elimination and cards

[quote=-Matty ]- The rule change was made because it's more logically, and it makes games (in general) more interesting.[/quote] -So when the board game came to the U.S. they did not use logic when they changed the rules? Well they did make "RISK" a household name not using logic...Bully for them! [quote=Matty]- Most of your points actually have nothing to do with the rule change, but are side effects from alot of things (most notably: back then we had alot less active players)[/quote] -Really? Side effects...that is not caused by the rule change? I can give you reasons for them ...right out of the mouths of some of the players that do them...you need to get out more...try to do some "Live Games" or just do some drop ends. [quote=Matty]I miss the point why this rule was there - because the rule makes more sense, and because it makes games much more lively, much more intense, much more interesting.[/quote] Wow! Bishop said that we were not using the rules that was back when the game was first made.(Pre-WWII) and that we could solve the long deathmatches that were a stall by using the old rules. By the way, this was before non-logical U.S. changed the rules and they made "Cap" games after this also. This statement made by feelings.

Yeah Matty play more live games!

[quote=lifeinpixels - Nov 11, 11:50 AM]Just a quick clarifying question, if a player with 1 wildcard goes to kill a player with 2 cards, can that player turn in his set of 3 since he knew it would make a set before he attacked? [/quote] Currently: Yes. With the reverse rule change: No. @Thorpe, I took the time to give some sort of answer to all of you points, please take the time to answer all my answers if you disagree with them, and surround them with [ spoiler ] and [ / spoiler ] (but then without the spaces). Please not that if we are going to revert this rule change for capital games, than this should be thought of very carefully, that is why I sort of answered all of them for you. I do not hate your or something :) Edit: If I would play more live games, they would be deathmatches ;) So no use there I think.

You should play more live games in general. If players aren't able to use wildcards like I suggested then I don't this rule as much. Wildcards will lose much of their value, but I guess if advocates of this change are looking for less luck then that's a good thing. But I wish the rule could be broken if a player had a wildcard because I think it makes the game more interesting.

Matty I am trying....just can not just go back and forth and I forgot your spoiler...lol Because you do not play "Cap" as I do...you have problem seeing the problem...you see the plus on deathmatches and I give you all those ++++++. That is why you need to play or watch "Cap",Live. Then you might understand.

If you right click the "Previous Page" link, and choose "Open Link in New Window", than you can have them both open simultaniously :) Alternatively you can copy them all and write the answer below.

