New spoils: colorless

[Rodion]

Concise description:

• new type of spoils

Specifics/Details:

• All spoils are colorless. You are always able to trade them when you get 3 of them. However, your patience will be rewarded according to this table:
  trade 3 spoils when you have 3 - 4 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 4 - 6 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 5 - 8 armies
  We can cap this here or go further, allowing for more powerful "midcashes", such as:
  trade 3 spoils when you have 6 - 10 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 7 - 12 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 8 - 15 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 9 - 20 armies
  
  You still get +2 when you hold a cashed spoil.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• I conceived this system to minimize the effect of luck on the game.
  
  1 - Nuclear is considered a game that involves a lot of luck, as you can nuke anything (particularly when you have 2 pairs and thus need to use the 5th card you are awarded, regardless of what it is).
  2 - Flat rate is also considered highly dependant on luck. You can get anything between 4 and 10 armies depending on the colors of the spoils you have.
  3 - Escalating is probably the setting that takes most skill. Games get really complicated when cashes get high (definition of "high" varying per game type). However, there is still a lot of luck in getting a 3-card set at the right time or hoping that your opponent's 4 cards are 2 pairs.
  4 - No spoils is probably the setting that is less dependant of luck. Well, at least when you consider "spoils" luck. This is the kind of game that is harder for comebacks to occur. Early leads are a great indicative of the winner. Several 2-sided no spoils games are decided when a player/team holds 1 well protected bonus. Since holding that bonus usually depends on a lucky drop or lucky dice, you could say that the luck factor in no spoils is simply shifted from the non-existent spoils to start/dice/drop.
  
  The idea of the "colorless" spoils is to remove luck elements that are present in escalating/flat rate, while giving some reasonable strategical margin for a team that started poorly and is deploying less armies per turn (by round 1 or 2) to comeback on the game.
  In other words, unlike flat rate, the ammount of armies you get does not depend on the color of the spoils you randomly drew; unlike escalating, you won't be denied a clutch cash with 4 cards just because you drew 2 pairs; unlike no spoils, that poor round 1 dice/drop is not a death sentence.
  
  Strategic elements would be the dilemma between cashing earlier to break/take/protect a bonus or make a kill and cashing later to get a bigger ammount of armies. "Luck" would be limited to getting cards of territories you already have (the +2 auto-deploys) and, of course, killing territories to grant you the card when your turn ends.
  
  In summary, the idea is good because it diminishes the role of luck and makes room for more strategic considerations.

[blakebowling]

I remember reading something like this before. A banana to the first one to link it for me.

[greenoaks]

no thanks, but i would consider this :-

Colourless Spoils

Concise description:

• new type of spoils

Specifics/Details:

• Those spoils don't have colors. You are always able to trade them when you get 3 of them. However, your patience will be rewarded according to this table:
  trade 3 spoils when you have 3 - 4 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 4 - 6 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 5 - 8 armies
  We can cap this here or go further, allowing for more powerful "midcashes", such as:
  trade 3 spoils when you have 6 - 10 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 7 - 12 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 8 - 15 armies
  trade 3 spoils when you have 9 - 20 armies
  
  You still get +2 when you hold a cashed spoil.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• I conceived this system to minimize the effect of luck on the game.
  
  1 - Nuclear is considered a game that involves a lot of luck, as you can nuke anything (particularly when you have 2 pairs and thus need to use the 5th card you are awarded, regardless of what it is).
  2 - Flat rate is also considered highly dependant on luck. You can get anything between 4 and 10 armies depending on the colours of the spoils you have.
  3 - Escalating is probably the setting that takes most skill. Games get really complicated when cashes get high (definition of "high" varying per game type). However, there is still a lot of luck in getting a 3-card set at the right time or hoping that your opponent's 4 cards are 2 pairs.
  4 - No spoils is probably the setting that is less dependant of luck. Well, at least when you consider "spoils" luck. This is the kind of game that is harder for comebacks to occur. Early leads are a great indicative of the winner. Several 2-sided no spoils games are decided when a player/team holds 1 well protected bonus. Since holding that bonus usually depends on a lucky drop or lucky dice, you could say that the luck factor in no spoils is simply shifted from the non-existent spoils to start/dice/drop.
  
  The idea of the "colourless" spoils is to remove luck elements that are present in escalating/flat rate, while giving some reasonable strategical margin for a team that started poorly and is deploying less armies per turn (by round 1 or 2) to comeback on the game.
  In other words, unlike flat rate, the ammount of armies you get does not depend on the colour of the spoils you randomly drew; unlike escalating, you won't be denied a clutch cash with 4 cards just because you drew 2 pairs; unlike no spoils, that poor round 1 dice/drop is not a death sentence.
  
