Better power distribution

[Travissimo]

The short version is…

Currently, many games I’m playing are decided by uneven orb and power distribution, making the match very one-sided. My suggestion is to set it up so that there is always an even distribution of powers in the game by assigning each power a number, and then dividing the board into quadrants; every half or quarter of the arena has to have an equal share of the total value of orbs distributed.

Now, get ready for the breakdown…

I don't know how the powers are currently distributed, i.e. what the coding and whatnot is, but, here's my suggestion anyway, based on my recurring bitch that I'm constantly playing games where either one side or the other gets all the orbs worth having, making the game pretty much not fun unless you're just playing for the pure sadism/masochism of it.

Powers should be designated with a number, and the higher the number, the more powerful the power. Say Raise/Lower Tile are 1’s, and Grow Quadradius, Invisible and Jump Proof are 10’s. Wherever that number appears, an equal number (or group of powers with that sum) must appear opposite it/them (see below). Powers are useful dependent on situation and positioning, but it's irrelevant to even try for position when nine out of ten orbs appear on just one person’s side of the arena.

So, the second part of this suggestion is that distribution needs to be divided up into quadrants like so:

4 1
3 2

Quadrants will help to insure that power distribution is spread evenly throughout all quadrants. To do this, total the values of all powers that are to appear in a quadrant. That number must nearly equal the sum given to its opposite side/quadrant. For example, if three powers are set to appear, one on the top of the board could be Power 8, offset by a Power 5 and a Power 3 on the bottom. Allow a margin of error of one point on a side, so the orb on the top side could hold Power 7, 8 or 9.

This probably ought to be staged somewhat so that at the beginning of the game, say, the first 20-40 moves, the distribution is even between top and bottom. Later, the distribution could spread out a bit more. In fact, having a couple random schemes for distribution would be good:

Scheme A: Top vs. Bottom (Q1+Q4 equals Q2+Q3)
Scheme B: Right vs. Left (Q1+Q2 equals Q3+Q4)
Scheme C: Diagonals (Q1 equals Q3 and/or Q4 equals Q2)
Scheme D: Totally Random (Even number distribution to each quadrant)

The main disadvantage I see to this in play is that it’ll be more apparent when you grab up an orb that your opponent has an orb of comparable power on their side. That, in my opinion though, should already be a given lest the game become more about luck than skill (which is where I believe it currently lies). In fact, it might even be cool to show the number of the highest value power to be distributed next on the countdown, because if you know that Power 10 orb is coming, play becomes that much more frantic as both sides try to get theirs while preventing their opponent from doing the same.

If any part of this is already the case, it's definitely not showing up in most of the games I've been playing as of late, which have been decisively one-sided.

Quadrants, man! It's thematic and everything!

Quad Erat Demonstrandum.

[ARHYTHMIC]

I don't know...There is definetly an element of luck in the distribution of the orbs. While in general, I agree that a even orb distribution is ok, I like the element of chance that the current random throws in. With the right luck even a beginer could potentialy take down a master...however unlikely. I guess my point is, if you are good....you don't need a ton of orbs!

[Travissimo]

I don't know...There is definetly an element of luck in the distribution of the orbs. While in general, I agree that a even orb distribution is ok, I like the element of chance that the current random throws in. With the right luck even a beginer could potentialy take down a master...however unlikely. I guess my point is, if you are good....you don't need a ton of orbs!

However, for those of us who play the game regularly, suffering through games where you literally have absolutely no chance because you can't get any orbs, which makes the entire game hinge on one move that luck may or may not let you make...that's kinda tired.

More to the point, it means that skill isn't that important in the game. If I wanted to see chance in action, I could sit around and flip a coin over and over again. Obviously, that's not too fun, but using skill is.

[goldhahnstein]

you guys are like making out with all this quadtalk,
and it's like gross.

My head hurts.

[Lallo]

What I like about this idea, Travissimo, of applying the title of the game to the theme and purpose of the game, that if the right algorythms were developed (which I think you could elegantly accomplish), there could be different ways of winning the game.

What I mean by that is that by concentrating on quandrants and removing the pressure on always getting orbs, the game could be more balanced and interesting.

My idea is this: You can win the game by having more pieces. And you can win the game by controlling more quadrants. That is, the board is split into 4 quadrants and the pieces on the opposite side use the same movements and orbs to not only kill the other team's pieces, but to get to the opposite last rows like in chinese checkers. Those could also be sources of points.

It's a poorly thought out idea, but I just wanted to contribute to all the work you did. I think I speak for everytone when I say "WE APPRECIATE IT!"

[Travissimo]

I'm nothing if not an obsessive gamer.

You're welcome.

*continues to make out with Arhythmic and Lallo*

[Lallo]

** mouths "hell yeah!" **