Improvement of Capitals game type

Don't know whether it would cause more problems down the line or not. But, I view it as a very small problem. Losing before your turn is exceedingly rare. More often than not, people cannot afford to take a run at the capital because if they miss, the next player just cleans up. As such, it's in everyone's best interest to wait a couple of rounds. That said, when I'm in a 3 player game on a small map and I get two territories beside a capital (i.e. giving me 6 beside their 12), I will often add my 3 and see if the dice go my way on the first roll (i.e. my 9 immediately taking them down to 10), at which point I'll take another roll, and then another, etc. I've taken out a cap a handful of times that way. Though, more often than not I have to stop lest I leave the cap too weak and the next player gets a shot. If the next in line is the cap I'm attacking, then I'll keep trying a little more, knowing that they can immediately reinforce. So, an extra 2 would eliminate that kind of fluke. Don't know that it would be as meaningful on larger maps.

This analysis from @sfclimbers convinced me that probably some extra troops is a good idea, to avoid at least that kind of immediate gamble. Well, then okay, in 3 players it's always a bit of a gamble, either that or it is drawish, but the immediate attack is too annoying, it shouldn't happen. In 1v1 the 2 capitals are offensive stacks from the beginning and too many extra troops could cause too much advantage to the first player, but if he gets a chance to kill the opponent immediately then it's even worse! So yes, some more troops... 2 extra troops on the cap's is fine I think.

Don't get me wrong about my thoughts from the previous post about leaving caps the way they are. I do like the idea of a small change of adding a few extra troops to it at the start. I'll leave the actual amount and numbers to the math prodigies here, though;) I just also thought there were some other good suggestions that might be fun to try and start a new thread about a new possible game type.

[quote=The_Bishop]I mostly play Capitals and I think 4 more troops can just make you wait a bit more before the beginning of the kill-phase. Not an improvement. Bad gamblers will not play any better, likely the 4 extra troops will be used for carry out even more crazy attacks. So I'm opposed to [i]this[/i] change. [url=https://dominating12.com/forums/2/general-discussion/3827/improvement-of-capitals-game-type?page=1]What proposed in the first post is different.[/url] We should create a new gametype -- call it 'Castles' (similar to Castle Risk) -- in which each capital is a fortress with a defensive bonus and who holds all of them wins the game (troops don't change colour when a player is eliminated). One possible way to set a defensive bonus for the fortress/castles/capitals is [url=https://dominating12.com/forums/2/general-discussion/3827/improvement-of-capitals-game-type?page=1]the one mentioned by Hood for the current mode:[/url] 3 defensive dice! Although traditionally the attacker uses only 2 dice when assaulting a capital and the defender also uses 2 dice as normal. Other ways exist... It would be an interesting gametype, however I wouldn't delete the current Capitals which is a little jewel for me![/quote] This sounds like a super fun game mode! I am also a player that seeks the defensive strategy in capitals so I'd definitely support that.

@@matty @@cireon no idea if you guys still update the site. Gonna chip in again. I think a simple fix would be to add more troops at the beginning [quote]10 + floor(territories_per_user / 3)[/quote] change to [quote]14 + floor(territories_per_user / 3)[/quote] Again you have people make silly strategies [url=https://dominating12.com/game/1420695]like this game[/url]. Disregard their rank since neither are really capitals players (see their stats. in fact i have played more capitals game than their combined games many times over). Before yellow could take his Round 1 Turn, he was dead. No chance to react, just cause they played with dice and fortuitous starting position. Then when another player tried to kill the original aggressor, lots of heated comments were made about m/s. I think this should be avoided at all costs - a player potentially dying during Round 1 before even getting a chance to react or strategise. You can view the replay on the [url=https://dominating12.com/forums/2/general-discussion/3438/game-visualiser/post/90027#post-90027]Chrome extension here[/url] to get a feel of the turn by turn actions. I played lots of capitals game and hope that this small fix can be implemented. Nothing too complex.

We still update the site, but only little bits here and there. The reason I haven't done anything with this thread yet is because of Alex's comment, who has a very good point. I'm thinking about changing it to 12 + floor... (just two extra troops, what The_Bishop said), but I'm not even sure about that.

Ah yes thanks, I thought and still think 2 more is fine. Let's try it. The example given by @@anuorre is a Team Capitals game. It's different because there you can have 2 or 3 or 4 teammates, all targeting the same enemy capital in the first round. But the other team(s) can still counter-attack mid-round (or defend)... So likely not so much different.

I don’t think any change is necessary

I'm with Irob on this one.

[quote=sfclimbers]Don't know whether it would cause more problems down the line or not. But, I view it as a very small problem. Losing before your turn is exceedingly rare. More often than not, people cannot afford to take a run at the capital because if they miss, the next player just cleans up. As such, it's in everyone's best interest to wait a couple of rounds. That said, when I'm in a 3 player game on a small map and I get two territories beside a capital (i.e. giving me 6 beside their 12), I will often add my 3 and see if the dice go my way on the first roll (i.e. my 9 immediately taking them down to 10), at which point I'll take another roll, and then another, etc. I've taken out a cap a handful of times that way. Though, more often than not I have to stop lest I leave the cap too weak and the next player gets a shot. If the next in line is the cap I'm attacking, then I'll keep trying a little more, knowing that they can immediately reinforce. So, an extra 2 would eliminate that kind of fluke. Don't know that it would be as meaningful on larger maps.[/quote] LOL I am a victim of this, so a play rematch usualy.

I like it the way it is for the most part. The mass build doesn't make for a fun game. It hasn't been mentioned but the mass build strategy elimination is compounded in Team Caps. I have been in games where a teammate or 2 don't get a turn. AGAIN not a fun game! Just players racking up points. I choose oponents and games carefully when looking for fun/challange. I vote for Capital troop count increase at the start in 1-9 players games.

I think overall the gameplay would be improved if the formulaic troop count moves provides for slightly more troops. It is an easy fix. Keeping it in its existing form is only preserving bad game play. It also means it is hard to make suggestions towards improvements towards a more balanced setting