understand the logic behind needing to cash, for 200 troops you have to lose 400. If you hit a stack of 400, you need the cash to be 401 to make it worth the kill. So how does this suggestion make this happen. For what I see, it makes the spoils go up faster, but not really fast enough to negate the problem. If players are stacking for a long game, they are already doing this at 30/40/50 spoils. Waiting for the spoils to hit 100 is too late for this. But earlier it is too early. Many times I hit 85/90 card sets in esc games. More so now with 12 players as the first round of cash sets hits 55 and the second set hits 115 (all players cash twice).

You also get the problem of players stacking with a set of cards waiting for the next larger set.

How often does this happen in esc games?
Does this happen more in no spoils and flat games?

Players have ways round this, it may not be the best solution to the problem but adding this to the mix at 100 would probably not solve the problem at all. It would just make some play slightly differently like round limit games.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: Increasing army cash in escalating when 100+

Postby jiminski on Sun Oct 20, 2013 5:28 am

jiminski wrote:
DiM wrote:i agree with the 100 cash value as a start and i especially agree with the non-linear increase....

or perhaps an even steeper increase
100
100+20
120+40
160+80
240+160
400+320
720+640
etc. this would definitelly put an end to stalemates in escalating games
and for anybody that thinks stalemates in escalating is impossible look at 1432626. it's horrible :(


yeap! it certainly would stop the stalemate!

And yes Stalemate games are pretty frequent in Esc, this one would have gone on forever if we had not negotiated an end : 949774

this one we are hoping for a death in the family a joke in poor taste as negotiations are complex (and i do not much like negotiating an end.. they do a disservice to the game): 1779532



this feels like a necropost but it is in this same thread... Though not as part of the later 'hyperbolic' suggestion, it's part of the "original original" within the discussion... Now i'm not saying that it's perfect but i think that the above scale of increase from DiM would solve the issue just mentioned by koontz..( I am sure Dukas has his own answer too ;) )

Personally i think that 50 is too early as many high level games don't get moving until that point... by 100 the game is often too far gone for a natural, logical end. Hence the need for a very large increase doubling each time, as shown above. An end is certain and quick. No suicide necessary, no double dealing, an end which everyone knows the rules for and can incorporate within their strategy.

Perhaps we can give control of the first page to Dukas who can hybridise the ideas, improving to a composite idea based upon discussion etc, as would happen in a better tended single, continuous, thread suggestion?

If Dukas would commit to trying to include some elements of both (perhaps hold votes to determine details at each stage as do the Cartographers?) then you could archive the original, place a link to it in the first post and keep this as a living Suggestion rather than a zombie-idea.
Image
User avatar
Major jiminski
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: London
Medals: 29
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (2)

Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Dukasaur on Sun Oct 20, 2013 6:32 am

Here's what the numbers look like. The first column (black) is the existing progression. The second column (blue) is my original proposal. The third column (red) is modifying the proposal to start at 100 rather than at 50. The last two columns are run using 20% and 50% escalations. I think those are grossly excessive, and am including them only for comparison.



50 50 50 50 50
55 55 55 55 55
60 61 60 60 60
65 67 65 65 65
70 74 70 70 70
75 81 75 75 75
80 89 80 80 80
85 98 85 85 85
90 108 90 90 90
95 119 95 95 95
100 131 100 100 100
105 144 110 120 150
110 158 121 144 225
115 174 133 173 338
120 191 146 208 507
125 210 161 250 761
130 231 177 300 1142
135 254 195 360 1713
140 279 215 432 2570
145 307 237 518 3855
150 338 261 622 5783
155 372 287 746 8675
160 409 316 895 13013
165 450 348 1074 19520
170 495 383 1289 29280
175 545 421 1547 43920
180 600 463 1856 65880
185 660 509 2227 98820
190 726 560 2672 148230
195 799 616 3206 222345
200 879 678 3847 333518
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.
User avatar
Colonel Dukasaur
Entertainment Coordinator
Entertainment Coordinator
 
Posts: 13530
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 162
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (44)
General Achievement (15) Clan Achievement (9) Training Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (5) Tournament Contribution (31)

Re: Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby jiminski on Sun Oct 20, 2013 7:32 am

Dukasaur wrote:Here's what the numbers look like. The first column (black) is the existing progression. The second column (blue) is my original proposal. The third column (red) is modifying the proposal to start at 100 rather than at 50. The last two columns are run using 20% and 50% escalations. I think those are grossly excessive, and am including them only for comparison.



