Spies and the use of.
Moderators: Duke, trewqh, korexus, Egbert
- Vortan
- Commander
- Posts: 588
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
- Contact:
Vortan <---- terminal sense of humour failure.
The only way Diplomacy can protect you until the end of the game as you suggest you ... annoying little man ... is by having permanent NAP's. Why play at all.
kor, if it is genuinely felt that any adjustments would make the game too easy then fair enough. I concede simply because I cannot be bothered to argue for the sake of arguing.
Now forget I said anything and start a different topic please.
The only way Diplomacy can protect you until the end of the game as you suggest you ... annoying little man ... is by having permanent NAP's. Why play at all.
kor, if it is genuinely felt that any adjustments would make the game too easy then fair enough. I concede simply because I cannot be bothered to argue for the sake of arguing.
Now forget I said anything and start a different topic please.
Now WHY did it do THAT!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
Ah, yes! The problem of sleepers. Here is where our concerns converge.Vortan wrote:The only way Diplomacy can protect you until the end of the game as you suggest you ... annoying little man ... is by having permanent NAP's. Why play at all.
I would like you to notice how I not even once made a personal assault against you. Why do you belittle me with words yet another time? Stop that.
trewqh
the gleefully aggressive Vulking
the gleefully aggressive Vulking
- Vortan
- Commander
- Posts: 588
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
- Contact:
Causal chain Trewqh. You use fancy phrases and it really gets up the average guys nose. I apologise for calling you an annoying little man okay.
But you are wrong...
The initial idea
New spy order: sabotage EFF = -2 EFF
SCRAP THAT try this
New spy order: STEAL EFF = 2 EFF transfers to spying player.
Remove success bonus to EFF but leave failure penalty.
Diplomacy still plays a massive part in the scenario.
Lets look at the stats then
1 v 1
each player succeeds in stealing 10 EFF - result nothing
one player doesnt spy losing 10 EFF Spying player gains 10 EFF
2 v 1
each player spies stealing 10 EFF = +10, +10 and -20
etc
BUT this system means you are not simultaneously gathering information, stealing population, sabotaging defenses/missiles YOU ARE TARGETTING EFF specifically. Fairer for all. It would have to be a concious choice a trade off if you like.
Diplomacy would still be king.
But you are wrong...
The initial idea
New spy order: sabotage EFF = -2 EFF
SCRAP THAT try this
New spy order: STEAL EFF = 2 EFF transfers to spying player.
Remove success bonus to EFF but leave failure penalty.
Diplomacy still plays a massive part in the scenario.
Lets look at the stats then
1 v 1
each player succeeds in stealing 10 EFF - result nothing
one player doesnt spy losing 10 EFF Spying player gains 10 EFF
2 v 1
each player spies stealing 10 EFF = +10, +10 and -20
etc
BUT this system means you are not simultaneously gathering information, stealing population, sabotaging defenses/missiles YOU ARE TARGETTING EFF specifically. Fairer for all. It would have to be a concious choice a trade off if you like.
Diplomacy would still be king.
Now WHY did it do THAT!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2829
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
How about this for a solution.
I spent a significant amount of time making the game engine user editable few years ago, to help solve problems like this.
Step One, I make Vortan a GM.
Step Two, GM 'Tan opens up a game where all the EFF changes from spy options are reduced to zero.
Step Three (optional) GM 'Tan changes a little used spy option - I suggest sab defenses - such that 0 defense is destroyed, but EFF does change.
Players can try out the alternative setup and after a few games we won't have to speculate on which is better.
Chris.
I spent a significant amount of time making the game engine user editable few years ago, to help solve problems like this.
Step One, I make Vortan a GM.
Step Two, GM 'Tan opens up a game where all the EFF changes from spy options are reduced to zero.
Step Three (optional) GM 'Tan changes a little used spy option - I suggest sab defenses - such that 0 defense is destroyed, but EFF does change.
Players can try out the alternative setup and after a few games we won't have to speculate on which is better.
Chris.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability
- Vortan
- Commander
- Posts: 588
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
- Contact:
Now that sounds like a very good idea indeed. I would of course need some guidance with regards to making said changes. But I am definately up for it. You never know this could actually prove me wrong NAH!
LETS DO IT!
