PBEM contest- Yes/ No ? - Why ?

[LouLong]

Hi lads,

I tried to organize a PBEM contest recently using the WWII Pacific conquest because it is both relatively short (50 turns, usually shorter) but active and because the game can be played by two people only, one for Japan, one for the Allies.

To my great dismay (correct word ?) only one person volunteered. So I am just wondering whether it is the idea of a contest that is wrong (for whatever reasons), the scenario chosen, the "rules" indicated, or for other (personal) reasons ?

So please tell me what you think/thought of the idea and if it is negative (as it was for most people), why ? Just for information purposes. No private data will be collected and used for any intelligence or marketing aim whatsoever ( ).

Thanks in advance.

Loulong

 

[DogBoy]

LouLong, the idea of a PBEM contest is nothing new. A bunch of guys here organized a ladder system about 2 years ago and it seemed to be doing pretty well. This is how it worked. Everybody who joined started out with something like 500 points. Then you would play someone in a game. THe winner would get 50 points and the loser would lose 50 points. The object, of course, was to wrack up as many points as you could. Then after a while, it just seemed to die. I haven't heard anything about it in over a year. Maybe it's still going on but I don't know. I think the problem was these games take a long time to play, especially if you don't set up many power hour sessions to finish a game. It's a good concept in theory, but bad in application.

 

[rcoutme]

Hi LouLong, what he said.

Just loses its flavor after a while.

 

[LouLong]

OK I get your point. And did not think it was a brand-new idea.
But what I had in mind was not a ladder style contest but a limited contest, for instance 8 players the first round (4 games), 4 players the second round (2 games), 2 players the last round (2 players) and then a winner and a runner-up. So quite circumstancial, not a long-term project.

 

[akots]

The idea is interesting. However, IMO, there are few problems. First, CDZ ladder is the most advanced and developed structure in terms of ranking. Even recent Skyfish story does not dimish its influence on PBEM players. Second, I don't like that particular scenario. It is not very well balanced. Starting a cage match from scratch would take longer time but is more fair. Also, as all Conquests, the WWII scenario has Preserve Random Seed Off option. Well, may be you can turn it on though, don't know.

As an alternative: how's about 2 - player contest on a symmetrical known map with no AI? The map can be small (tiny) and production set to AP to ensure that the game is finished by turn 200.

 

[LouLong]

It is not balanced, ok. That is why I proposed two games simultanously. In one you played as Japan, in the other as the Allies. Win both ? Then you win the round. One victory then the one who won the earliest gets the round.

But that was just an idea. Thought it would be more fun (means less people dropping) than with a standard epic-like game. Of course if you don't like modern warfare, especially at sea...

Preserve random seed is easy to change.