50 50 50 50 50
55 55 55 55 55
60 61 60 60 60
65 67 65 65 65
70 74 70 70 70
75 81 75 75 75
80 89 80 80 80
85 98 85 85 85
90 108 90 90 90
95 119 95 95 95
100 131 100 100 100
105 144 110 120 150
110 158 121 144 225
115 174 133 173 338
120 191 146 208 507
125 210 161 250 761
130 231 177 300 1142
135 254 195 360 1713
140 279 215 432 2570
145 307 237 518 3855
150 338 261 622 5783
155 372 287 746 8675
160 409 316 895 13013
165 450 348 1074 19520
170 495 383 1289 29280
175 545 421 1547 43920
180 600 463 1856 65880
185 660 509 2227 98820
190 726 560 2672 148230
195 799 616 3206 222345
200 879 678 3847 333518



yeas the first bone of contention you need to resolve is the 50 or 100 start.

That the hyperbolic 50% or DiM's solution look "grossly excessive" is due to the fact that the 100 beginning gives the game a huge shot at 'natural' death. Much more so than for the 50 start; the 50 start makes for a different game and culture whereas the 100 start makes for a means to an end without tampering with existing strategy too much.


Why not set up a vote and then include the decision into the suggestion.
You could vote on, just as an example:
A) 50 start hyperbolic 10%
B) 75 start hyperbolic 20% or Double bubble (jiminski scale increase*)
C) 100 start hyperbolic 50% or Double bubble (DiM scale increase)
D) other please suggest

I think you need to get a mandate upon these 2 key factors: -
1) beginning level (50 or 100)
and
2) method of increase.

The 2 things very much go hand in hand. So perhaps you can mix them in the canvassing for approval.

*In passing I also gave an option previously: 100, 120, 150, 190, 240, 300
This would be a more gentle but certainly less quick resolution than DiM's
Image
User avatar
Major jiminski
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: London
Medals: 29
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (2)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby jiminski on Sun Oct 20, 2013 8:05 am

Please see mine and DiM's played out... I think in comparison, if your method begins at 100 (except with the large percentage versions 'perhaps'), it is too gradual to have the required result of ending the game quickly.

Code: Select all
jim    DiM

100   100
120   120
150   160
190   240
240   400
300   720
370   1360
450   2640
540   5200
640   10320
750   20560
870   41040
1000   82000
1140   163920
1290   327760
1450   655440
1620   1310800
1800   2621520
Image
User avatar
Major jiminski
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: London
Medals: 29
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (2)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:23 am

Duke, out of the lines you have, black (original) and red (yours modified to start at 100), I do not see how the change will result in the stopping of stalemated games. Blues (start at 50) is way to early to start this as it starts in round 6 of 12 player games. The last two columns as you say are excessive and would result in stacking like round limits till you hit those limits. So with all of the lines, black is what we have, red is what you want but I cannot see any way this would solve the issue of stalemates. By the time you get to the better spoils, you have already had 25 cash ins, so borders are going to be pretty well defended. If you had 150 troops defending your border, and I cash in set 31 (red set at 177) that is only 27 more troops. With any deployable set, I might have +50 troops to your border. With those odds, I may not attack.

All I get with these new sets is better odds of winning the battle, but not enough to reward me to attack. This at best is a band aid like someone said with round limits.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Metsfanmax on Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:30 am

koontz, I don't follow your logic. There are levels of increase that are clearly excessive, and there are levels of increase that are not enough. Somewhere in the middle there must be a level of increase that is just right, and we just have to find it. In either case, it's not clear that people would stack forever in the "excessive" case: if the game worked for you to eliminate someone early on, and go for a sweep, you'll do it now instead of trying to wait for later. If we think that (say) an escalating game should end before the cashes get to 100, then the cashes after 100 should be designed to make the game end relatively quickly. I do not agree that this would be similar to round limits, because in this scenario you're forced to be aggressive and go for a sweep when the exponential spoils kick in, instead of just stacking.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 5273
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 43
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (7)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby chapcrap on Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:52 pm

From looking at the numbers, I think starting around 65-75 would be the best spot and have the number be 10-15% increase.
Image
User avatar
Captain chapcrap
 
Posts: 9585
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:46 am
Location: Kansas City
Medals: 168
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (31)
General Achievement (16) Clan Achievement (17) Training Achievement (6) Challenge Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (34)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:45 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:koontz, I don't follow your logic.