Some of the points, we can go back and worth cause they are "points of view", so if you only look at the face of a quarter you miss the back side of the quarter. Deathmatches vs Capital. You play mostly deathmatches vs I play mostly capitals, different "point of view"...that is why I said good and bad. I want to get into the bad...but if you want to discuss all points..ok. [spoiler] [quote=Point of View]- Not hard to learn capitals This is not true, it's pretty hard to learn to play capitals well. Harder than without this rule, as there you only needed patience.[/quote] No you need a lot more than patience...(Standard rule) "Never block your capital in" (New rule) "Does not matter as much, cause of (Killer Card Runs)" (Standard rule) "It is better to let them attack your cap then to kill yourself and them"[thaithai rule] (New rule) "I want their cards and hope I get a trade-in" (Standard rule) "The first player that takes a player cap early..loses 70% of the time"[1771 statement] (New rule) "Cards are the most important and region bonus are important" [quote=Point of View]Harder than without this rule, as there you only needed patience.[/quote] (Standard rule) "You need to plan your moves" (New rule) "...you only needed patience" [i]There are so many changes on caps that I could go on and on.[/i] [quote=Fact?]- A lot of "Cap" games in 'Live Games' I don't know, possibly. We always had alot of cap games, also before the rule change I believe.[/quote] If you mean that we had 1771... Fendi... Thorpe... Diddly... Paddlin... and a few others playing all of them? Yes we did. But 75% of the live games were deathmatches and it was hard to get a Capital game going over 4 players and you would never see two player cap games...now 75% is two or three players cap games and they take up 40% of the "Live Games" [quote=Point Of View]- Newbies get a taste of what "Caps" are, without having to learn to much[/quote] I call them "Stacked Deathmatches" not real "Cap Games" [quote=Ask Vexer]- Great for Deathmatches. Solved the problem of longer games Well, it is great, yes, but was there ever a problem with long games on deathmatches (increasing ones of course, fixed was long, and still is long)?[/quote] [quote=Point Of View]I miss the point why this rule was there I miss the point why this rule was there - because the rule makes more sense, and because it makes games much more lively, much more intense, much more interesting.[/quote] If you read why at the middle of this topic you will know why this rule was changed. As for... [i]because it makes games much more lively, much more intense, much more interesting.[/i] in deathmatches maybe...but in Caps it makes it lucky, more cussing, and a lot less fun. [quote=JOKE- 354 long term games][/quote] - Older players leaving the site They already did that before I even joined this site, only a very little bit might do it because of this rule. Well, maybe this rule might be one of the reasons for them to leave, I haven't heard of anyone so against this that it makes them leave the site, not even you.[quote=Just cause you do not hear it?][/quote] I will give you that there is a lot of reasons why players leave...add to their list on more thing and then it is not fun...I for one would have left if it was not for my maps and the staff...I do not play anymore cause I can have more fun at maps or cutting my fingers off...some players are waiting for the old rule to be a option...and they do still play a little...Diddly, Paddlin(now mostly deathmatches) are just two. I get messages all the time about the rule change from older players...here is just one...I have not deleted: [quote=Comment was asked to keep private-from who]Because there's no logic in their moves. Today, i've also played 8cap. Killed all the guys who had more then 2 cards. Had 58 troops on cap. And then suddenlly some guy ("Bang") have killed 2 more players. He ended up with 3 cards and no set, ofc. There's so many thing that i can't influence on...NEW RULE IN THE FIRST PLACE. God i hate it so much. [/quote] How many others? They have left the site so maybe they will not comment cause they are no-longer here? [quote=True not false]- No brain games. More luck than skill. False. Skillfull players will not wait untill they have 90% chance to win, they will go earlier. And since everyone does that, the percentage gets lower and lower. So more skill actually means more dependency on luck. This holds for both capitals and deathmatches. Risk is called risk for a reason, remember?[/quote] [i]"So more skill actually means more dependency on luck."[/i] This is my point that you re-stated and others have said the same thing. The games would be more skill than luck. Remember I just want it changed for Capitals so let us not compare. I have said this rule works for Deathmatches, but does not work with Capitals. [quote=Point of View]- A lot of older players that started playing after the "Test Run" have to set password games to hopefully avoid the players that do a "Killer Card Run"...more long term games[/quote] Some players have even done "cap cards" for caps and said that it might be closer to what I am pushing for[elysium5]...plus they have told me to just do password games. Yeah that fixes it. [quote=? Point of View]- Older players not helping train the Newbies, cause even some of the older Newbies, do a "Killer Card Run"The fact that some players are on this site for a long time, and that these players are still noobs has nothing to do with a rule change I think???[/quote] Not talking about the ones that will never learn or want to...I am talking about me! I now try for those cards...cause if I do not attack @ 30% chance than I will not get any chance cause of my turn placement. [quote=This is all point of view and fact]- A lot of complaints on "Killer Card Run" players. We had that before (but now there are more players, so more complaints). Also, if these are getting options, there will be confusion (and thus complaints) about weird rules.[/quote] The ratio is what I am talking about not the amount. So what your secound part says is we do not need more options because we will get more complaints? To me that is a narrow view and mkes of of my points weak. [quote=Point of view from a deathmatch person]- Older players saying "Caps" is no longer fun I am one of those - and I already said this before the rule change. Sorry. Capital games simply are more simple than deathmatches, as there you can 'move your cap' and 'split your cap'. Alot more skill involged in DM's than in caps. But that was true before this rule change.[/quote] Did you not read MuzuaneAskari comments and mine? Joca is another one, than Diddly's. This was your view before and not mine...why was I made a trainer just for "Caps"? Train them on luck? Ask madmouser if it was luck that his rank was at a stalemate and after I spend 4 hours training him his rank went up three steps...I guess his luck changed. - Players that want a "skill" game need to join a deathmatch game to even get any chance of a good skill game...and hope to get a good placement Well, you can play domination games too, they can be fun and require lots of skill. But it's true that the capitals options is somewhat simpler than the other two. This was true before the rule change as well, so not a good point again. What does placement have to do with this? A good placement helps in all types of games, has absolutely nothing to do with a rule change again.[quote=Point of View][/quote] Sure you can get lucky with placement...but with Caps you can still win with-out a good placement...if you have the skill. Sure this might be a weak point but it is more of a point with Caps than Deathmatches. [quote=?]- Capitals that you know who will win in turn one...if players do not have someone do a "Killer Card Run" You do realize that no player can get a turn in with two cards right? [b]Yes![/b]...come on. So if ppl kill someone in the first turn, than either version of this rule has absolutely no effect on the outcome of the game.[/quote] I was not talking about the first turn killers.(See above) [quote=Fact]- Quick games I don't see how quick games are bad - suicides make for quick games, and suicides are bad, but not all quick games are. If ppl play capitals decently than you don't have suicides, with or without new rule. If ppl play capitals bad, than you will have suicides, with or without new rule.[/quote] Lucky to get to the forth turn...this was not true with the Standard rule. [quote=True]- Low options What does this have to do with the rule change. It's not so much about the amount of options, but about whether or not they are confusing. Adding more makes things more confusing, but some are more confusing then others. Why is this at the bad side?[/quote] We are talking about a option...oops forgot learning is confussing...making any of my points non-effective, not cause the older players want it. [quote=True and False]- No need for a trainer...I love training People still need a trainer, it's just that there is no trainer at the moment willing to teach players how to play games properly. Apart from that, not all players are willing to let someone else teach them.[/quote] True, not all players are willing. False in needing a trainer for caps, they my need it for deathmatches. But once they learn deathmatches they do not need a trainer...just use the pre-set chat buttons...cause they really are just "Stacked Deathmatches" [quote=Fact]P.S. A nice fact that you apparenly do not realise: Players with skill are better in capital games than players without skill - I pretty often see Antonis_xania playing capital games, if they were all about luck, he wouldnt be general right now.[/quote] A nice fact is that Vexer is really good at them also...but both players are very good at Deathmatches. As for me...I suck at them, but I am really good at Caps. Where do you think I got my rank from? I was #3 in the list for a long time (Players Rank)[/spoiler] I hope that I got all your point of views done... But the bottom line is that the [i]Stardard Rule[/i] with not become a option and we will keep the new one in: -to confussing to add as a option --to few that want it...the older players are not here to say anything PS. Why do you think sekretar plays caps now and he would not have before? He was one of the kings of 1v1 deathmatches.

