CTWL1 Interest Thread

[ChrTh]

I'm thinking of creating the first in a series of "Weakest Link" games. Here's how it would work:

7 Players (not me, I'm just moderating here) in a tough-scenario--but winnable--Emperor game. 10 turns each, after every 2 rotations, the players vote off the "Weakest Link"--the player whom the majority feel has not been doing the best job (voting would be via IMs to me, and I wouldn't reveal who voted against whom, in order to eliminate pettiness; in the case of a tie, I will be the tiebreaker). After 10 rotations, we would be down to 2 players, who play out the rest of the game, alternating every 10 turns. After the game is over, the ousted 5 select the strongest link from the remaining 2, who is declared winner.

The 7 players would be the creme de la creme of the SG players on this board. To be selected as a member of this game, you'd have to basically submit a resume of your accomplishments in order to be judged worthy or not (not all versions of CTWL will have this criteria, it'll change game to game). Obviously, if not a lot of the high-caliber players on this board elect to participate--but enough interest is present--I'll make an 'easier' game and less stringest requirements for joining.

If you like the idea, let me know; if you think it sucks, let me know (politely )--also let me know if my math for #of turns is screwy

 

[Ville]

That's good idea
I will join if it's 1.14f.
(I'm sure I'm the first weakest link )

 

[Matt_G]

7x10x2=140 turns
6x10x2=120 turns
5x10x2=100 turns

Right here you are already at 1790 AD.
You need to make it every rotation, not 2 rotations.......or you could keep it every 2 rotations but eliminate 2 players after 2 rotations.

7x10x2=140 turns
5x10x2=100 turns
3x10x2=60 turns=1550 AD, I think. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
Then just eliminate 1 here. Of course, if the team is strong it will already be over by 1550 AD.........

 

[Ville]

No, it can't be strong when I'm in
I have won only once in Monarch and if this is in Emperor I'm dead after first round

 

[ChrTh]

Thanks Matt. I think 2 rotations before the first vote, then 1 rotation for the subsequent votes would work then, am I right?

 

[Matt_G]

Here is where the breaks will be in years.

7x10x2=140 turns. First player eliminated at 250 AD.

6x10x1=60 turns, 200 turns total. Second player eliminated at 850 AD.

5x10x1=50=250 turns. Third player eliminated at 1300 AD.

4x10x1=40=290 turns. Fourth player eliminated at 1500 AD.

3x10=30=320 turns. Fifth player eliminated at 1560 AD.

So you're down to 2 players in 1560 AD. Your call, most games are long decided by this time. If you cut it to 6 players to start, here is how that would break down.

6x10x2=120 turns. First player eliminated at 150 BC.
5x10x1=50=170 turns. Second player eliminated at 550 AD.
4x10x1=40=210 turns. Third player eliminated in 950 AD.
3x10x1=30=240 turns. Fourth player eliminated in 1250 AD.

Down to 2 players in 1250 AD with 6 vs. 1560 AD with 7.

Just an FYI.
First 25 turns are 50 years per->2750 BC.
Next 25 are 40 per-> 1750 BC
Next 40 are 25 per-> 750 BC
Next 50 are 20 per-> 250 AD
Next 100 are 10 per-> 1250 AD
Next 100 are 5 per-> 1750 AD
Next 100 are 2 per-> 1950 AD
Last 100 are 1 per-> 2050 AD
540 total turns

 

[ChrTh]

Ok, thanks Matt I'll see what the interest is, perhaps 6 is the way to go

 

[LKendter]

This is NOT a signup.

However, do you really want it down to just 2 players at the end?
I would never sign up for a 2 player SG as to little time between turns. I think the end should be 3 players.

 

[ChrTh]

3 players would be good, too, but then you're back to not eliminating everyone else until the 1500s (if you start with 7), or only voting half the players off (if you start with 6)...perhaps dropping from 10 turns to 5 per player after you drop to 5 (from 7)...but then is 5 turns enough to judge a player?

I'm beginning to have a vague feeling that the game isn't long enough to support this format

 

[Nad]

I am NOT one of the best players on this board but I'll play if you have any spaces - this sounds too crazy to pass up. And I'll expect some decent Anne Robinson impressions, ChrTh

 

[Sirp]

If you want the 'cream of the crop' in terms of good players around, then don't you think something a little harder than emperor would be best?

Most of the best players aren't any pressure at all under emperor. No cracks will be exposed, the person who is voted out will simply be the person who dominated the AI marginally less convincingly than everyone else.

Also consider that this encourages players to harshly criticize others to make them look like the 'weakest link'.

You also might want to start with six players, since I think the game would be over too soon for seven.

Further, some players have a 'reputation' as being very good players. Since 10 turns might not be nearly enough basis for comparison, especially in some circumstances, I think it's likely that players will simply get voted off due to them not having a reputation that precedes them. On the other hand, if players were cutthroat competitive, the players with the best reputations *would* get voted off, not because they are the worst players, but because they are the *best* players and thus the greatest threat to one's survival. Just like on the tv show...

-Sirp.

 

[Nad]

Sirp is right in all the points he makes there but I think the essential fact is that anyone who signs up should be prepared for that and should just have a laugh and not take it too seriously

 

[Sirp]

Nad: True....I am tempted to sign up myself, I must admit

I was really just pointing out all the possible problems I could see rather than saying "oh my gosh, this is an awful idea!"

-Sirp.

 

[Skyfish]

I definitely like the idea
I agree with Sirp that a Deity game would be better for me but preferably not modded or heavily modified map.

 

[amirsan]

How do we sign up then?? I am interested!!!

 

[ChrTh]

I was never able to get the math to work. If someone else wants to take a stab at it, they're more than welcome

 

[Sirp]

The math to work? Huh?

 

[Skyfish]

Sirp can certainly work out any math we'd ever need
But which math ?
If it's just about the number of turns, seems to me Matt_G did a pretty good job at it already, and is it that important anyway ?

 

[ChrTh]

I couldn't find a way to give a player enough turns to be fairly judged and at the same time allow enough players to get voted off before the game ended. There's not enough turns built into the game.

Hence, this post:
3 players (competing at the end) would be good, too, but then you're back to not eliminating everyone else until the 1500s (if you start with 7), or only voting half the players off (if you start with 6)...perhaps dropping from 10 turns to 5 per player after you drop to 5 (from 7)...but then is 5 turns enough to judge a player?

 

[Sirp]

Well, I think there are all sorts of problems we can theorize over it, but...as long as everyone promises not to take it too seriously, I think there's enough interest to just go ahead anyway

-Sirp.