Adjust the Victory Requirements?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Adjust the Victory Requirements?

      The recent update just changed a solo victory from 60% to 51%, coalition/team victories from 80% to 70%, and 2-team/1-on-1 maps from 90% to 80%.

      Realistically, war would either end through diplomacy or conquering the entire world. Since this is a simplified board game mechanic, we go for conquering the world, but instead of forcing one to take over the entire map, we only need to determine where people are very unlikely to make a comeback (say 95% of players win when reaching x% of the VP, the game could probably end then).
      A solo victory is typically uncommon in active games, this decrease makes it a lot simpler for this to happen. I have no problems with this as long as the map has more than 3 normally playable nations.
      The 2-team/1-on-1 maps apparently decreased from a required 90% VP to 80% VP. And since one of these sides have to win, delaying the end with high requirements is all you can do. The change once again has no issues with me because it's hard to come back when you have 20% of the VP/land.

      Now, the coalition/team victory lowered from 80% to 70%. I personally think this was a bit much because coalition victories are fairly easy, if it was 75%, I would be satisfied.

      Anybody else have any thoughts regarding the VP requirements?
      "Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster." ~ Sun Tzu, The Art of War

      "War does not determine who is right - only who is left."
    • I have found that a lot of games drag on after the bulk of the combat is finished and there is simply a bunch of cleaning up to do.

      I am not sure on the 100 player world map though which continents you can control for the 70% though. I almost think that you can get that without setting foot on north or south america, but I would have to check.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020.

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • I think this was an overall smart change as after a certain point the games become tedious conquering inactives.

      But what of that rare scenario where you are actually in a fight? Well I firmly believe that past a certain point the burden of proof that the game is winnable should switch to the challenger. What I mean is at some point the smaller guys should go after the big dogs and prove they can win; passed a certain point it makes no sense to force the big dogs to chase the little guys around the map.

      Now where you draw that defining line is it 80% of 70% VPs or another number entirely? I say its been at 80% for the longest time and most maps are snoozefests so lets try 70% for a while and see what happens.
    • Irritated with the gold change I am set to lose 40,000 gold on my next first place victory. I thought the changes were to the new games why am I losing the gold I earned?? I spent gold in this game calculated the spend versus win ratio based on 60k win... my 30k investment to win 60k is now not even break even.
      :thumbup: :beer: - Living the dream!
    • Initially I was worried about this change. But the more I think of it, the more I agree.

      First of all, I don't see any significant change in the major maps, when it comes to coalition victory. Only case might be the 100 players map, but in general 70% seems quite comfortable as a victory level.

      In the small map (22 players) the change is simply very good, since it only helps speeding up the game.

      My only remaining question is about the possibility of a landlocked solo victory in the Pacific map, which I feel is against the spirit of this map. So overall the change seems positive.
    • With the release of the new Paratroopers we are introducing additional victory rewards for all participants of a game round. Not only did we increase existing victory reward payouts, but added a fixed gold bonus for all participants of games who survived until the end and stayed active. So even if it seems that you are not able to win the game anymore, there is still some reward waiting for you at the end! The new gold rewards can be seen in the Newspaper tab "Rewards"."

      Mine were decreased...
      :thumbup: :beer: - Living the dream!
    • Svven78 wrote:

      Irritated with the gold change I am set to lose 40,000 gold on my next first place victory. I thought the changes were to the new games why am I losing the gold I earned?? I spent gold in this game calculated the spend versus win ratio based on 60k win... my 30k investment to win 60k is now not even break even.
      We changed rewards of certain maps, including event maps like yours. Nearly all maps now have higher rewards, with some exceptions (which were not specified in the News). The change is only applied to new game rounds though. Sadly there seems to be a display issue in the newspaper reward tab to show the new reward also in old game rounds. But you should get the old reward.
    • Svven78 wrote:

      With the release of the new Paratroopers we are introducing additional victory rewards for all participants of a game round. Not only did we increase existing victory reward payouts, but added a fixed gold bonus for all participants of games who survived until the end and stayed active. So even if it seems that you are not able to win the game anymore, there is still some reward waiting for you at the end! The new gold rewards can be seen in the Newspaper tab "Rewards"."

      Mine were decreased...
      Your newspaper is lying to you. Never trust a reporter who changes his story. ;)
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020.

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • I feel that the lowered amount especially helps on world when you need to conquer that last bit of central siberia to win, but it's going to make the already weirdly balanced pacific maps a bit dumb. The Pacific is supposed to be a big thing about a strong navy and whatnot, but if you play as somewhere like Tomsk you may never even get a coastal province. A good way to balance this may be making inland places larger and coastal provinces smaller, to bunch up the players near the water. Also, developing the islands in the Pacific would make much more of an incentive to actually pass them. What happens already in most games is one group quickly slips past or overpowers the other's navy in just one location and pushes inland, making navy useless.