I just saw this in chat: [i]"I'll join this, but I won't join any more adjacent games you make. Not before they implement that new cards rule, at least."[/i] Guess who said this? If you said this do not tell, or if you seen the chat.

Whether or not that was said by an "important" player, I think it's important that the site agrees to the change and that the details are finalized first. That statement was not enough to warrant the change itself. Sometimes players might not like certain modes (such as adjacent caps) with the current cards rules, but they might like other modes (like same time unlimited caps) with the current rules. So we shouldn't jump to make any quick changes just yet.

You call this quick? Trust me I knew this was no going to be quick and I did not say who or if they were a "important" player...lol. Who says they are "important" player is all in the point of view...as for me, I am the most "importatant" player of all time...when I am in a game...I only really think about how I can win! I am the most important player then and only then.... Good come back though.

I can understand who are asking to not add new options and to have few simple and clear options, but... Capitals and deathmatch are different. I mean, in capital games it's easier to kill an opponent and it's harder to protect him/her. This is the reason why the rule has different effects on them. Several capital players are asking to restore the rule back. Since I feel Thorpe is in the right way: older rule for Capitals, newer for Deathmatch. By the way I know the decision is hard to take now. Hoping for the best choice. P.S. My question is: what was wrong in the old rule??

And you were the one who caused this forum toptic and thereby caused the rule change...lol...glad to see you make a comment and is this why you do not play games here?

