Dominions 3 1v1 Ladder

[Meglobob]

Good idea, I was thinking of doing something similar myself, just for the fun of it. My system involved just rating players on how they performed in MP games just in the multiplayer section of this forum. I was going to call it, The Hall of Fame, I still may do it as my system will be alot different than yours. However, being in 6 MP's at the moment I lack time! I was very, very happy to be knocked out of the 7th MP I was in.

I hope your idea takes off.

Just a suggestion, but in order to find the best players, shouldn't all the settings be standard with no changes? Why nerf blesses? If you try to nerf them, then you are not really playing the standard, default version of Dom3. If blesses are too powerful the developers Illwinter should tone them down.

I say just play the standard Dom3, latest version, with random nations, random map size, default/standard settings. Everyone knows exactly where they stand and its a very simple system.

[Shovah32]

For selecting nations you could use an idea some-one(forget who) suggested a while ago:
Have player x pick the 2 nations that will be played and let player y pick which one he wants.

[Maltrease]

Awesome Saarud! I would love to be a part of this.

There is another thread with a little discussion on coming up with fair matches.

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...b=5&o=&fpart=1

Of course now I just saw your name on there so I imagine you read it.

Instead of playing 2-3 matches there is another idea that I think has a lot of merit. B0rsuk came up with the premise of it.

One person decides which 2 nations are going to play and all of the game settings. The second person picks the side they want to play. So it obviously in the first person interest to make sure the choices are as fair as possible.

Settings that could be determined:
Number of provences
Typical map stuff (indy, research speed, gold, etc.)
Treaty Time, number of turns until direct conflict is allowed.
House Rules (no dual bless... or no castings of hurricane)
-Anything else?

It might make sense to create a few "balanced maps" as right now the random maps can give one player a lot of rich provences and leave the other with poor swamps. And you might want to allow a mulligan that can be used within the first 3 turns (or similar) in case someone gets a second turn plague or other very nasty event.

Anyways... sign me up as a player as soon as you are ready.

[WSzaboPeter]

That thing sounds great.

[Folket]

I would prefer to let both players play both nations and give 1 point for each turns you defeat your opponent before turnh 100. Games end in a draw at turn 100. Or 50 if people like that better.

After people play thier game using any settinsg they agre on, they put up the score on the wiki and whoever wants to administer this recalculates wins/draws/losses into Elo change.

Every new player should have an ELO of 1000, and each game should at most have an ELO change of 30.

[Folket]

I think this would be the easiest system and I would be intrested in playing a game tonight.

[Maltrease]

That is a very interesting idea Folket.

It seems like there are a lot ways to make a duel game work.

I like the idea of a treaty. Give 24 months before hostilities can start and suddently things like Misfortune 3 and Death 3 are no longer "no-brainers" for most builds.

Plus you can get a little more flavor of "big gun" stuff that you will never see otherwise in a duel.

[Saarud]

Meglabob: A Hall of Fame... what a great idea. You want some help getting eliminated from the rest of your games? The reason I beleive blesss RUSHING is to good for a 1v1 game is that in games with more than 2 players these things balance themselves out. It'll be hard for most nation to survive a Helheim bless rushing early on. You do have a point about playing on the standard settings. Anyhow right now we are just collecting ideas and discussing them.

Maltreas: Yeah I read that thread and waited for someone to take the initiativ to start a ladder of some sort. Borsuks idea is great and perhaps the right way to go. You also do have a point regarding maps. Hmm we need to hear more opinions.

Folket: Now that idea is just awsome, though it highly encourage bless rushing. I would like every strategy to be viable even the high scales one that just tries to outproduce your opponent. All these strategies can be applied to big MP games but in 1v1 games blessrushing will be way too über in any case.. me thinks.

[Folket]

It does not encourage bless rushing, only if the people agre to allow heavy blesses.

In each game the players agre on settings. I was refering to house rules as well.

As well as mods, version number, treaty turns, and all other things you can think of.

My idea is just let two players play games the way they like and record the results.

[Gandalf Parker]

We can all make suggestions but its going to get down to being that the method of the ladder is going to be up to whoever ends up doing it. And no matter what it is, some will feel that it doesnt reflect some method of play so they will be free to create another ladder. I think we will end up getting two or three ladders which everyone can use as general comparisons.

Actually, Im rather hoping it goes that way. Id rather have the "but I kicked you on xxxxx ladder" discussions than to have one supposedly "ultimate answer" on who is king. Things like that have killed games. I dont really think Dominions is susceptible to a single-ladder king strategist anyway. There are too many different types of games you can play.

By the way, the devs seem to like victory point games.