5K Europe games actually suck

I apologize for making (and somewhat setting a trend) the tournament at 5K starting funds, in Europe.


It was fun for about 5-6 matches, but it quickly became apparent that there weren't that many options that are viable, or even strategies at that. Matches soon became very predictable, and, due to the low starting cost, it resulted in cluttered matches where people started near each other, leading to 1st turn turnblocking and other very random factors that could affect the game. In addition, zerg-rushing became a very popular and powerful way to win a match in 4-5 or less turns. This isn't fun or entertaining.

Any tournaments I organize thereafter (if any!) will be @ 10K as they're more skill-oriented.


That is all. Comments appreciated.

Nope, they're awesome as people don't get to pick OP countries and actually have to think about how many units they are going to need. 10k games often mean an endless flow of cash, really.

Problem is with the map (Europe) in my opinion.

Written by YOBA, 15.07.2011 at 09:27

Nope, they're awesome as people don't get to pick OP countries and actually have to think about how many units they are going to need. 10k games often mean an endless flow of cash, really.

This is why I specified "Europe". Oh, and, play some 10K in Europe games before spouting rubbish like "unending flow of cash derp" please.
It's not about being able to pick OP countries as much as both players picking balanced countries.

5K Europe means you have, increasing in "power", Austria, through Greece to Ukraine. This disparity isn't balanced.

3k world time trial map: You have to get as much SP as possible from killing neutrals in a set amount of time. No turn blocking just glorious micro management. GLORIOUS micromanagement.

I say make it 5k medd. and you have to start on opposite sides of the map.

But then you will have to use GW, Imperialist or PD.

Written by BASED Ironail, 15.07.2011 at 10:12

Written by YOBA, 15.07.2011 at 09:27

Nope, they're awesome as people don't get to pick OP countries and actually have to think about how many units they are going to need. 10k games often mean an endless flow of cash, really.

This is why I specified "Europe". Oh, and, play some 10K in Europe games before spouting rubbish like "unending flow of cash derp" please.
It's not about being able to pick OP countries as much as both players picking balanced countries.

5K Europe means you have, increasing in "power", Austria, through Greece to Ukraine. This disparity isn't balanced.

>implying I wasn't talking about Europe
>implying I haven't played 10k games
>implying 5k doesn't make things more interesting because you can pick obscure countries and still kick butt and actually have to think of strategies to do so

Not in an 1vs1 YOBA.

>Pick Iron Fist
>Pick Austria

>If your opponent picks something near
>Win because of the hp advantage

>If your opponent picks something far from you
>Win because of easy expansion at the start

Only way to win against this:

>Pick Poland
>Try to first turn-block
>Have luck
>Win

PS: These rules won't apply in a normal game, just in a 1v1 Europe

Although slightly more complicated, this is an accurate summary I feel.

10K just gives more flexibility and more creativity.

Admittedly you set the trend.

ALSO OH MY FUCKING ZEUS YOU ARE RANK 10
ZIZOU SHITTING HIS PANTS NOW

Europe is fun because it has more geographic variety; maps like S. America and Africa are just blobs of land.

The Italian peninsula, the Black sea, and England/Britain make the map very fun.

I prefer the Middle East map though, it has some peninsular warfare opportunities, like in arabia/mediterranean. And it doesn't start overflowing in cash by the 5th turn.

Written by Vespre, 15.07.2011 at 15:14

Europe is fun because it has more geographic variety; maps like S. America and Africa are just blobs of land.

The Italian peninsula, the Black sea, and England/Britain make the map very fun.

Yes! That's why so many people like Europe I guess.

I think a temperate eurasia map would be fun.

mediterranean, mideast, india, and southern china.

5k europe is much superior to 10k europe, but nothing beats some 50k czechin'

however, 5k eurasia is the best of all maps.

I disagree, Europe 5k games can be very diverse. depending on where you start, the game might go on for hours (im actually in that situation right now) and others last 5 minutes with very little sp bring the result. in the game im in now we have been playing for over 2 hours and i (at the moment) have 700 sp. if i lose i will get at least 350 sp and if i win i will get over 1000. most Europe 5k games i play give me an average of 500 to 50

Written by PANTHA_1, 16.07.2011 at 04:59

for over 2 hours and i (at the moment) have 700 sp. if i lose i will get at least 350 sp and if i win i will get over 1000.

Written by PANTHA_1, 16.07.2011 at 04:59

for over 2 hours and i (at the moment) have 700 sp.

Written by PANTHA_1, 16.07.2011 at 04:59

for over 2 hours
700 sp.

Face-to-mah-muthafucking-palm.

2 hours=120 min
2 min turns=60
3 min turns=40
4 min turns=30
So you either set a game over 50 turns in Europe (doubtful), or you play a noob 3/4 min turns game on Europe.

Written by Fruit, 15.07.2011 at 22:36

5k europe is much superior to 10k europe, but nothing beats some 50k czechin'

however, 5k eurasia is the best of all maps.

Sadly, I have to agree with fruit on this one. If you have the time for a eurasia game, that is.

Europe+ so east is at least income balanced (somewhat) with west.