Now WHY did it do THAT!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
- Saladin
- Moderator
- Posts: 1652
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Ok, don't have time for a complete reply so i just throw out some short opinions.
- I agree with Vortan that spies are a bit too much bang for their buck. That's why i was planning on setting a successful spy eff bonus to +1 and the rest to 0 for my Westeros game.
- I disagree that this ruins the game and that it is unfair.
- I agree that spies are not a problem and the problem of getting spied out by several players at once is more a diplomatic issue than a game engine issue.
- I agree that spies could be better and i really like the idea of having an EFF sabotage as a spy function.
- I disagree that changing the spy options concerning eff would make the game easier. To the contrary it would make it harder!
- I agree with Vortan that spies are a bit too much bang for their buck. That's why i was planning on setting a successful spy eff bonus to +1 and the rest to 0 for my Westeros game.
- I disagree that this ruins the game and that it is unfair.
- I agree that spies are not a problem and the problem of getting spied out by several players at once is more a diplomatic issue than a game engine issue.
- I agree that spies could be better and i really like the idea of having an EFF sabotage as a spy function.
- I disagree that changing the spy options concerning eff would make the game easier. To the contrary it would make it harder!
"Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by stupidity."
"To speak ill of others is a dishonest way of praising ourselves."
"To speak ill of others is a dishonest way of praising ourselves."
- Calidus
- Commander
- Posts: 530
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Clan Head, CoN
- Contact:
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
So simple, so ingenious. I bow before your Solomonic wisdom.korexus wrote:How about this for a solution.
I think I'd have to play it to be fair in my criticism afterwards, right?
No, seriously, I don't assume I'll be critical. I'll play and I'll approach it with an open mind.
I would, however, suggest that Vortan should also play it rather than GM this game so that he can experience the changes on his own. I have nothing against him becoming a GM; with the amount of time he devotes to WoK, he's destined to become one.
My other suggestion would be to wait for the other two games to fill before opening this one.
trewqh
the gleefully aggressive Vulking
the gleefully aggressive Vulking
- Vortan
- Commander
- Posts: 588
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
- Contact:
You know what - odd really - Trewqh said somethings here that I can actual agree with
I will be happy to wait until the other two are underway. JUST GET THEM FILLED UP NOW *froth, froth*
Cal: rofl, are you suggesting I am a little uncontrollable?
I will be happy to wait until the other two are underway. JUST GET THEM FILLED UP NOW *froth, froth*
Cal: rofl, are you suggesting I am a little uncontrollable?
Now WHY did it do THAT!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2829
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
We'll have to play more than one game under the nw setup anyway. Historically, whenever an x-game has gone down a new route, players have gone a bit crazy, so the first game wouldn't make for a fair comparison. You can GM one, Vortan can GM one and I'll GM one, then w can discuss with lots of data. - Thus making Sal happy too!
Chris.
Chris.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability
- Hannibal
- Commander
- Posts: 886
- Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 7:00 am
- Location: London and The Vulkings Clan.............(started in Valn Ohtar, then jointly founded The Vulkings)
- Lardmaster
- Commander
- Posts: 690
- Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: The Big Smoke
I don't know, I leave you alone for one day (while making my film directorial debut (and finale!!) for my works "conference", results will be on utube seeing as though my team won and I got an Oscar for best film) and your at each others throats.
My two penneth. (I know you were all just waiting for my coments )
Spying to lower a players eff is an intrinsic part of the game and as so is a completey valid tactic (as is sleeping, so there). I would be surprised if we have ever lost one single player because they were spied out multiple times. If you are getting spied then its your diplomacy that is at fault not the game engine.
In the back to roots game from the ouset I considered Calidus to be the biggest threat to me winning the game (for various reasons before people get all offended) so I napped with everyone but him and used my 5 spy options on him every turn. I had no interest what was in his provinces I just wanted to hamper without attacking him (seeing as though he was the other side of the map). Of course this came with the risk of me losing eff with my failures but overall I would have lowered his eff more than mine. Changing the spy prov to a lowef eff I think is just work for the sake of it. What difference does it make to say lower eff rather than spy prov which also lowers eff?
My two penneth. (I know you were all just waiting for my coments )
Spying to lower a players eff is an intrinsic part of the game and as so is a completey valid tactic (as is sleeping, so there). I would be surprised if we have ever lost one single player because they were spied out multiple times. If you are getting spied then its your diplomacy that is at fault not the game engine.
