Nation Game

the forums


You are not connected. Please login or register

Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion

Which Method of Rolling?

40% 40% [ 4 ]
40% 40% [ 4 ]
20% 20% [ 2 ]
Total Votes : 10

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:58 am

kobo1d

avatar
Moderator
Some players prefer to roll sequentially, while others roll correspondingly.

I prefer sequential expansion, where Rolling on 1, 2, 3, and 4 means success depends on priority. This method is less random. First 1 is colonized, then 2, then 3, then 4, depending on number of successes.

Others prefer corresponding expansion, where Rolling on 1, 2, 3, and 4 means dice 1 = territory 1, dice 2 = territory 2, dice 3 = territory 3, and dice 4 = territory 4. This method is more intuitive for a lot of people.

Confusion over which method each player prefers has led to some map discrepancies. I try and remember each players personal preference, but it is difficult keeping track of them all.

We are considering mandating one style of rolling to alleviate the confusion. Please vote on what you think.

View user profile

2 Re: Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:00 am

kobo1d

avatar
Moderator
Here's a sample of the difficulties. Rolling on 1,2,3, and 4.

View user profile

3 Re: Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:00 am

The member 'kobo1d' has done the following action : Roll Dice

'Six Faces' : 2, 1, 4, 2

View user profile

4 Re: Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:02 am

kobo1d

avatar
Moderator
With sequential expansion, territory 1 is gained.
With corresponding expansion, territory 3 is gained.
With confusing expansion, I personally guess which method they meant.

View user profile

5 Re: Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:13 am

Syrnn

avatar
Moderator
While my preference is Corresponding Expansion for the ease with which it is done to me, and that not all nations can always expand the way that they want/need, or in what is necessarily a sensible manner (failures do happen behind lines too!), I bend my knee to Sequential Expansion, to preserve everyone's sanity, as it is the simplest and cleanest way to figure things out, and makes prioritizing colonies a very real possibility.

View user profile

6 Re: Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:53 am

I think Corresponding is much more realistic and organic.

Lands are gained less neatly, and in that way, in a better simulated fashion of what a real war might look like. Plus, it allows for really cool fluff posts; say, in case someone's gained all the lands encircling a land that simply refuses to roll above 3 whenever someone goes for it, posts like...

"The fierce minotaur villages of sector 163 resisted colonisation for several years before finally yielding to the Goblin Protectorate of Khan. The few warriors left after the bloody massacres that finally consolidate the region under the Protectorate make a fine addition as the Khan's royal guard."

If all territories are simply gained one-by-one in a "string" fashion, I feel it creates a much more boring map.

View user profile

7 Re: Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:38 pm

Jabberwock wrote:I think Corresponding is much more realistic and organic.

Lands are gained less neatly, and in that way, in a better simulated fashion of what a real war might look like. Plus, it allows for really cool fluff posts; say, in case someone's gained all the lands encircling a land that simply refuses to roll above 3 whenever someone goes for it, posts like...

"The fierce minotaur villages of sector 163 resisted colonisation for several years before finally yielding to the Goblin Protectorate of Khan. The few warriors left after the bloody massacres that finally consolidate the region under the Protectorate make a fine addition as the Khan's royal guard."

If all territories are simply gained one-by-one in a "string" fashion, I feel it creates a much more boring map.

While I can appreciate your opinion on how this option would feel more realistic, the problem is since there is no limit on number of posts for colonization, those who would prefer a more controlled expansion can just roll 1 at a time , and reroll for the same province if they do not get it. So the results would be the same as sequential expansion, but we now have more posts clogging up the thread

View user profile

8 Re: Solving the Rolling Styles Confusion on Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:40 pm

minotaur wrote:
Jabberwock wrote:I think Corresponding is much more realistic and organic.

Lands are gained less neatly, and in that way, in a better simulated fashion of what a real war might look like. Plus, it allows for really cool fluff posts; say, in case someone's gained all the lands encircling a land that simply refuses to roll above 3 whenever someone goes for it, posts like...

"The fierce minotaur villages of sector 163 resisted colonisation for several years before finally yielding to the Goblin Protectorate of Khan. The few warriors left after the bloody massacres that finally consolidate the region under the Protectorate make a fine addition as the Khan's royal guard."

If all territories are simply gained one-by-one in a "string" fashion, I feel it creates a much more boring map.

While I can appreciate your opinion on how this option would feel more realistic, the problem is since there is no limit on number of posts for colonization, those who would prefer a more controlled expansion can just roll 1 at a time , and reroll for the same province if they do not get it. So the results would be the same as sequential expansion, but we now have more posts clogging up the thread

That is poor sportsmanship. Poor sportsmanship is treason, Citizen. I suggest more medication.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum