FTA and 2(3) actions on first turn

[Cookie]

(07-12-2012 11:00 PM)Perrin Wrote:  Maybe I haven't run into the top level of competition but I haven't noticed a significant difference in starting first or second. The only argument that really made me wary was what Cookie said about if there really was no difference between going first or second wouldn't all first players just pass their turn to start with 10 WIT and go second. That is interesting and I might have to try it out with friends. But if you consider that then there is always an advantage to going first because even if statistically they both win an even amount of time then everyone should start postponing their first turn. You would get the same chance of winning and start with twice the WIT.

Yes, because Outwitters is not a perfect information game, there is most likely no way to guarantee a win for the first player.

Basically the special case when there is no advantage to go first is a game with units with defense much stronger than offense, so that attacking is not possible. This kind of game will basically end in a stalemate (i.e. players agreeing to a draw because they are bored).

In fact, trying this out is quite interesting as well, and it basically amounts to trying "not to lose". Naturally, if you succeed in this goal you normally win, because in this case the opponent will usually try (and fail) an attack. But, if both players try not to lose and just build up huge defenses, the game basically ends in a stalemate.

So far, from the little I have seen, the first player will normally try to win, and the second player will usually try "not to lose" for the first few turns, basically building up a strong defense. If the first attack is not successful, the second player has a good chance to turn the tide.

These roles of attacker and defender could potentially make the game feel more interesting, even if it is less balanced that way. Like in chess, somehow balancing the game might result in more draws, thus making the game more boring. As chess is right now, P1 has some pressure on him to win compared to P2, as results are tallied over a tournament.

If you think of shorter games (say, 6 turns for P1 and 5 turns for P2) it is likely that the FTA is bigger, because the relative percentage difference in the number of wits the players have available is bigger. In this case, P1 has used 30 wits and P2 only 25 (+bonuses of course).

However, my key point still stands. It is easy to make the game more balanced with the fix proposed, it is simple, and looking at the game so far, it would most likely not produce a problem with stalemates or draws.