Orange didn't deserve second but bottling out is overpowered. Personally, I think you should place above all other players who bot out if you surrender. Furthermore surrendering should always be an option. Botting out meanwhile should automatically put you one position lower than when you botted out as to encourage surrendering. That way it encourages surrendering instead of bottling out which I personally believe is better sportsmanship. That and make a bot type on progressive capitals which only stacks caps and takes a card and passes. Making it easy to trade with, feed cards, and prep for killing at the cost of a cap roll. You know, instead of making both players so weak from getting slammed on and stacked on by a massive bot while fighting each other that it makes the bot place higher via killing the other sentient human being since bots are easy to play around even if they're massive but only in a 1v1. Simultaneously I think not taking a card when you have the ability to do so for multiple turns in a row is cheap and should probably automatically surrender you but there are times when you'd be card blocked if you took a card and you're holding a trade with your cap open until the opportunity presents itself.
The core issue of the bot out problem is that there's no real solution to the players who bot out who simply don't care about their placement. Someone mentioned a badge system in a recent video that could be used to identify frequent botters in the lobby which I think might be the best solution. As far as not taking a card when you can, I won that recent Alcatraz game because I didn't take cards. Different circumstance, because I was trying to force a player to open my capital, but it was over several turns and could be flagged by the same system. I think I'll start drafting up a script here soon for my "State of Risk" discussion I'd like to do.
It's a weird trade off, because orange quit and the bot took over, there's no incentive to work together to kill it, because of the risk of betrayal. I get why black didn't try to deal with it at all, because it increases his chances of winning. It's a very flawed system.
When you send emotes in game it revels information to all the other players. Black had a good read on your emotes to know you were in conflict. His 3 saw Blue take your cap and next turn you returned many hits
I am aware, I didn't mention it in the video but I mentally processed it and that was why I walked back the collusion comment with "actually...no". I realized he knew I didn't fortify back to the hidden cap after I took blue's so it made sense to at least take my bad cap.
Orange didn't deserve second but bottling out is overpowered. Personally, I think you should place above all other players who bot out if you surrender. Furthermore surrendering should always be an option. Botting out meanwhile should automatically put you one position lower than when you botted out as to encourage surrendering. That way it encourages surrendering instead of bottling out which I personally believe is better sportsmanship.
That and make a bot type on progressive capitals which only stacks caps and takes a card and passes. Making it easy to trade with, feed cards, and prep for killing at the cost of a cap roll. You know, instead of making both players so weak from getting slammed on and stacked on by a massive bot while fighting each other that it makes the bot place higher via killing the other sentient human being since bots are easy to play around even if they're massive but only in a 1v1.
Simultaneously I think not taking a card when you have the ability to do so for multiple turns in a row is cheap and should probably automatically surrender you but there are times when you'd be card blocked if you took a card and you're holding a trade with your cap open until the opportunity presents itself.
The core issue of the bot out problem is that there's no real solution to the players who bot out who simply don't care about their placement. Someone mentioned a badge system in a recent video that could be used to identify frequent botters in the lobby which I think might be the best solution. As far as not taking a card when you can, I won that recent Alcatraz game because I didn't take cards. Different circumstance, because I was trying to force a player to open my capital, but it was over several turns and could be flagged by the same system. I think I'll start drafting up a script here soon for my "State of Risk" discussion I'd like to do.
Black didn't deserve second. He could have just helped you defeat orange yet he kept pestering you.
It's a weird trade off, because orange quit and the bot took over, there's no incentive to work together to kill it, because of the risk of betrayal. I get why black didn't try to deal with it at all, because it increases his chances of winning. It's a very flawed system.
When you send emotes in game it revels information to all the other players. Black had a good read on your emotes to know you were in conflict. His 3 saw Blue take your cap and next turn you returned many hits
I am aware, I didn't mention it in the video but I mentally processed it and that was why I walked back the collusion comment with "actually...no". I realized he knew I didn't fortify back to the hidden cap after I took blue's so it made sense to at least take my bad cap.
GG i thought it was a little crazy alot of people seem attack happy in the beginnning haha
Blue player rolling capitals goes brrrrr
I really hate playing against players like blue was to start
It was so weird, he hadn't ventured into my neck of the woods at all and suddenly he's just rolling my capital 😂
I can honestly say I do not recognise this map..
Interesting! I’ve seen it around a fair bit, but happy to introduce you to it for the first time
@C_money cheers