Rules of The MetaGame

[masterjskye]

It really pays to keep an eye on the rules discussions, etc. as this has been asked three times already and has been clarified in the rules for a while now, And marc and ndrm did use it last time when their last territory went under siege.

From the rules:

* Siege: When a country comes under attack, it comes Under Siege. If one or more of your countries is under siege you lose the ability to do normal attacks, surprise attacks and blitz attacks from that country during that turn. You may still use the Stormtroopers and nukes while under siege. You can also still issue attacks from elsewhere - unless all your countries get attacked before you have a chance to get your orders in. A team completely under siege that does not get to use any move orders at all will still receive the move orders for use on the next round. Please note that Neutral countries do not come under siege, they are taken immediately and become the property of the first invading army. As such, a territory that was neutral but was just taken may still be re-attacked with any type of attack, including Blitz attack.

 

[hat7rick]

oh lol never noticed, my bad =) Can we add this in the stormtroopers paragraph as well? something like: you may still use stormtroopers if you are under siege

 

[masterjskye]

Yes okay good call.

 

[Sebrim]

An idea for determining turn order:

Amount of territories owned = T
Amount of move orders = M
Win percentage = W

T * M * W = X

The team with the lowest X begins.

This would ensure that a tie is unlikely and take all the relevant factors into account.

Only the first turn needs to be sorted out differently

 

[BadElmer]

An idea for determining turn order:

Amount of territories owned = T
Amount of move orders = M
Win percentage = W

T * M * W = X

The team with the lowest X begins.

This would ensure that a tie is unlikely and take all the relevant factors into account.

Only the first turn needs to be sorted out differently

Tie's would still be inevitable among those with 0% win percentages, but could be decided by lowest total team rank. (Lowest rank's go first 1st round.) Good idea.

 

[Sebrim]

Tie's would still be inevitable among those with 0% win percentages, but could be decided by lowest total team rank. (Lowest rank's go first 1st round.) Good idea.

OK: W = Win percentage +1

 

[Chilly]

An idea for determining turn order:

Amount of territories owned = T
Amount of move orders = M
Win percentage = W

T * M * W = X

The team with the lowest X begins.

This would ensure that a tie is unlikely and take all the relevant factors into account.

Only the first turn needs to be sorted out differently

This is a good idea, but I would offer up you do it only by move orders, in reverse order, for the first loop (ties go to the ones who post first).

After that, leave it the way it is. I like the tradeoffs of getting your moves in first, but tipping your hand for 2nd and 3rd and more loops. This gave Cards and me the opportunity to block a blitz into Antarctica by attacking E. Australia at the end of the 2nd loop, just before Masterjskye and Namelochil blitzed it. If we change it to a completely determined order, then there is no incentive to turn your moves in until the last 30 seconds of the clock which eliminates that interplay.

I'd also be okay with teams that have one tert left get bumped to the top of the move order.

 

[th-child]

This gave Cards and me the opportunity to block a blitz into Antarctica by attacking E. Australia at the end of the 2nd loop, just before Masterjskye and Namelochil blitzed it.

That was a good move, and we are actually thankful for that. This way we can keep the place. :dancing:

 

[masterjskye]

An idea for determining turn order:

Amount of territories owned = T
Amount of move orders = M
Win percentage = W

T * M * W = X

The team with the lowest X begins.

This would ensure that a tie is unlikely and take all the relevant factors into account.

Only the first turn needs to be sorted out differently

Definitely a good start, but I have a slight concern, maybe others will share it, maybe not. Basically, if you take move orders "in the bank" into account, as well as territory count, then you are essentially penalizing a team for holding on to their move orders and encouraging going in to the next round with the least amount of moves as you can. That removes a bit of strategy, imo.

I would favour keeping it at something like move orders gained this round instead of total move orders that was used as a deciding factor. But, if we go with chillys suggestion of it only counting for the first loop, I have less of a problem with it.

This is a good idea, but I would offer up you do it only by move orders, in reverse order, for the first loop (ties go to the ones who post first).

I like your idea about only applying it for the first loop. But the idea behind my suggestion was that the moves be done in secret under a system like that, simply because there's nothing to stop a team waiting until the very end of the phase before submitting any moves at all. They then slip in their moves which they already know will be valid because they have a guaranteed first place in the first loop, for example.

Although when I was thinking about it I was thinking that team would be first in a lot of loops, not just the initial one, so maybe that won't be a problem but the idea really was to reduce the amount to which being on the forum at a certain time on a certain day is important.

But that is the game really so... I dunno. Good ideas getting thrown about here though, I like it. Keep at it