Settings and Modifiers by gxhedron

[meager robin]

Welcome @loud lark! Any feedback from the community will show up here.
Please note that this thread discussion is not shared with SMG.
It is solely for the RISK Community to discuss ideas & provide constructive feedback!

[loud lark]

This may be a controversial opinion, yet I feel that the reconnection feature just needs to be completely removed. Believe it or not ... I am very much in the camp that thinks removing a feature, instead of fixing it, isn't necessary. I also understand Risk: Global Domination is being developed as a mobile game first. Most players probably do primarily play on their mobile networks. This causes all kinds of connectivity issues as they migrate to and from cell towers. Naturally a reconnection feature seems like a great idea.

However, the current system is too easily exploited by players who are too impatient to play fairly. Something needs to be drastically changed, or eventually players will get bored of the nonsense. Maybe just an option to turn reconnections off will do. I don't know.

Didn't feel this needed to be posted with the idea itself.

[desert stone]

as someone who has been on a laptop, disconnected from full internet- restarted the game, then restarted the laptop to finally get back. I 'm against the hardline, reining in things perhaps, I don't know, I'll agree there is a problem, and I don't have any alternative suggestions. I just know it's the internet, and sometimes it screws up. All these years of improvement has reduced the odds a lot, but it still happens, and it's not rare. Because you're connection is always only as strong as it's weakest redirect. And with VPNs being popular a lot of redirection is happening, even when you aren't using one.

maybe instead of an all/nothing active/inactive bots, make bots that replace a player inactive for a number of turns before taking action. or heck, all bots have like a 3 turn wait timer where they just stack and pass?

[gentle bison]

Neutral vote because I think it addresses a good concern however I think the suggestion is also too harsh,

It may be better to look at something like:

• maximum offline time: 15m, 30m, 1h, unlimited
• maximum reconnect time (per event): 1 minute, 3 minutes, 5 minutes, 10 minutes

What it'd mean is that you are restricting both:

• individual disconnections from exceeding X time to prevent abuse
• total disconnected time from exceeding X time to prevent abuse

Even 1m & 3m isn't a great idea for individual tbh, but it could work better in private games - but providing a maximum limit ensures that you won't have people botting out 'up to timer' in X instances in case they genuinely disconnect briefly too (and get booted for it)

[loud lark]

I play a lot of fixed card games. I don't mind the standoffs that come with them. I also like the map to matter more in the endgame rather than the luck factor of turn order and who gets the trade in on 3 first at the end. Makes being one of the final two alive more engaging to me, if it is close enough.

In my experience, a player just needs to disconnect once to change the outcome of the game. They don't even need to be gone that long. The more disconnections/going offline I see from a player, I am more inclined to believe they are trying to exploit the feature to their advantage.

Your ideas are good. I like them as well. Maximum disconnect per event is looks ok. However, Maximum offline looks too generous to me. What keeps someone from disconnecting for 45 sec / 2.5 min / 4.5 min / 9 min then coming back from time to time if they have a bank of 15m / 30m / 60m?

I don't feel like anyone really should need more than a few minutes, in a legitimate disconnect issue. I don't see much issue with asking players to make sure their connections are stable enough for play.

Maybe there should be a limit to number of disconnections per a certain timeframe. Maybe those could be added between On and Off in my suggestion.

Off would be first disconnection, a player wouldn't be able to return. Then maybe it could be something like more than 3 / 5 / 10 disconnections in 5 min / 8 min / 15 min, respectively a player wouldn't be able to return. On would mean reconnections would work as they do now, or normally.

[sullen yoke]

I could in theory tolerate blitz if we only allowed one attack per turn however the issue is you will be punishing someone who quits after they get fucked over by the random dice rolls happening during bitz that decides that 50 armies will lose to 10 armies for some reason just to take a territory. The only time I would expect this is if I was normal rolling.

[loud lark]

Games can have either Fixed or Progressive card trades.

Fixed is when Infantry, Cavalry, or Artillery Sets, respectively give you 4, 6 or 8 troops for the entire game. Sets for one of each, or all three, gives you 10. The maximum you can get for any trade is 12. This is if you have a territory for one of the cards you are trading.

Progressive cards means the trades get larger each time a player trades. First player to trade gets 4 troops. After that the next players to trade in it goes: 6, 8, 10, 12, 15. Then it goes up every 5 troops from there.