Tempers Ball

Ok,

Based on my last thread in the Chaos Games Forum, and my confusion regarding whether the following are good ideas
i.) Swapping out Solo
ii.) Introducing Quad

Therefore I'm going to see what kind of response I get from the playerbase. I have come up with 6 options for games (as we can have a max of 6 options in a poll)

You can select up to 4 options.

Those selections include:

Solo:
Age based game with 1 realm, standard turnrate, no allies, downhit limitation, external Solo UB

Duo:
Age based game with 2 realms, high turnrate, shadow guilds and UB

Quad:
Age based game with 4 realms, standard turnrate, Quads and UB

Massacre:
King of the hill style game, no turnrate, bounties, saves

LMS:
Last Standing Game with 1 realm, variable turnrate, interfaith war, bounties and saves

LQS:
Last Standing Game with 4 realms, variable turnrate, interfaith war, Quads, UB, bounties and saves

So Vote.

Quads with no alliances, otherwise it basically becomes guilds

Duo
LMS
Solo
Massacre

Less kingdoms with the most options for play is the best route in my humble opinion.

Solo
Duo
Quad

I agree with Kwaiq. I say Duo and Quad should should be guildless and no DB. Chaos style.

LQS NO alliances

NO db
:>

same with LMS:>

Can we get the Last standing games back to where you can't declare on someone who is already at war?

Odo,

That code is no longer included in any of the code sources I have available, which means that not only would I have to add it anew, but would have to spend time debugging it.
---

Venus, Kwaiq,

I'm quite happy to add a rule about Quads not working together, although it would be nice to retain the ability for a Quad to be made up from more than one player if they wish to, and would need to be player enforced. I am also quite happy to not provide a database for the game.

Adding elements such as it being illegal to work with others just causes bitching and complaints to Admin, because quite frankly, if we can't enforce it in Solo, why would we be able to enforce it elsewhere. Other than occassionally banning realms that take the piss and are too obvious with their working together.
----

Relating to LMS control,

The closest I could get to LMS control, would be to apply the solo downhitting blocks into LMS, but if you mess with stuff like that it wouldn't be a true 'Last Standing' game. It would be about fearing to get too big because you lose your ability to dictate your own survival.

I think Last Standing games should be about the strongest winning at whatever cost, I'd rather add the ability to hit your own faith, and ensure that no reset occurs until there is only one realm left, that try and add elements of 'law' that cant be enforced, or make it easier to stay alive in an LS environment.
----

Relating to any new games, new tweaks,

With the current changes we are trying to buy ourselves a period of renewed interest, where we can work on new gamecode options behind the scenes, rather than constantly tinkering and bug fixing current implimentations of the gamecode.

Therefore other than giving you some new games, with different race strength etc (see the threads in Unity) there will not be any major game code addtions from this point.

If Monarchy was version 1.0 and Canon version 2.0, think of this as the completion of the Massacre codebase (Canon 2.5) turning Gold, and us looking to think about version 3.0 instead.

We have reached the point where we have to make the game HTML code Web Standards Compliant, there are already the odd random browser bugs turning up. We also need to be able to pick up the game code and move it to a server running the newest version of PHP, as we have been unable to upgrade core server software for years. Alas, picking up the current code and placing it on a modern, secure server will only serve to totally stop the game functioning.

Demmy has been playing with doing artwork, and we also have been in discussions with a couple of professional artists. There are even thoughts to impliment a version of canon that can be an application in Facebook or Myspace, thoughts to make the game more WAP ready, add SMS or email alerts when you get news, declared on etc etc.

We cannot do any of those things if we keep spending all available time tweaking the current code.

if you still have the debacle codes you should make a game with the faith conversion when the realm dies =)

Yeah return of debacle or atleast something debaclesque

solo
Duo
LMS
Quad

no alliances, no DB.

I agree, no alliances...especially in the 2 solo games...part of the reason solo is the lowest played game

Canon: Solo 16% [ 14 ]
Canon: Duo 24% [ 21 ] x
Canon: Quad 15% [ 13 ] x
Canon: Massacre 10% [ 9 ]
Canon: Last Man Standing 20% [ 18 ] x
Canon: Last Quad Standing 12% [ 11 ]

Ok,

Based on the varied results, we are going to try offering all the games for this first age, and seeing how it pans out.

That means we will have:

Last Standing Games
LMS - 1 Realm, No Allies, Bounties, Variable Turnrate, Saves
LQS - 4 Realms, Allies, Quads, UB, Bounties, Variable Turnrate, Saves

King of the Hill Games
Massacre - 4 Realms, Allies, Bounties, No Turnrate, Saves

Agebased Games
Solo - 1 Realm, No Allies, No Downhits
Duo - 2 Realms, Shadow Guilds, High Turnrate,
Quad - 4 Realms, No Multi-Quad Alliances, Quads

Holy crap.

I am going to play them all then!

Will any besides Unity guilds have a data base?

LQS will retain its database.

Seems that most people have argued to not provide databases for Duo and Quad.

I'll be playing Solo Duo and LMS most likely as well as Unity of course.

I think LMS can be done with a notepad. No banners, nothing. Just us and them.

Plus it makes us actually play like we used to in Solo.