  Strategic elements would be the dilemma between cashing earlier to break/take/protect a bonus or make a kill and cashing later to get a bigger ammount of armies. "Luck" would be limited to getting cards of territories you already have (the +2 auto-deploys) and, of course, killing territories to grant you the card when your turn ends.
  
  In summary, the idea is good because it diminishes the role of luck and makes room for more strategic considerations.

[Super Nova]

Would the colorless spoils be given out randomly mixed with the regular spoils? If so (assuming I understand your suggestion correctly), this would mess up a lot of strategies, and would also kind of screw up the whole mid-turn cash board sweep thing. If this were to work, it would have to be completely independent of the spoils system. (Maybe you get one per turn if you took a territ?)

Either way, I'm afraid I'm not in favor of this suggestion.

[Rodion]

Greenoaks a fan of the british spelling?

Would the colorless spoils be given out randomly mixed with the regular spoils? If so (assuming I understand your suggestion correctly), this would mess up a lot of strategies, and would also kind of screw up the whole mid-turn cash board sweep thing. If this were to work, it would have to be completely independent of the spoils system. (Maybe you get one per turn if you took a territ?)

Either way, I'm afraid I'm not in favor of this suggestion.

No, I think you didn't understand it. All spoils would be colorless.

[Army of GOD]

Like blakechess already said, this has been suggested before and I completely agree with it. It's a great sugg...kind of like a "cash early, low spoils; cash later, high spoils" thing.

But, like everything in this forum, this suggestion is going to die quickly. Even if it sent to the "to do" section, it won't ever be acted on. We've been waiting on things like adjacent attacks and "choose your own color" for a long-ass time now.

[SirSebstar]

when i read the suggestion i thought, hey that might be fun... it took some thinking to see it differently.
obvious strategy would be to simply bomb a country in fog and build up a stack and hang back...

It would make sweeps extremely likely. After all cash in 3, get 18 extra cards..
I do read this correctly that you can have an unlimited amount of spoils right? I would not even add countries, because that would still denominate luck, and cause problems when cashing in..
I assume you get to cash in only at the start of your turn, and not midcash?

how about limiting it to a hand of 5, allow midcashes and make a bonus on a cash in of 3,4,and 5 cards?

i actually like the suggestion..

and another thing, nuclear is a full strategy spoil. true there are some ways to avoid nuclear waste on your own, and it can be overly strong by taking out a stack, but the gameplay is totally different and can indeed upset a game where no spoil would simply have succeeded. luck is always subject to strategy. if it fits use it, other then that nuclear is just plain cool.

[greenoaks]

Greenoaks a fan of the british spelling?

and australian spelling

.

btw, the increases in cashed troops would make it like escalating. hold 4 spoils, eliminate another player with 5 to have 9 - except in escalating you then cash all sets to give you the troops to eliminate the next guy with 5, cash sets and go on

with this spoils option a decision is required (strategy) - cash all sets for max troops to eliminate the next guy or keep some spoils to max the next cash after eliminating player 3.

sweeping the board would be more interesting so i guess i am a fan of colourless spoils

[TheForgivenOne]

I remember reading something like this before. A banana to the first one to link it for me.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=109230&hilit=spoil

[tkr4lf]

I'm not really a fan of this. I like the spoils the way they are now.

[TheForgivenOne]

I'm not really a fan of this. I like the spoils the way they are now.

Same. I like the whole "Max of 5 spoils and must trade 3" aspect

[Woodruff]

I think this is a GREAT suggestion. I would consider adding the ability NOT to cash spoils mid-turn (after an elimination of an opponent, for instance), though. But other than that, it's a great option.

[Rodion]

I might need help from someone with phrasing the idea, as people seem unable to understand something that is pretty obvious in my eyes.

1 - This system is like any other spoils system. You can "naturally" collect up to 5 spoils. You are forced to cash everytime you have 5 or more spoils. The only possibility of holding more than 5 cards at once is, like in any other game type, killing someone else and having a midcash. When I said in the OP that we could cap that at 5 cards or go further, allowing for more powerful midcashes, I thought I had established pretty clearly that the only way to hold more than 5 cards is through an elimination.

