... why would I want to ask for allies? An extra point per ship is pretty weak and the reinforcement cards are rare.... I'm going to repeat an experiment I did a couple of years ago. For my next 30 games at Cosmic Encounter Online, I am not going to invite a single ally, offensively or defensively.* I will track the results and post a summary.
Anyone thinking "playing the 'no-invite' guy should be an easy win' " should look for user ID TheDukester at CE Online.
* The obvious exception, as always, is asking for defensive allies when defending against a possible game-winning challenge. I won't play kingmaker just for the sake of an experiment.
11 comments:
If you track individual encounters you can get specific data not influenced by game outcome. Also if you note the date when you play your first no ally game and the last no ally game. We can do a query and get all the data on encounter outcomes, and game wins.
In my experience, too many players are too afraid to not ask for allies; if "everyone else" uses allies, then that must be the way to play, right? I love having these players at my table. I usually pick the worst offender and try to sit directly to his left.
This bugs me for some reason. I guess I feel Cosmic is a light enough game that you should not "game" the players like Poker where you are trying to take someone's money.
I might have to join this experiment 'cause I've always found evening out colonies via allies prevents a run away like this guy does.
Not really a fair statement.
I've taught CE to a number of players ... I've played poorly on purpose to keep newcomers in the game ... I've enjoyed quite a few goofy nights of "let's just wing it" CE ... I've been a good ambassador for the game for a number of years.
I was referencing playing against experienced players and **playing to win.** I thought that was clear.
I don't crush newcomers. But I will gleefully steal a win from a veteran player who over-invites.
Oh, and BTW: feel free to join the experiment ANY TIME.
I'll start the game; you go in next. That'll put you on my left.
Don't worry -- I'm recording the results.
Challenges are won and lost by just a few points. I've seen challenges lost but would have been won if only someone allied or just allied with one more token.
Attacks cards are a factor. Playing a 40 will win against an 8, barring powers. However, you also get 8 vs. 10, 14 vs. 17, 15 vs. 20. Allies do make a difference.
Obviously allies can make a difference. They wouldn't be part of the game otherwise. But they don't always make a difference, and yet there are many players who invite everyone every encounter, at least on defense. Strategically, this is not sound for any of a million reasons.
The "no allies" experiment is, as far as I know, just that: an experiment. I don't think the idea is to prove that allies are pointless. He's just trying to see how well he can do without them for the experiment's sake, or to see exactly how much of a difference they do make as a means of gauging their worth.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Duke. I think the experiment and post are being misunderstood though. I see it as an interesting and valuable experiment personally. My "no deals" experiment was equally fun and enlightening... especially when I got stuck as Empath.
Oh, yeah -- it's mostly just for something to do. Much like playing Philanthropist 10 times in a row or something like that.
But, that being said, I think it's patently obvious that most CE players over-value alliances. Or, as I put it over at BGG: everyone talks about winning **challenges**; I'm talking about winning **games.** And one sure way NOT to win games is to give your oh-so-temporary allies a bunch of rewards for really not doing much at all.
Plus, I've already done this once before, and I don't see any reason why the results won't be much the same. I should win about 55 to 60 percent of the time; I'll be surprised if it varies too much one way or the other.
Well, the thing that set this off was someone asking what the point of inviting allies was, since they only added a few points. I think Gerald's point is intrinsic to CE. Most encounter wins are not blowouts. I think the spread (as someone mentioned elsewhere) is usually under 10. Allies can make the difference in most cases (not always, sure), but it's hardly a rare occurrence.
I didn't comment on the experiment. I commented on the original proposed idea that allies were useless.
air max, burberry outlet, true religion jeans, louboutin, louis vuitton outlet, louboutin, ray ban sunglasses, tiffany and co, coach outlet store online, oakley sunglasses cheap, christian louboutin shoes, longchamp outlet, louis vuitton, true religion jeans, tory burch outlet, kate spade outlet, kate spade handbags, oakley sunglasses, jordan shoes, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton outlet, louis vuitton handbags, coach outlet, prada outlet, ray ban sunglasses, chanel handbags, michael kors outlet, longchamp handbags, michael kors outlet, oakley sunglasses, nike shoes, air max, coach purses, michael kors outlet, longchamp handbags, louis vuitton outlet stores, nike free, prada handbags, coach factory outlet, gucci outlet, tiffany and co, louboutin outlet, michael kors outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, michael kors outlet, burberry outlet, michael kors outlet
louboutin, moncler outlet, juicy couture outlet, iphone 6 cases, hollister, moncler, karen millen, oakley, baseball bats, wedding dresses, ray ban, gucci, canada goose, ralph lauren, canada goose, swarovski crystal, hollister clothing store, moncler, air max, converse, pandora jewelry, juicy couture outlet, rolex watches, moncler, supra shoes, moncler, pandora charms, ugg, vans, toms shoes, links of london, pandora charms, air max, timberland boots, parajumpers, hollister, thomas sabo, louis vuitton, montre homme, coach outlet store online, lancel, ugg, swarovski, moncler, converse shoes
Post a Comment