In the back to roots game from the ouset I considered Calidus to be the biggest threat to me winning the game (for various reasons before people get all offended) so I napped with everyone but him and used my 5 spy options on him every turn. I had no interest what was in his provinces I just wanted to hamper without attacking him (seeing as though he was the other side of the map). Of course this came with the risk of me losing eff with my failures but overall I would have lowered his eff more than mine. Changing the spy prov to a lowef eff I think is just work for the sake of it. What difference does it make to say lower eff rather than spy prov which also lowers eff?
Last edited by Lardmaster on Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Question everything.
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
- Lardmaster
- Commander
- Posts: 690
- Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: The Big Smoke
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
- TheDragon
- Recruit
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: Yorkshire Mercenary Camp
Are we saying that the no spying part of a Nap agreement is there to be broken, well silly me. It's little wonder I don't last for long. I thought as a total new player to these games it was about stratergy, not sitting back and taking the easy way of making spies, send as many as you can to bring down as much EFF as possible, then walk through the territory. Without hardly a fight.
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
No.TheDragon wrote:Are we saying that the no spying part of a Nap agreement is there to be broken
If you think someone broke a NAP with you I'd suggest starting by asking that player for explanations, but not in public. Beginning a dispute about nap-breaking in public usually gets ugly in a way nobody wanted it to. If, however, you have contacted the player and were ignored or sth then let us know, because we'd surely like to know which players spoil the community by deliberatley breaking NAPs or not making up for an incidentally broken NAP. Such players are not worth our trust.
trewqh
the gleefully aggressive Vulking
the gleefully aggressive Vulking
- Lardmaster
- Commander
- Posts: 690
- Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: The Big Smoke
- Vortan
- Commander
- Posts: 588
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
- Contact:
The new proposal, which thanks to kor we will try out shortly, will still allow the use of spies to lower a target players EFF but it will be as a result of a direct spy order not just an additional consequence.
I personally, as I am sure some have figured by now, am rather partial to Stealing POP and under the current system successes also hurt EFF, as if having upto 15 POP knicked wasn't bad enough. The new proposal means that if I want info I spy province, if I want dead missiles I sabotage them and if I want to hurt EFF I target that instead BUT this does mean the victim doesn't suffer twice.
Please DON'T respond by saying but what about my chance of failing and getting lowered EFF. We all know that option 1 Spy province has a very high success rate, and therefore failure is, as well you know, very unlikely indeed if you have a good EFF to start with.
SEE - LOOK - CALM - POLITE - REASONED - AND UNDENIABLY RIGHT
Now WHY did it do THAT!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
- Vortan
- Commander
- Posts: 588
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
- Contact:
AS A SIDE NOTE RE NAP's - SEE ABOVE MY LAST POST
With the percentage of catching spies based upon the amount of spies present in the target province the chances of actually finding out if there are any active and deliberate NAP breakers out there is very poor indeed.
1% in fact. Has anyone EVER actually found out who sent the spies in? Perhaps - oh ho its another this percentage could be raised to say 10%. This increased risk of detection may well be the deterent needed to stamp this out - if in fact it happens - seen as it is so hard to prove, almost as hard as 'not letting anyone through deliberately'.
I suppose the only way is if you are NAPped with 5 players out of the 9 others in your game and you get hit by 25 spies. This would mean at least one NAPper was cheating but even then who?
Could it be altered a little??
Anyway - stop changing the subject Vortan - this thread isn't about NAP's.
With the percentage of catching spies based upon the amount of spies present in the target province the chances of actually finding out if there are any active and deliberate NAP breakers out there is very poor indeed.
1% in fact. Has anyone EVER actually found out who sent the spies in? Perhaps - oh ho its another this percentage could be raised to say 10%. This increased risk of detection may well be the deterent needed to stamp this out - if in fact it happens - seen as it is so hard to prove, almost as hard as 'not letting anyone through deliberately'.
I suppose the only way is if you are NAPped with 5 players out of the 9 others in your game and you get hit by 25 spies. This would mean at least one NAPper was cheating but even then who?
Could it be altered a little??
Anyway - stop changing the subject Vortan - this thread isn't about NAP's.
Now WHY did it do THAT!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!
If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!
Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!