Unfairly advantage 1P make 3 wit?

[garcia1000]

Hi everyone new here I got this game yesterday great game!!!!

I got question about why the first player get a huge advantage. He get always more wit than second player. If he wants to be second player instead, he can pass turn, then he has 5 extra wit!!

this unfairly to second player. In all the similar game such as Spectromancer, the first player start with fewer mana. It should 1P start with 3 wit. what do u think? if u dont feel the freedom that start with only 3 wit, u can skip turn and become 2P with 8 wit!

[hullcrushdepth]

Not unfair, you're both on the same team and if they happen to do that then whatever they plan to do with the wits will also benefit you. Play as a team, not as yourself.

[Kamikaze28]

I think the OP is talking about the FTA in 1v1 games.

There are a number of threads for this topic already with great discussions.

• FTA
• First Turn Advantage
• FTA and 2(3) actions on first turn
• Is there any disadvantage for the starting player?
• First-mover advantage?
  

[garcia1000]

thanks for those therad it was older and i didn't see it on the front page sorry

I dont understand something about them, it says that they are fair because u will be 1P half the time and 2P half the time??? Then it means it still be fair if 1P starts with 100000000 wit, since u will be 1P half the time? lol I disagree because it will not be so fun that way.

[Cookie]

Well, they are right that it will even out in the long run. In chess there is a known advantage without anyone trying to do anything about it (too well-established) and in go there is instead a trend to adjust the compensation for the second player to make the game as even as possible - because nobody wants to introduce draws in go, no matter how you choose this compensation, it will have to be an integer.

I agree completely with you, but I think 2 wits is probably the most fair. You can see my posts in the other threads. However, there is a risk that this change will make the game more defensive, as like that, it will be harder for both of the players to attack early on.

[Meph1ston]

I like it how it is now. Because the so p1 has a small advantage and so he will more likely attack. So its a bit that p2 defends and p1 attacks but i like it because it brings action to the game. Would both players be equal there would be more lukely a turtling game because both are afraid of attacking. I think p1 should get at least for. With four he could still play aggresively but some rushes wouldnt work so well anymore.

@ Kamikaze28: Now you can add this thread to the list with including fta already