Is there any disadvantage for the starting player?

[calmon]

Hi,

Great game. I enjoy it!

I just want to know: Is there any disadvatage for the starting player? For me it looks like he get the advantage of being in front a "half turn" for the whole game but don't see any penality for this bonus.

Is there any penality I miss? If not I would suggest to give the starting player less point in his very first turn.

Thanks!

[Kamikaze28]

There's already a discussion about this topic here.

[calmon]

Thanks for the link! Good to know there already is this discussion.

It seems pretty streight forward to have this first player limitation so hopefully we get this in near future. It seems very simple just to limit the wits.

[calmon]

(07-12-2012 04:55 AM)mkaen Wrote:  

(07-12-2012 04:51 AM)calmon Wrote:  It seems very simple just to limit the wits.

Very simple but not very thoughtful.

In chess, the starting player isn't penalized or restricted relative to the second player. I see no reason he should be in Outwitters.

If you want the fairest possible determination of skill between two players, they should play a series, alternating who moves first.

Otherwise, because you play some ladder games as "white" and some as "black", the net result is any potential advantage gets averaged out in your MMR / ladder status.

It really amazes me how many people want/expect OML to twiddle with fundamental game design parameters within the first week after release.

You could say the same to games like Magic the Gathering.

When in come out and for several years they had this advatage for the starting player. Years later until now they changed it in a way the starting player don't draw a card in hist first turn and it was the most liked change since start.

Why do you think it needs even a discussion?

Chess? Chess uses 1 Turn and not 5 so this is a limit! + even here you have a (small) advantage playing white.

Having 5 Wits doing stuff, geting bonus fields first makes it even worse for second player.

[calmon]

(07-12-2012 05:08 AM)mkaen Wrote:  

(07-12-2012 05:01 AM)calmon Wrote:  

(07-12-2012 04:55 AM)mkaen Wrote:  

(07-12-2012 04:51 AM)calmon Wrote:  It seems very simple just to limit the wits.

Very simple but not very thoughtful.

In chess, the starting player isn't penalized or restricted relative to the second player. I see no reason he should be in Outwitters.

If you want the fairest possible determination of skill between two players, they should play a series, alternating who moves first -- just like in chess.

Otherwise, because you play some ladder games as "white" and some as "black", the net result is any potential advantage gets averaged out in your MMR / league status. This is analogous to chess's ELO ratings. It would be ludicrous to suggest that ELO ratings are bunk because white has a tiny advantage. Even more silly would be to call for white to start with one less pawn than black, to "make up" for this slight advantage.

It really amazes me how many forum posters want/expect OML to change fundamental game design parameters within the first week after release, based on their own personal whim.

You could say the same to games like Magic the Gathering.

When in come out and for several years they had this advatage for the starting player. Years later until now they changed it in a way the starting player don't draw a card in hist first turn and it was the most liked change since start.

Why do you think it needs even a discussion?

Chess? chess uses 1 Turn and not 5 so this is a limit! + even here you have a (small) advatage playing white.

Having 5 Wits doing stuff, geting bonus fields first turn makes it even worse for second player.

In one game it's one action, in the other it's five actions. Do you see that 1 == 1 and 5 == 5?

The first player "getting bonus first" isn't a problem. The second player can just get it second. VOILA! Magically, each player now has 6 wits on his second turn.

My comments still stand. I see no reason to adjust this.

Man do I really need to explain the difference? Come on... just think logic otherwise you never play highest League

Fun beside I don't want to explain it in detail for you. You could read the first post in the link I got as first answer. He explains it a bit for you.

[ArtNJ]

(07-12-2012 05:24 AM)mkaen Wrote:  Your application of condescension was a bit disappointing. If you'd like to argue your point and support it with something, anything at all, please go right ahead.

I'll support it for him. I'm 99-4. I have no idea how to counter a properly done Foundry rush without losing 4 base health. Its a problem.

In Chess, there is no forced win of a queen in the first 5 moves. If there was, the rules would be different. Its a bad analogy.

[calmon]

@mkaen
You really don't see the advantage to always go first in every of your turns from start on?

Whenever the starting player makes his turn he ALWAYS lead in wits income. So on turn 1 he has his starting unit + 5 wits compared to the other players starting units.

On second players turn he has just equal values here (starting units + 5 wits)

The second turn of start player let him do action with starting units + 5 wits + usually 6 wits vs starting unit +5 wits.

Second turn of second player just equalize this for him.

Do you see whenever the starting players turn is he has more and whenever second players turn is he just has equalized stuff. (this is what I meant having "half turn" advantage)

And of course its a bigger advatange in this game than in chess because chess is only 1 turn each and 16 starting units on each site + longer way to opponent + far better protected king. And even with all this differences there is still a small advantage for white in chess. Max bigger advantage in outwitters with less starting units, 5 turns per player + shorter ways to get in contact + less protected base.

[ArtNJ]

@Calmon: We are on the same side of this issue, but I just wanted to note that the FTA in Chess is actually considered HUGE at the world-class grandmaster level. So even if the analogy was a fair won, it is hardly an effective argument for not doing something in a game where the fix is easier, and the rules lack the century's of tradition found in chess.

[calmon]

I stop arguing with you mkaen. If you don't see... you don't see.

[ArtNJ]

mkaen...no interest in posting a replay for everyone to exploit, making the game less fair...if you agree not to post it, I'll show it to you personally. Its just one rush on one map, but it is one of the more deadly ones