Written by BASED Ironail, 16.07.2011 at 06:05

Written by PANTHA_1, 16.07.2011 at 04:59

for over 2 hours and i (at the moment) have 700 sp. if i lose i will get at least 350 sp and if i win i will get over 1000.

Written by PANTHA_1, 16.07.2011 at 04:59

for over 2 hours and i (at the moment) have 700 sp.

Written by PANTHA_1, 16.07.2011 at 04:59

for over 2 hours
700 sp.

Face-to-mah-muthafucking-palm.

i won and got something like 1400 sp, have a look on my profile if u want proof (if its still there)

Dude, I wasn't doubting you, just commenting on the fact that you played over two hours for 700 SP

I personally love eurasia games,either 5k or 10k,but not over 10k because with that you can have japan and southeast china at 15k,and india i believe only at 50k.....which is gamey having india AND 24k of free funds

I said Europe sucked before Ironail made it hipster.

5K Europe does indeed suck a little. I prefer a large map with more room to spread about, expand and crush the enemy horde coming at you from the other side.

Written by BASED Ironail, 17.07.2011 at 06:17

Dude, I wasn't doubting you, just commenting on the fact that you played over two hours for 700 SP

would you not play that long for that much sp?

Written by Pinheiro, 15.07.2011 at 13:16

>Pick Iron Fist
>Pick Austria

>If your opponent picks something near
>Win because of the hp advantage

>If your opponent picks something far from you
>Win because of easy expansion at the start

Only way to win against this:

>Pick Poland
>Try to first turn-block
>Have luck
>Win

PS: These rules won't apply in a normal game, just in a 1v1 Europe

----------------------------------------Yeah, I know this is a wall of text, but please take the time to read it.-----------------------------------------------------

This is the truest thing I heard so far. (Pinheiros post)
Well, I like 5k games more than 10k, maybe we could just improve the other factors, means:

- no first turn blocking
- at least 2 games per round, each player gets one first pick. If it is 1:1 after this two rounds, another two games will be played. Well, maybe some people need more time for their round. But this is at least very unlikely.

If really necessary:

- countries, which are commonly known as part of a overpowered country-strategy pair, are not allowed (like IF-Austria, PD-Ukraine before the range nerf)
- the tournament map won't be Europe, but Europe+.

Personally I think that the first two points would be enough to keep 5k Europe games as a relative fair standard in tournaments and duels, making the last two points redundant.

And finally: If we really want FAIR games. With equal chances for every player we have to do this:

- each player creates a second account, right before the game starts (no upgrades)
- each player picks one of the three standard strategies
- a referee checks if both accounts have 0 SP and aren't premium-accounts (necessary to prevent the pick of premium strategies and to make sure the player didn't buy upgrades) another possibility is to create test accounts as referee and tell the players about the passwords
- the referee creates a new game where the opponents join and starts it, leaving the game right after this (necessary because non-premium account can't create games with no-rares)
- settings: 5k, 3players, max. joining week 0, no-rares, 100+ cities (my favorite)
- at least two games per round and no initially turn stalling, as mentioned before
- set start countries, for example: player 1 belgium, player 2 greece; second round: player 1 greece, player 2 belgium

I think this would be the best way to find out who really has skill and would be the fairest way to fight tournament matches.
Maybe players aren't familiar with the set countries, but if you set them a few days before the tournament starts, the player could play them in training games with test-accounts.

PS: I don't know how much SP you need to buy the first upgrade, but maybe it would be necessary to create new accounts for each game.


This makes me think about the implementation of a "duel-mode" in this game, which you can choose when you create a new game and where you can only pick one strategy (e.g. perfect-defence) and all your upgrades would be disabled.

Quote:

And finally: If we really want FAIR games. With equal chances for every player we have to do this:

- each player creates a second account, right before the game starts (no upgrades)
- each player picks one of the three standard strategies
- a referee checks if both accounts have 0 SP and aren't premium-accounts (necessary to prevent the pick of premium strategies and to make sure the player didn't buy upgrades) another possibility is to create test accounts as referee and tell the players about the passwords
- the referee creates a new game where the opponents join and starts it, leaving the game right after this (necessary because non-premium account can't create games with no-rares)
- settings: 5k, 3players, max. joining week 0, no-rares, 100+ cities (my favorite)
- at least two games per round and no initially turn stalling, as mentioned before
- set start countries, for example: player 1 belgium, player 2 greece; second round: player 1 greece, player 2 belgium

I think this would be the best way to find out who really has skill and would be the fairest way to fight tournament matches.
Maybe players aren't familiar with the set countries, but if you set them a few days before the tournament starts, the player could play them in training games with test-accounts.

PS: I don't know how much SP you need to buy the first upgrade, but maybe it would be necessary to create new accounts for each game.


This makes me think about the implementation of a "duel-mode" in this game, which you can choose when you create a new game and where you can only pick one strategy (e.g. perfect-defence) and all your upgrades would be disabled.

i think this is way too complicated...

Written by PANTHA_1, 17.07.2011 at 23:43

Written by BASED Ironail, 17.07.2011 at 06:17

Dude, I wasn't doubting you, just commenting on the fact that you played over two hours for 700 SP

would you not play that long for that much sp?

Not in a Europe map. Yesterday, my match against Totenkopf lasted about 40 minutes and he won 1100 SP overall. I consider that "good"