My logic is pretty simple. This will not work. It really does not matter how you set up escalating spoils, players will play how they play. By setting up the spoils so they get bigger and bigger after 100, all that will happen is the walls will get bigger. Players tactics to include the bigger spoil will come into effect. Things like card spots will be agreed on, walls will get bigger but the end of the game will stay the same.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby jiminski on Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:52 pm

koontz1973 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:koontz, I don't follow your logic.

My logic is pretty simple. This will not work. It really does not matter how you set up escalating spoils, players will play how they play. By setting up the spoils so they get bigger and bigger after 100, all that will happen is the walls will get bigger. Players tactics to include the bigger spoil will come into effect. Things like card spots will be agreed on, walls will get bigger but the end of the game will stay the same.


It's not accurate koontz, the point is that if the increase is steep enough (where the increase doubles each cash from 100 onwards for example) there comes a point, and relatively quickly, where the cash will be very close to the whole troop count on the board. Therefore a victory is guaranteed based on a run of kills and multiple mid turn cashes; this is reliant upon the players actually wanting to win of course.*

(*The only problem could arise where some odd balls play to get a million troops on the board for example. that could be an issue with genuine ramifications.)
Image
User avatar
Major jiminski
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: London
Medals: 29
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (2)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Mon Oct 21, 2013 11:42 pm

jiminski wrote:
koontz1973 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:koontz, I don't follow your logic.

My logic is pretty simple. This will not work. It really does not matter how you set up escalating spoils, players will play how they play. By setting up the spoils so they get bigger and bigger after 100, all that will happen is the walls will get bigger. Players tactics to include the bigger spoil will come into effect. Things like card spots will be agreed on, walls will get bigger but the end of the game will stay the same.


It's not accurate koontz, the point is that if the increase is steep enough (where the increase doubles each cash from 100 onwards for example) there comes a point, and relatively quickly, where the cash will be very close to the whole troop count on the board. Therefore a victory is guaranteed based on a run of kills and multiple mid turn cashes; this is reliant upon the players actually wanting to win of course.*

(*The only problem could arise where some odd balls play to get a million troops on the board for example. that could be an issue with genuine ramifications.)

And by allowing the troops count to increase that quickly, the site is giving the game to the player who manages to get lucky cards and not played with any skill or strategy.

But this needs to start later than 100 as 12 player games, you are giving the bigger spoils to the last players to cash. That will also make players stack and not attack so they do not get a card for a round.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Metsfanmax on Tue Oct 22, 2013 9:22 am

koontz1973 wrote:
jiminski wrote:
koontz1973 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:koontz, I don't follow your logic.

My logic is pretty simple. This will not work. It really does not matter how you set up escalating spoils, players will play how they play. By setting up the spoils so they get bigger and bigger after 100, all that will happen is the walls will get bigger. Players tactics to include the bigger spoil will come into effect. Things like card spots will be agreed on, walls will get bigger but the end of the game will stay the same.


It's not accurate koontz, the point is that if the increase is steep enough (where the increase doubles each cash from 100 onwards for example) there comes a point, and relatively quickly, where the cash will be very close to the whole troop count on the board. Therefore a victory is guaranteed based on a run of kills and multiple mid turn cashes; this is reliant upon the players actually wanting to win of course.*

(*The only problem could arise where some odd balls play to get a million troops on the board for example. that could be an issue with genuine ramifications.)

And by allowing the troops count to increase that quickly, the site is giving the game to the player who manages to get lucky cards and not played with any skill or strategy.


In pretty much all of escalating, winning is a healthy combination of diversifying your territories and cashing and attempting a sweep at the right time. In an eight player game, there are usually two or three players who could have won in the same round other than the person who did win, had the turns been skipped. This doesn't change anything about this; in general in escalating, when the cashes reach maybe 2/3 of a player's troops, you win if you try a kill at the right time, and sometimes you can't because someone got in there before you. You're therefore completely wrong about it being completely about luck -- if you just sit there and hope you cash at the right time, in any version of escalating, you're doing it wrong.

But this needs to start later than 100 as 12 player games, you are giving the bigger spoils to the last players to cash. That will also make players stack and not attack so they do not get a card for a round.


