FTA

[stevewastaken]

(07-07-2012 08:57 PM)Kamikaze28 Wrote:  There is one thing to keep in mind though: is it general FTA, independent of the map or is it a map specific problem?

In my experience, it depends largely on the number of turns it takes to finish. The "faster" a map plays, the more problematic FTA is.

For example, if a game can last only 3 turns, (taking bonus spaces out of the equation) the starting player got to use 15 Wits, while the second player only got to use 10. That would be a HUGE advantage.

Tic-tac-toe takes about that many turns, and if you play properly, you will always win with FTA.

If a game last 100 turns, the starting player got to use 500 wits, while the second player got to use 495. That's an advantage, but a fairly small one.

Chess takes quite a few turns, and FTA isn't a big deal, unless you are talking about unbeatable Grand Masters... which brings us to the next factor: skill.

Even in tic-tac-toe, 2 people who don't know how to play can go back and forth with who wins and loses. While the second player will recognize he is at a disadvantage, he'll still win a few thanks to "mistakes" by the other player.

Most people view a mistake as a serious miscalculation that results in a setback. However, when talking about extremely high level play, a mistake can be a really great move, but not the absolute maximum threat to the opponent. A top level opponent will see this teeny-tiny opportunity to take an advantage and as long as he pushes turns to the absolute maximum threat every turn, he will carry that opportunity to a win.

So in chess, when a Grand Master faces Grand Master, FTA is pretty important. Because if neither makes a mistake, then the win goes to the guy who went first. He got (I don't know) 200 turns, while his opponent got 199.

But games with action points are interesting. Because if you cut in half the number of starting action points of the FTA, it (in theory) mitigates the mathematical issue of who got more turns. What's left behind are questions like "Is it better to be able to decide how things start, or is it better to be able to see what your opponent is doing and know how to counter it?"

In my opinion, that's where you want it. When the question is "what strategy is best?", and not "who got more chances to move/attack?".