2 - Another misconception is that you'll get armies based on the number of spoils you trade. No. You always trade 3 spoils (like every other game type). You will, however, get armies based on the number of spoils you hold when you decide to cash (and only 3 will be cashed). I thought the "trade 3 spoils when you have 4/5/6/7/8/9" had made that clear, but apparently not.

I'll try to make an example on how the game would look like (assuming you take a territory everytime):

round 1 - you end with 1 spoil
round 2 - you end with 2 spoils
round 3 - you end with 3 spoils
round 4 - you can cash 3 spoils for 4 armies (and end round 4 with 1 spoil) or not cash and end with 4 spoils (I'll assume you did not cash)
round 5 - you can cash 3 spoils for 6 armies (and end round 5 with 2 spoils) or not cash and end with 5 spoils (I'll assume you did not cash)
round 6 - you are forced to cash 3 spoils for 8 armies (and end round 6 with 3 spoils)
round 7 - you can cash 3 spoils for 4 armies (and end round 7 with 1 spoil) or not cash and end with 4 spoils (I'll assume you did not cash)
round 8 - I'll assume you can kill someone without cashing your spoils. The person you are going to kill has 5 spoils. You kill that person and thus hold 9 spoils. You can then:

a) capped version - forced to cash (from 9 to 6) for 8 armies, then forced to cash (from 6 to 3) for 8 armies and then cash or not (from 3 to 0) for 4 armies -> you'll get between 16 and 20 armies
b) uncapped version - forced to cash (from 9 to 6) for 20 armies, then forced to cash (from 6 to 3) for 10 armies and then cash or not (from 3 to 0) for 4 armies -> you'll get between 30 and 34 armies

You see, the game type and number of armies usually gotten resembles "flat rate" system, but the ammount of armies you get are not determined by luck, they are determined by your decision on when to cash. Accepting the "uncapped" version of the suggestion, we could add a small "escalating" factor to the idea, in which killing someone with several cards would allow you to make a pretty powerful midcash and possibly sweep the board.

I hope my idea got cleared now. I'll be accepting ideas on how to make the OP clearer!

[danryan]

I like this idea a lot, a cross between escalating and flat rate, especially with rewards for eliminating someone and cashing over 5 spoils at once. It would be an interesting setting for team games.

[tkr4lf]

I understood what you meant by it. I just like the way the spoils are now. They are more true to the game of risk. Yeah, I know this isn't a risk site, but still, it's a risk site, if you get my meaning.

I suppose if it was an option to play this way then I could support it. But I don't want to see it become the only way to play.

[SirSebstar]

mmm.
just making the spoils all jokers then.. no not interested in that part.
cashing in 5 cards(instead of 3) and then getting a bigger bonus, now that would be funny! but in your proposal nobody will cash in unless they must. thats just no fun.
and the player who desperatly needs his 3 cash to work is screwed by the player who can just wait.. or you get noobs who cash as asson as they get 3.. no that part i dont see as attractive.. sorry

[Rodion]

mmm.
just making the spoils all jokers then.. no not interested in that part.
cashing in 5 cards(instead of 3) and then getting a bigger bonus, now that would be funny! but in your proposal nobody will cash in unless they must. thats just no fun.
and the player who desperatly needs his 3 cash to work is screwed by the player who can just wait.. or you get noobs who cash as asson as they get 3.. no that part i dont see as attractive.. sorry

What happens if a player is in desperate need of extra armies and happens to be playing a no spoils game?

I think they'd rather solve their problems in round 3 by cashing 4 and risking new problems arising when their enemy cashes 8 in round 5 than not cashing and simply losing the game because they were not able to break Asia.

And noobs making mistakes it not a ground for not liking something. Think of all the complicated maps that are forged every month!

[tkr4lf]

mmm.
just making the spoils all jokers then.. no not interested in that part.
cashing in 5 cards(instead of 3) and then getting a bigger bonus, now that would be funny! but in your proposal nobody will cash in unless they must. thats just no fun.
and the player who desperatly needs his 3 cash to work is screwed by the player who can just wait.. or you get noobs who cash as asson as they get 3.. no that part i dont see as attractive.. sorry

What happens if a player is in desperate need of extra armies and happens to be playing a no spoils game?

I think they'd rather solve their problems in round 3 by cashing 4 and risking new problems arising when their enemy cashes 8 in round 5 than not cashing and simply losing the game because they were not able to break Asia.

And noobs making mistakes it not a ground for not liking something. Think of all the complicated maps that are forged every month!

