The Dominating 12

I think capped cards will be really dangerous.

Elaborate?

Sorry.
We couldn't even finish December's increasing-cards dominator game due to a stalemate. And all the big increasing games I've played with good players have had only 1-2 deaths before the set value reached ~70. Additionally, about a third of capped games (above 25 per set) I've played result in a really long game.

So given the conservative nature of the top players, as well as the medium-paced dynamics of capped cards games, I would guess that a 9 player game capped at 30 could easily take a few months to finish.

Well, the problem has been that the 9 player d12 games have gone too fast. I'd like to set the cap at a level where we would have 6 kills before the cap is reached and then a real good fight for the last 3 players.

If my feedback can help...

One of the first time I played capped cards it was 9p game in world expanded map, capped at 40. At some point I killed 5 players without gaining anything. Because then the 3 survived was able to balance the game out and we went in a boring stalemate, (or high fixed cards game).
If the turn in was 40-45-50-55-60 instead of 40-40-40-40-40 probably I would have had enough troops to kill another one and finish the job.

But I think capped cards match well with domination game type. I have recently played several 5p domination games in map of several sizes with the cap set at half the map size in territories (low rounded), for example Korea-Japan capped 25 or Mediterranean capped 30. Most of those games ended pretty quickly, except one in the world classic map, still going, (probably in that map people are better to calculate who can win or how to avoid it to happen). But I don't think it will take so long to end.

I like your idea about domination games, Bishop. I don't think I've had more than a couple domination games stalemate, and they were with fixed cards. I should really play more of them in general.


Vexer, I do not think that there is a deathmatch mode which produces gameplay like you've described. At least, very few of the games I've played have had these results, and the ones which have were due, in part, to luck, not something that can nearly guarantee a good game.
 
Game 242341 is what I would describe as an ideal game of risk for the dominating twelve. The tension grew with no deaths up to a set of around 60, if I remember correctly, and when players did start to die, it was one by one and not all at once. I think that the non-advanced card rules helps with this too. I'll admit that I've not played too many big increasing deathmatches recently, but with experienced players, is this not a common occurrence? I've thought that large increasing games that end in a turn are due to inexperienced players weakening themselves or another and giving another player a big advantage. Maybe I'm wrong though; I'm interested to hear your response.

Well most of the previous d12 games didn't end in one turn after the killing started but a few of them did seem very fast to me. Just a few rounds after the killing began. I remember the 8p games being better than the 9 player.

We can start by setting the cap high like at 60 and then working it down 5 at a time until it feels right. If we play with advanced increasing then most likely the killing will start well before the cap is reached. If a stalemate occurs even with a cap at 60 I can easily switch it to increasing cards mid game when the next round starts.

That seems reasonable. Hey, I have an idea, you should join a test game with a bunch of other players It would be nice to see you back in action. We all appreciate your help but you should have some fun here once in a while.

I am available for a "beta test" game if you need a guinea pig who will be online often enough to keep the game moving.

I only ask that even though the game is a "test game", everyone gives it their best shot. I would like to see how I stack up against the best.

Thanks,
Richard

How can I play

No disrespect to the volunteers for beta testing, but surely the way it is played etc would depend on the level of knowledge of the game and strategy that would only be applicable to those that have reached the level of an entrant to the D12 contest?
LOL only kidding, at least 1/5 of those in the contest came here to gain the points to get into it and couldn't win an argument, never mind a Deathmatch in the D12 contest.
I am happy to see that my point has been proven with the true champion this year being a real player who in my opinion, has always played fair and to win with absolutely no tricks up his sleeve, Villain191 a deserving champion! Other entrants (you know who you are) why bother getting the points by whatever means at your disposal when the contest would require you to have worked hard at learning every aspect of the game (alone) in order to play (alone) in this theatre and Dominate!?

Just curious if the new full rankings list is out yet?

don't be bitter old man. you can grumble all you want but i don't think you would ever get into d12 cause, well, you're not good enough

@suldam LOL... you do know it's not Same Time play and that you have to play on your Own and you have to be a Deathmatch strategist and that you are referring to the (current) Deathmatch Tournament Champion of D12? Perhaps not!?!?!?!
FYI, I only heard of the D12 contest the week I stopped playing!

From Basic to Colonel in a couple of weeks... hee hee! Yes okay master, but then again you do make up the numbers and make winning by the experienced Deathmatch (normal time) players a bit easier!!

A mature adult mind also sees that to respond to my statements above would require a 'sore point' to have been touched.

Remember guys, you know who you are... oh and the staff know it too!!

Let's not dirty my thread with this sort of jabbing. Start your own thread in off-topic if you like.