Again, nothing about this fundamentally changes the way escalating works. If the types of scenarios you are describing would really happen, then they are already happening. The cashes after 100 do not increase fast enough that you can just rely on luck to win. If it went 100 -> 200, that would be one thing, but going 100 -> 110 (say) is not enough to really cause what you're saying.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 5273
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 43
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (7)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:52 pm

Mets, I have said the last player in a 12 player game is getting +18 troops. This is to soon so the idea needs to be moved to a higher number. I also said that this idea is giving an advantage to a player as it stands. So no, I do not support this as it stands and I see nothing to want me to.

Right now, if anything, the number needs to be made a lot higher before it starts because games in escalating games may not be stalemated at this point. How can any small group determine that if a game has a cash of 100 troops, it must be stalemated so the scale of increase must be changed to stop that game by allowing the player with the lucky set to win.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Metsfanmax on Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:44 pm

koontz1973 wrote:Right now, if anything, the number needs to be made a lot higher before it starts because games in escalating games may not be stalemated at this point. How can any small group determine that if a game has a cash of 100 troops, it must be stalemated so the scale of increase must be changed to stop that game by allowing the player with the lucky set to win.


We should implement this whether or not a stalemate exists at 100 troop cashes. Anyone who has played, say, 4 player escalating games on classic knows how easy it is to reach this type of stalemate. But, you say, in a 12 player game this is less likely. But that's OK! We're not increasing the cashes so rapidly that the game ends one turn after we hit 100. People will have time to adjust and adapt. In order for your point to be justified, you'd have to prove that a 12 player game would get significantly worse at this point because of the increased cashes, and I just don't see why it would. Inevitably in an escalating game someone is going to be at the right place and time with their cash, and that's true regardless of what size the cashes are. I can even envision plausible scenarios where 12 player games would be improved by this change.

So, this has a clear benefit for some types of games, and at least no real drawback for other types of games. Seems like a win to me.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 5273
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 43
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (7)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:46 am

Metsfanmax wrote:In order for your point to be justified, you'd have to prove that a 12 player game would get significantly worse at this point because of the increased cashes, and I just don't see why it would.

How can you say this when you have not shown a 4 player game at 100 cash is any worse for not having this.
Metsfanmax wrote:Anyone who has played, say, 4 player escalating games on classic knows how easy it is to reach this type of stalemate.

How often does this happen? In any size of game? Does it happen in 10%, 20% or 50% of 4 player escalating games? And does it happening in 4 player escalating games on classic provide enough of a justification for it to change the game for 12 player world 2.1 games? Neither idea should effect the other.
Metsfanmax wrote:I can even envision plausible scenarios where 12 player games would be improved by this change.

How?

Did the adding of round limits give a working solution to stalemates? As agantcom in my thread says
agentcom wrote:The basic form of it is that you should have to play out the games you start come hell or high water.


After looking at 4 player classic escalating games on game finder (I excluded trench as a setting) only one game got to round 21 in the first 5 pages. The highest cash in that game was for 95 troops. So this does not happen as often as said for this game. This change would not effect the games it is designed to help but change the games it is designed not to.

Mets, without seeming to be a stalker O:) , I checked your games, 8 or more players with escalating spoils, you have only 68 games out of 2092 (3% of all games). So this will not really effect you. I have on the other hand 1640 out of 6002 (27% of all games) and would effect me. I know how quickly games get to this level of spoils and how an increase will effect them.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Dukasaur on Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:43 am

koontz1973 wrote:How often does this happen? In any size of game? Does it happen in 10%, 20% or 50% of 4 player escalating games? And does it happening in 4 player escalating games on classic provide enough of a justification for it to change the game for 12 player world 2.1 games? Neither idea should effect the other.

I addressed the fact that it is a rare occurance, but on the occassions when it happens it is extremely unpleasant to endure, so if we can even reduce the frequency from one in a thousand to one in two thousand we will be improving the experience for countless members.

And World 2.1 is precisely one of those big, bonus-heavy maps that has a tendency to deadlock, and where bigger cashes are needed to break the game open.
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.
User avatar
Colonel Dukasaur
Entertainment Coordinator
Entertainment Coordinator
 
Posts: 13530
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 162
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (44)
General Achievement (15) Clan Achievement (9) Training Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (5) Tournament Contribution (31)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:13 am

Dukasaur wrote:And World 2.1 is precisely one of those big, bonus-heavy maps that has a tendency to deadlock, and where bigger cashes are needed to break the game open.