Is it my fault? I want to clarify my position then. I started the topic when I was not very expert in Risk and my task was to ask [i]"how"[/i] and [i]"why"[/i] that rule. If I asked to do something I'm almost sure I asked to add an option but I never asked to change the rule (I'm not going to check all this topic back). The reason why I put that question (in my previous message) is to put in evidence that some people dislike the new rule but nobody disliked the old rule. Since I answer to my own question [i]- what was wrong in the old rule? -[/i] I think nothing was really wrong but it was a bit illogical to allow a double turn-in with 6 cards and not allow a single turn-in with 4. Apart from that if the rule worked well, even if a bit illogical, I agree to restore it. In the opposite side I think the new rule makes a funny effect and probably most of people do not want to restore it back. I think Vexer was brave to change it so fastly. I mean, it's just a little rule but it's the "salt of the game" - at least in increasing games. So now after thousands tests maybe things can be reconsidered. I always said that Capital games are a juicy specialty of Dominating12 and it's sad now to hear some of the best capital players of the site which say that it is not good to play here anymore. I can't ignore that. How to solve the problem without adding a new option? I really don't know. My personal answer to Thorpe's question [i]- why you do not play games here? -[/i] I have been lastly involved in many games: first Italian Risk (which is called Risiko), then Stratego, then Eastern chess (Shogi, Xiangqi and Makruk) then ancient chess (Shatranj) and finally modern chess -> There's a world championship on going, do you know? Game #6 is next to start right now. Well sorry, this is clearly off-topic here! :))

@Thorpe, below an answer to one of the points, with history (I slightly changed your post to make it more clear I hope): [spoiler] [b]Thorpe: [/b]Not hard to learn capitals [b]Matty: [/b]This is not true, it's pretty hard to learn to play capitals well. Harder than without this rule, as there you only needed patience. [b]Thorpe: [/b] No you need a lot more than patience... - (Old rule) "Never block your capital in" - (New rule) "Does not matter as much, cause of (Killer Card Runs)" - (Old rule) "It is better to let them attack your cap then to kill yourself and them"[thaithai rule] - (New rule) "I want their cards and hope I get a trade-in" - (Old rule) "The first player that takes a player cap early..loses 70% of the time"[1771 statement] - (New rule) "Cards are the most important and region bonus are important" So about the blocking in your capital: how could that be less important??? You say because of killer card runs, what exactly is that? Yes, if someone goes for the win and fails, than someone else could kill a cap while his own is blocked in. But really, if you want to make a decent kill, you have to kill from your cap, old rule or new rule alike. I know that when I played with the old rule, that I killed players for their cards. I do so too with the new rule. Of course it is sometimes better to wait, and sometimes better to do the move. But that applies back then and now, no difference between old and new rules. That 1771 statement doesn't make sense. You can actually calculate the probability of your move. If you do it too early, yes, than you will lose more often. If you do it at the right time, well done. If you do it too late, well, gotta be tougher. You can do this in both the old rule and the new rule. The fact that cards are most important and region bonusses can be important too is in no way related to the above statement. [/spoiler] Please Thorpe, it is not so that "Old players are not allowed to say anything". But the way you bring your arguments simply do not seem logical to me. I agree that there the changes in this rule change the way a game is played. But for some reason you seem to exactly not be able to tell me what is changed, and why this has something to do with the new rule. You say things like that with the new rule people attack too early and make stupid mistakes and don't need training. Sorry, but those two things seem to meen exactly the opposite to me.

At the beginning I was happy with the "new rule" then after Joca's intervention I started to reconsider the things, trying to stay neutral. Now I'm definitely on Joca and Thorpe's side. @Matty - They attack early but this is not a stupid mistake it's just the way to play with the new rule. People are forced to attack because they are pretty sure to not survive to the next round. Joca, Muzuane and Me already said that, so I don't think Thorpe have to explain it again. Once I liked to play Capitals because that was the only way to play beginners minimizing the risk to lose because of their mistakes. Now if one weakens his Cap just a little bit, then the game is completely over! So it is not possible to play beginners anymore, so it is not possible to teach them anymore.