Alternate Escalate Options

[Chilly]

I like this idea. Tweak the numbers, but yes, escalate the escalation. Second derivative...blah blah...

I also suggested a very long time ago that bonus should be relative to map size.

Flat rate on classic mini frequently means that the first set wins the game.

 

[TheGeneral]

yes - this is true - escalate means different things on different maps. that could be a good idea too. when you think of one thing it just spreads and spreads

 

[sundicekid]

Yes I like that better than my idea - btw the point of Proliferation (I still like the name) or Escapalooza (and that is that even on massive stalemate would be very unlikely.

Well, whatever it ends up being - it should be called Escapalooza! Lol :rock:

 

[kanzler73]

Escalot in Massive Games

Hi Masters

I have recently been playing some games that ended up stalemated. I noticed that it happens relatively often in the massives - especially the world massive, where the deployments and bonuses qua massives are quite big compared to other games. Have anyone ever considered a reservedeployment that escalated more than escalate (escalot!)? That is, a reservesystem that didn't end by adding 5 (15-20-25 and so on), but continued to escalate exponentially, say 15-20-25-30-36-42-49-56-64 or something (I'm sure someone could do the calculating better than I). I think it could add some interesting tactics to the Massive-games a la escalate in smaller maps. Explosiveness - just more complex than regular escalate-games!

kanzler73

 

[Tharnduil]

New Game Setting

Hey fairly new to the MC site but love risk and have played my whole life.

I'd absolutely love to see one more setting that I have played with the board game version and think would work here. The setting is individual Escalate/Escalite. What that means is that for each player their first card set would be 4 then 6 then 8, ect...
Same format for Escalite.
The main advantage for this would be that cards still stay very important but at the same time you have to earn a much higher turn in count. I know that there might be some difficulties in coding for each player to have their own counter, but would love to see it.

Thanks have loved playing with everyone so far!

 

[F15FreeEagle]

I think this is an interesting idea. But as you said, something that would probably take some time to set up. Maybe it's something the "powers that be" could take a look at after the new engine implemented?

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

In Escalite or escalate games, it would be fun if the rate reserve bonus increased with some level of randomness. On average, it would increase about the same rate, but from bonus to bonus, it would jump more or less, or could even drop a few. It would encourage some scrambling to get the better bonuses, and it might give teams a chance to get back in the game after they get behind in a 2 team game.

Arithmetic progression of n + 1 would be good for escalate I think.... maybe this is a formula for Cagey's escalate plus ?

4 (+1) 5 (+2) 7 (+3) 10 (+4) 14 (+5) 19 (+6) 25.....

What about Escalate resetting?
4, 6, 8, 10, 12, reset! then it continues to
4, 8, 12, 20 then
4, 12, 20, 30 ... and so on, preventing 1 turn kill them all but allows the game to... well escalate as expected

Our have we gone overboard with the reserves settings?

Hi,

I have thought about this before and our esteemed colleague adamlumpy has also pointed it out. When an escalate game ends up with large stacks and the card trades are worth 100+ the increment of increase per trade is only +5. In effect play ends up defensive and the game drags on. There needs to be a change in the increment from +5 to something more exponential. Currently, it is like a poker game where the blinds go up quite quickly and then just stop so as the more and more troops come into play the smaller the blinds become.

I am not saying this is the right structure but how about something like this. It would keep the game more akin to escalate.

Trade Troop Bonus Increment
1 4 0
2 6 2
3 8 2
4 10 2
5 12 2
6 15 3
7 20 5
8 25 5
9 30 5
10 40 10
11 50 10
12 60 10
13 70 10
14 85 15
15 100 15
16 115 15
17 130 15
18 150 20
19 175 25
20 200 25
21 225 25
22 250 25
23 300 50
24 350 50
25 400 50
26 450 50
27 500 50
28 575 75
29 650 75
30 725 75
31 800 75
32 900 100
33 1000 100
Thanks for your thoughts and consideration.

So all these ideas are being considered, and some are being tested at the moment.

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

Yes, changing these settings is fairly easy. No problem there.

The only issue is creating another option in the settings menu for players to choose when they create a game. That probably won't be done for the current engine.

In other words:

- We can easily change the rules for escalate
- We have to make the change universal
- It will affect all players in all games immediately
- There will be only 1 escalate option for players to choose from when the create a game

 

[Sebrim]

I think you replied to a robot/troll there, Sheriff

 

[NewSheriffInTown]

I think you replied to a robot/troll there, Sheriff

Yeah, I thought of that.... Though it's a bit too precise to be 100% bot. And it edited it's message. So I think there might be some human interaction there.

 

[Sebrim]

yes, but it's happened before. People who don't play agame for several weeks after joining the site, then add some kind of interesting to-the-point question to an old disused thread, editing it a couple of hours later to seem geniune. I'm clueless as to what motivates that kind of behaviour....