You can't cash in anything in a no spoils game, that's why it's called a no spoils game because there are no spoils to cash. If you're in desperate need of an army in a no spoils game then you're probably already losing.

[Rodion]

Tkr4lf, trust me, I know that.

That's part of the reason why I'm suggesting colourless ( ) spoils.

[Woodruff]

1 - This system is like any other spoils system. You can "naturally" collect up to 5 spoils. You are forced to cash everytime you have 5 or more spoils. The only possibility of holding more than 5 cards at once is, like in any other game type, killing someone else and having a midcash. When I said in the OP that we could cap that at 5 cards or go further, allowing for more powerful midcashes, I thought I had established pretty clearly that the only way to hold more than 5 cards is through an elimination.

Oh! You're right...I completely misunderstood your idea. Actually, I like the misunderstood version WAY better, to be honest. I'm not sure this way adds that much interesting to the equation.

2 - Another misconception is that you'll get armies based on the number of spoils you trade. No. You always trade 3 spoils (like every other game type). You will, however, get armies based on the number of spoils you hold when you decide to cash (and only 3 will be cashed). I thought the "trade 3 spoils when you have 4/5/6/7/8/9" had made that clear, but apparently not.

Yes, that part I understood.

[SirSebstar]

mmm.
just making the spoils all jokers then.. no not interested in that part.
cashing in 5 cards(instead of 3) and then getting a bigger bonus, now that would be funny! but in your proposal nobody will cash in unless they must. thats just no fun.
and the player who desperatly needs his 3 cash to work is screwed by the player who can just wait.. or you get noobs who cash as asson as they get 3.. no that part i dont see as attractive.. sorry

What happens if a player is in desperate need of extra armies and happens to be playing a no spoils game?

from a spoils point of view, that would be no fun either.. so yea. But at least spoins and no spoils have a very distinctive difference. the difference between collerless spoils and the rest.. not so much

I think they'd rather solve their problems in round 3 by cashing 4 and risking new problems arising when their enemy cashes 8 in round 5 than not cashing and simply losing the game because they were not able to break Asia.

but if they break asia, then the other player cashes, and takes it back and is stronger then ever...
i do get your basic point anyways.. like woodruff, its not that exhilirating as the 'misunderstood' idea

And noobs making mistakes it not a ground for not liking something. Think of all the complicated maps that are forged every month!

true, but at least i can mention it. and if someone uses 1 map because of its 'special attractions' its basicly farming.. may be legal, but still cheap...

overall, i liked the "you can cash in 5 cards now" for more points then 2x3 a much better proposition...

[Army of GOD]

I like this idea very much because it eliminates the luck factor for cards like in in flat rate where you can wait 5 cards to get a red set while an opponent gets a rainbow set in 3 cards. Escalating too, because unless you're in the middle of the pack for "cashes" in large games, you're screwed (with either a cash too early or too late).

[FarangDemon]

mmm.
just making the spoils all jokers then.. no not interested in that part.
cashing in 5 cards(instead of 3) and then getting a bigger bonus, now that would be funny! but in your proposal nobody will cash in unless they must. thats just no fun.
and the player who desperatly needs his 3 cash to work is screwed by the player who can just wait.. or you get noobs who cash as asson as they get 3.. no that part i dont see as attractive.. sorry

So you don't see escalating as attractive either? Because that's how it works, too.

A team that gets an early lead may postpone cashing, hoping for the losing team to cash out of desperation, knowing that they will then get more later. The fundamentals of the current escalating and proposed colorless spoils systems are different but they both lead to the same result you have described.

I'm not saying that the two systems have exactly the same effect on gameplay, just that the effect you have cited as negative and attribute to the proposed colorless system already exists in escalating, and is not considered negative.

[SirSebstar]

are you proposing then to change the current escalating system with this?

i guess not.
Indeed, escalating already has a few of the features you mentioned, hence i dont see the inventiveness of it.(or the plus or whatever)
now if you would chance your proposal to chance the value by adding more cards to your hand, or by being able to cashe in 5 cards, well that would be different enough for me

[drunkmonkey]

Great idea. It saddens me to know this will soon fall into the suggestions abyss.

I understood what you meant by it. I just like the way the spoils are now. They are more true to the game of risk. Yeah, I know this isn't a risk site, but still, it's a risk site, if you get my meaning.

I suppose if it was an option to play this way then I could support it. But I don't want to see it become the only way to play.

Why would you think this would be the only way to play? There are 4 options for spoils now; this obviously wouldn't replace all of them.