[GO] Poker Spoils

[Queen_Herpes]

Hey all. Glad to update! Give me a little while to consolidate all the feedback, figure out what was most popular, maybe run some numbers and update.

edit: updated. I hope that caught everything.

Laughing Boy, you have a lot of suuport here...we're all looking forward to the next step. You got time...after all it won't be approved right away anyways....GL!

[Laughing.Boy]

So is there anything to do at this point, or just wait for word?

[Joodoo]

Hmmm, the method you introduce seems to be a good extension to the flat rate system, and the justification you gave for the possible number of troops rewarded when cashing in the different hands seems decent to me.
I would really like to see this implemented.

[TheForgivenOne]

I want this to see more traffic, as this was liked, so i'm stickying this

[JoshyBoy]

I'm going to make a move here and submit this shortly. It's a great idea with lots of support, so why not? We just need to finalise the suggestion, especially the following issue.

Potential Cashing Methods

• True Poker: Rewards are arranged in the order of hands as per the rules of Poker. With these rules, it may or may not make sense to allow a Single. As such, a possible layout of set bonuses and T/S is (in ascending order of Poker hands):
  

  Code: Select all

  Set \ Spoils 1    2    3    4    5    AVE    Worth  T/S
  Single     100% 100% 100% 100% 100%  100.0%     1   1.00
  Pair         0%  33%  78% 100% 100%   62.2%     3   1.50
  2 Pairs      0%   0%   0%  22%  62%   16.8%     7   1.75
  3 o'Kind     0%   0%  12%  27%  63%   20.4%     8   2.67
  Run          0%   0%  22%  44%  62%   25.6%     9   3.00
  Flush        0%   0%   0%   0%   1%    0.2%    14   3.50
  Full House   0%   0%   0%   0%  25%    5.0%    18   3.60
  4 o'Kind     0%   0%   0%   4%  33%    7.4%    20   5.00

  
  There are some obvious flaws, including the spoils system not matching up to the card system of Poker and thus giving bonuses not proportional to the chance of that hand. i.e. In order to make a Full House worth more than a Flush, the T/S and total Bonus need to be higher, despite the Full House being ten times more likely to be obtained. A 4-of-a-Kind, the hardest Poker hand attainable with the spoils system, would be worth over 40% more troops despite being over 30 times more likely to be attained.
• Percentage-Based: Rewards are arranged in the order of likeliness of attaining them. As such, a possible layout of set bonuses and T/S is (in ascending order of rarity):
  

  Code: Select all

  Set \ Spoils 1    2    3    4    5    AVE    Worth  T/S
  Single     100% 100% 100% 100% 100%  100.0%     1   1.00
  Pair         0%  33%  78% 100% 100%   62.2%     3   1.50
  Run          0%   0%  22%  44%  62%   25.6%     5   1.67
  3 o'Kind     0%   0%  12%  27%  63%   20.4%     6   2.00
  2 Pairs      0%   0%   0%  22%  62%   16.8%     9   2.25
  4 o'Kind     0%   0%   0%   4%  33%    7.4%    11   2.75
  Full House   0%   0%   0%   0%  25%    5.0%    16   3.20
  Flush        0%   0%   0%   0%   1%    0.2%    20   4.00

I vote percentage based!


Cheers, JB

[Laughing.Boy]

Agreed. Percentage, while not exactly Poker, is the best fit for Conquer Club. Poker is a theme and inspiration.

Thank you, again for the awesome support, everyone.

[Queen_Herpes]

Hurray Poker spoils!

[pmchugh]

Agreed. Percentage, while not exactly Poker, is the best fit for Conquer Club. Poker is a theme and inspiration.

Thank you, again for the awesome support, everyone.

Defo percentage based.

I like this idea as it really makes you think about the right time to cash/wait.

[TheForgivenOne]

I'm putting up a poll to get peoples thoughts

[JoshyBoy]

I would give this a few more days, then submit this. I believe that the percentage based will work very nicely. Great suggestion, great work.

Cheers, JB

[Bruceswar]

I hope this does not make it in. This will just end up as more useless medals.

[JoshyBoy]

I hope this does not make it in. This will just end up as more useless medals.

You don't like this idea?

[Bruceswar]

I hope this does not make it in. This will just end up as more useless medals.

You don't like this idea?

This would be correct

[JoshyBoy]

I hope this does not make it in. This will just end up as more useless medals.

You don't like this idea?

This would be correct

May I ask why?

[Bruceswar]

I hope this does not make it in. This will just end up as more useless medals.

You don't like this idea?

This would be correct

May I ask why?

Another meaningless medal that will at some point come out, just like all these meaningless maps now coming out that have 5 people that like them. Crowding the system is never a good idea. This would create tons of more farming. We do not need this, and this is nothing to do anything with risk at all. It is just a bad idea all around.... just like some maps that come out. They never should have.

[AndyDufresne]

At least you are expressing your input during the process, Bruce. That is a good sign, even if you don't like a suggestion, or a map. Honestly, I mean it.


--Andy

[Bruceswar]

At least you are expressing your input during the process, Bruce. That is a good sign, even if you don't like a suggestion, or a map. Honestly, I mean it.


--Andy

I always have opinions on things, but I hold some back due to the fact others might be offended.

[JoshyBoy]

I hope this does not make it in. This will just end up as more useless medals.