In 1429 games on world 2.1, I am yet to play a deadlock game on that map.
Dukasaur wrote:I addressed the fact that it is a rare occurance, but on the occassions when it happens it is extremely unpleasant to endure, so if we can even reduce the frequency from one in a thousand to one in two thousand we will be improving the experience for countless members.

So a rare occurrence can now be justified for making a major change to what has been around for a very long time? Unpleasant or not, players get into games knowing full well the game can stalemate. Players have found many ways around this so to change a spoil to stop what occurs once in a thousand games to once in two thousand is not a good enough reason to change it. Stalemates happen far more often in flat, so why not increase those spoils after round 50? Or allow no spoil games to have spoils after round 100? Why not have nukes nuke a region and all around it after 50 rounds. These would all be rejected with the same excuse of round limits. An argument I do not agree with but is more than pertinent for this idea.

Why fix something that is not broken and this is surely not broken? Or if we are going to fix something that is broken, lets fix it all at once and not do half measures.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Metsfanmax on Wed Oct 23, 2013 8:45 am

koontz1973 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:In order for your point to be justified, you'd have to prove that a 12 player game would get significantly worse at this point because of the increased cashes, and I just don't see why it would.

How can you say this when you have not shown a 4 player game at 100 cash is any worse for not having this.


I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who agrees that a stalemate is a fun way to end up in, for an escalating game.

Metsfanmax wrote:Anyone who has played, say, 4 player escalating games on classic knows how easy it is to reach this type of stalemate.

How often does this happen? In any size of game? Does it happen in 10%, 20% or 50% of 4 player escalating games? And does it happening in 4 player escalating games on classic provide enough of a justification for it to change the game for 12 player world 2.1 games? Neither idea should effect the other.


If the game experience won't be made worse for 12 player World 2.1, then your argument is going nowhere. You need to actually come up with a reason why this would occur instead of continuing to insist that it would but without any real justification.

Metsfanmax wrote:I can even envision plausible scenarios where 12 player games would be improved by this change.

How?


Mainly this would be in situations where players have already stacked up a lot of troops by the time the 100 cashes came around. No one can go for a sweep in that case, which means that people will either continue to stack, or possibly try and fail for a sweep and then give the game to the next player, which is never fun.

Did the adding of round limits give a working solution to stalemates? As agantcom in my thread says
agentcom wrote:The basic form of it is that you should have to play out the games you start come hell or high water.


The addition of round limits solves stalemates, but in a way that is foreign to the game experience. When I join an escalating game, I expect that someone will win by eliminating another player, cashing their cards, and repeating this process. Round limits do not encourage this, because if someone could have done this prior to the round limit they would have. Instead of just encourages stacking until the last round, which is the antithesis of why someone joins an escalating game.

After looking at 4 player classic escalating games on game finder (I excluded trench as a setting) only one game got to round 21 in the first 5 pages. The highest cash in that game was for 95 troops. So this does not happen as often as said for this game. This change would not effect the games it is designed to help but change the games it is designed not to.


You have to be more careful in your search. For example, if you include games with round limit = 20 in your search, of course you're not going to find as many that reach round 21 :-) I did a search for 4 player standard escalating games on classic with round limit of 50, 100, or None, and found 8 of the first 100 to have reached round 21, and many more to have come close enough that it's plausible they would have been indirectly affected by this change. So this lends some credence to the idea that perhaps 10% of games are affected by this change.

Mets, without seeming to be a stalker O:) , I checked your games, 8 or more players with escalating spoils, you have only 68 games out of 2092 (3% of all games). So this will not really effect you. I have on the other hand 1640 out of 6002 (27% of all games) and would effect me. I know how quickly games get to this level of spoils and how an increase will effect them.


Well, my whole argument was that this affects games with <8 players more than this affects games with 8 or more players. Yes, it changes the games you play as well, but you haven't yet told me why it's worse for those games.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 5273
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 43
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (7)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Wed Oct 23, 2013 9:41 am

Metsfanmax wrote:Well, my whole argument was that this affects games with <8 players more than this affects games with 8 or more players.

How, more larger games will get to this than smaller ones. So it will effect more larger games than smaller ones even getting to it.
Metsfanmax wrote:Yes, it changes the games you play as well, but you haven't yet told me why it's worse for those games.

