Random/Anonymous Opponents

[codymac]

I suggest to have an option when creating the game, of having the names of your opponents be hidden from you. That way, in a 1v1v1v1v1v1 game, that idiot in your office who holds a grudge against you for stealing his girlfriend won't constantly be hounding you when it makes no sense tactically, effectively creating an alliance against you.

I've thought about this a bit, and cannot find any negatives. It would be cool at the end to have it revealed who was who, etc.

Again, this would just be an option. Thoughts??


EDIT: Oh, I forgot the "random" part. You might want to force random colors with this, too, since the game's creator will always be red.

[AK_iceman]

How about you just stop stealing girlfriends?

Edit: I dont like the idea because i like to know who i am up against when i join a game.

[codymac]

My developers didn't allow that toggle.

stealGirlfriends = 1

[codymac]

How about you just stop stealing girlfriends?

Edit: I dont like the idea because i like to know who i am up against when i join a game.

You will know who you're up against when you join a game, you just won't know what color they are (unless they tell you outside of the game) while you're actually playing said game.

[dragonfly]

i dont know, that actually sounds like a cool idea. would their ranks be hidden too?

[cyberdaniel]

How about you just put him on the ignore list and you will not play with him. Why would I want to not know who I'm attacking?

[Phobia]

i like playing risk blindfolded...

[codymac]

How about you just put him on the ignore list and you will not play with him. Why would I want to not know who I'm attacking?

Interesting point. However, it doesn't make the idea a bad one. I think it would be cool to use even among good friends.

[zarvinny]

say you were randomly chosen to be the green color, but nobody knew it was you who was green. When you talk on the game chat, should it be:

green: i think red is winning, lets have an alliance blue.

It would be okay, but you are not going to be able to leave feedback til the end of the game, and some will just announce their name in the chat, or make some comment where you'll KNOW its them. However, this option would change the strategy in a tournament game cause then you don't know who is who, and who has how many points to give to you, so you don't go after specific people.

[Phobia]

hmm but everyone will immediately know what colour i am because everyone knows what tactic i do

[MeDeFe]

I think the idea is interesting, if it was implemented as an option I would defintiely try it.

[lackattack]

I don't like the anonymous idea. It goes against the social aspect of the game, namely developing positive and negative relationships with your opponents. Also, without access to your opponents' pofiles you would not be able to put abusive members on your ignore list.

[AndrewO]

What if it un-anonymised after the game was over?

[Fireside Poet]

Just add 'Anonymous' to your ignore list - that is so simple.

I would also see it as a problem with those that are concerned with their scores to create games in which all deadbeat and then all points go to the account they want to have the points with.

I just don't see this one working ... though I could be wrong, not uncommon.

[codymac]

I don't like the anonymous idea. It goes against the social aspect of the game, namely developing positive and negative relationships with your opponents. Also, without access to your opponents' pofiles you would not be able to put abusive members on your ignore list.

Well, the idea was that, whenever the game ended, everyone would be unmasked. Then you'd be like, "ahh, so that was YOU?????"

Oh well, thanks for listening...