You don't like this idea?

This would be correct

May I ask why?

Another meaningless medal that will at some point come out, just like all these meaningless maps now coming out that have 5 people that like them. Crowding the system is never a good idea. This would create tons of more farming. We do not need this, and this is nothing to do anything with risk at all. It is just a bad idea all around.... just like some maps that come out. They never should have.

I see what you are saying Bruce, and I respect your view. I guess I like the suggestion because I love poker.

[Bruceswar]

I see what you are saying Bruce, and I respect your view. I guess I like the suggestion because I love poker.

I like poker also and if I want the poker feel, just play poker club. We do not need spoils for this.

[pmchugh]

I see what you are saying Bruce, and I respect your view. I guess I like the suggestion because I love poker.

I like poker also and if I want the poker feel, just play poker club. We do not need spoils for this.

I think it adds something a little different to the already given options. I don't even like the poker feel to it, I just like the change in strategy.

[Bruceswar]

I see what you are saying Bruce, and I respect your view. I guess I like the suggestion because I love poker.

I like poker also and if I want the poker feel, just play poker club. We do not need spoils for this.

I think it adds something a little different to the already given options. I don't even like the poker feel to it, I just like the change in strategy.

It goes against everything this game stands for... Imagine if you could play soccer 5 vs 5 and not 11 vs 11.. There are some rules that need not be bent. Cards must be a 3 set is one of them.

Edited to add: a ton of coding is needed for this one also which will make it not easy.

[TheForgivenOne]

I'm going to be honest, i couldn't for the life of me figure out what you were talking about, until that last post. I originally was thinking "Hey, this sounds like a new quirk to the game". But now i see the flaw in "cashing 1 or 2 cards" or "cashing in 5" all at once.

[Laughing.Boy]

I'm not sure I see the flaw. All due respect to Bruceswar and his opinion, to which he is certainly entitled and has explained with a valid reason. In fact, it's pretty awesome to hear valid opposition to the idea. Criticism is beneficial when constructive.

The problem I see, though, is clinging to tradition. Cashing in three cards at a time is a time-honored tradition of the game this site is based upon. But that doesn't mean we can't innovate. We already have altered the rate, with Flat-Rate spoils and Nuclear spoils. Those two have introduced new strategies. I certainly wouldn't play an Escalating game the same as I would a Flat-Rate game, and I'd play a Nuclear game different that either of those. Of course, we also have No spoils, which itself is different too.

There are new maps that introduce new strategies. Every one is breaking the tradition of the original game, and I personally own several board game variants of the original game that introduce new maps and game mechanics.

And, of course, there's Fog of War which isn't realistically possible with the original board game, and we have the option between Manual and Automatic troop deployment. Each of those options change the way one plays the game.

Oh, and our many game modes coupled with our turn options.

Tradition was broken a long time ago. In my opinion, for the better. Not because I enjoy every mode and option (I don't) but because I highly value the freedom of choice and a wide array of options. The only thing we haven't innovated is the number of spoils one cashes at a time. (No Spoils doesn't count.)

If it were change for the sake of change, I'd agree that Poker spoils was nothing but rubbish. However, it isn't. In fact, it may be one of the most strategy-changing options yet. Right now, everybody cashes in three spoils at a time, and when you can cash those is is largely left to chance. With one or two spoils, you have no option and thus no strategy. You have a 1-in-3 chance with three spoils, just shy of 4-in-5 chance with four spoils, and five spoils guarantees you can (and must) act. At any point along the possible collection of spoils, one has a 42.5% chance of being able to cash, not including a person who has no spoils. (That's just the way of the game.)

However, your ability to choose a strategy is less than that, since you must act at five spoils. Unless you have three of one type and one of each other type, thus giving you a binary choice, (statistically happening less than 25% of the time you gain five spoils) you have no real option at five spoils. In reality, you have a choice to act strategically about about 27.5% of the time, or about 11-in-40. With Flat-Rate, Escalating and Nuclear, that is.

With Poker spoils, you have the option to act strategically 100% of the time. (Again, discounting a person having no spoils.) There is still chance, but you always have a choice. Players can act with cool, calm collective strategies, saving spoils and pruning their collections for the optimal cash-out; or they can spend what they have right away for a desperate gamble or last-ditch effort. A player can not be sitting on four cards and have no way to act.

I don't see another useless medal. It's not about playing Poker. (That's just the inspiration. I don't even play Poker.) And it's not about crowding the system and change for the sake of change.

Poker spoils is about the ultimate expression of choice and strategy. It is the ability to manage your inflow of troops as much as randomness will allow. It is the thinking man and woman's spoil system.

At least, that's what I've envisioned.

[Bruceswar]

You missed the whole point. It is impossible to have fog of war in real life. Flat rate is nothing new from the original game. Nuclear is, but you know what it has in common with Escalating and Flat rate? All have 3 spoils needed. You mine as well flipping quarters to see if you win an attack and sending out bunnies to take over the next spot. This whole idea is pretty absurd if you ask me. Cashing 1 card just makes no sense. @ the other maps comment. Maps still use the same basic game style as this site is modeled around sans a few off shoot maps. Anyhow this is not needed and not a good idea.

[Laughing.Boy]

No, I think I understood. Let me ask you this. Why is it important that players must cash in three cards at a time.