Because if you give a player more troops, the chances of that player winning goes up. You are inevitably changing the chances of winning the game in someone favour.
Metsfanmax wrote:If the game experience won't be made worse for 12 player World 2.1, then your argument is going nowhere.

But you cannot say it will be better so your argument is also going nowhere are we are both never going to agree on this.
koontz1973 wrote:So a rare occurrence can now be justified for making a major change to what has been around for a very long time? Unpleasant or not, players get into games knowing full well the game can stalemate. Players have found many ways around this so to change a spoil to stop what occurs once in a thousand games to once in two thousand is not a good enough reason to change it. Stalemates happen far more often in flat, so why not increase those spoils after round 50? Or allow no spoil games to have spoils after round 100? Why not have nukes nuke a region and all around it after 50 rounds. These would all be rejected with the same excuse of round limits. An argument I do not agree with but is more than pertinent for this idea.

Why fix something that is not broken and this is surely not broken? Or if we are going to fix something that is broken, lets fix it all at once and not do half measures.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Metsfanmax on Wed Oct 23, 2013 9:51 am

koontz1973 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Yes, it changes the games you play as well, but you haven't yet told me why it's worse for those games.

Because if you give a player more troops, the chances of that player winning goes up. You are inevitably changing the chances of winning the game in someone favour.


Would you support a change to escalating that reduced the increase to 4 troops per cash? After all, that would "decrease the chances of winning the game in someone's favor" (I don't even think that what you're saying makes sense, but I'll go with it for now). Or does 5 troops just happen to be the right number?

So a rare occurrence can now be justified for making a major change to what has been around for a very long time? Unpleasant or not, players get into games knowing full well the game can stalemate.


Actually, I join an escalating game expecting full well that the game will end with a sweep. That's what that game style is supposed to be about. We have other game types if you want an experience that is more likely to end in a stalemate situation.

Stalemates happen far more often in flat, so why not increase those spoils after round 50? Or allow no spoil games to have spoils after round 100? Why not have nukes nuke a region and all around it after 50 rounds. These would all be rejected with the same excuse of round limits. An argument I do not agree with but is more than pertinent for this idea.


We're talking about escalating here. I assert that if an escalating game ever reaches a point where the spoils become irrelevant, then it's not really an escalating game. That's what we need to fix.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 5273
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 43
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (7)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby DoomYoshi on Wed Oct 23, 2013 10:46 am

I suggested 100 troops since I have never seen a standard sweep game end in that range. Therefore, most users wouldn't recognize the change and there would be less opposition. After realizing that i have never played 12-player sweep game, I concur that perhaps the starting point could be a function of player size.
I will not stand for an America where reckless bankers and suicide bombers can make a mockery of our promise for tomorrow.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 5685
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Termina Field
Medals: 74
The Championships Gold (1) Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2)
Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (2) General Achievement (8)
Clan Achievement (16) Tournament Contribution (6) General Contribution (5)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby Metsfanmax on Wed Oct 23, 2013 11:15 am

I'd be fine with making it a function of player size if that's what it takes to reach a compromise.
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 5273
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: NY
Medals: 43
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (2)
General Contribution (7)

Re: [GP/UI] Increase Escalating Spoils to Avoid Stalemates

Postby koontz1973 on Wed Oct 23, 2013 11:24 am

Metsfanmax wrote:I'd be fine with making it a function of player size if that's what it takes to reach a compromise.

What about a trench or adjacent reinforcements, they can also slow down a game. Settings would need to become a factor as well then. So what would you say, all 2/3/4/5 player games that are not adjacent or trench must have this? What would happen if a player did not want to play escalating like this?

Metsfanmax wrote:Actually, I join an escalating game expecting full well that the game will end with a sweep.

Amazing how few escalating games end in full sweeps.
Metsfanmax wrote:We're talking about escalating here. I assert that if an escalating game ever reaches a point where the spoils become irrelevant, then it's not really an escalating game. That's what we need to fix.

But you are trying to fix something that is not broken. Escalating spoils work exactly like they are supposed to. More games in flat or no spoils stalemate over esc but at no point has anyone suggested they need changing.

This would go so much faster is a stalemate button was introduced to the game page. Then everyone would have a way out. ;)
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class koontz1973
 
Posts: 7538
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:57 am
Medals: 117
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (10) General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Map Contribution (12)
Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (10)

PreviousNext

Return to Implemented Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron