Escape (First Crack Variant) Format Discussion

[dok]

Originally Posted by Ixe

@dok , while you did rapidly beat your opponents in those matches, it seems that you at the very least interacted with them during it to some degree. You had to utilize your figures to make a few attacks and claim open glyphs while they attacked you back.

I made some attacks, but I could have rolled zero skulls in those first two games and I would have won them. I don't see it as any different than what you are complaining about vis-a-vis Escape.

In both formats these "non-interactive" wins, as you call it, are difficult when your opponent is aware and trying to prevent it, with the exception of a few oddball matchups. The self-kill thing does make it a little more do-able in Escape, which is a problem.

Originally Posted by Ixe

It is admittedly a tough balance to strike. If escaping becomes too hard, the game will just devolve into a kill 'em all and kind of defeat the point of the format.

That is my concern as well.

Really, except for speedy flying heroes, escaping is plenty hard. In many matchups, you can turn it into kill 'em all if that's your intention. This change would make it extremely hard to use an escape-centered strategy if your opponent has any intention of denying it.

Originally Posted by Ixe

You don't believe units that are using some form of bonding should escape? That certainly hurts some builds (like my ninja army), but it may not be the worst thing.

I also think it's a little too extreme to limit it to an OM reveal on that specific figure as opposed to allowing escape on bonding turns. Especially since our most worrisome units are not bonding figures.

Originally Posted by Ixe

In any case, if we playtest maps and we playtest figures, I don't see why we shouldn't playtest formats. Any proposed change should probably get a few probing games to see how it shakes out and if it's something to roll in to another tournament.

FWIW we do test formats, and Escape has actually been used at live events before without the "self-kill" strategy emerging.

Originally Posted by kevindola

I also like the penalty points or 1/2 points back for figures on the field, but I worry about adding complexity to an already mildly complex format.

Same. I slightly prefer the self-kill restrictions because they will come up less often. With the 1/2 points refund you need to calculate it nearly every game.

"If a figure you control is destroyed when targeted for an attack, or chosen for a special power that inflicts wounds, by another figure you control, the destroyed figure counts negative towards your Escaped points total."

[Ixe]

Originally Posted by dok

FWIW we do test formats, and Escape has actually been used at live events before without the "self-kill" strategy emerging.

I'm sorry if it came across that I was implying that the format was not tested before. I know that a lot of work and effort goes into organizing these tournaments and I am certain that the organizers do no construct them haphazardly. I know too well that things can slip through the cracks and strategies that you had not considered can be taken advantage of.

I more meant to ensure that any changes to the format should be treated by the same testing standards we submit everything else to to make sure that it plays in a satisfactory way.

[infectedsloth]

If you pick and play well and still get screwed by the format you can complain all you want. If you play or pick poorly I don't really care about your opinion. The way I've seen people pick and play is atrocious. This format isn't perfect, but stop setting yourself up for failure.

Funny you bring up our treasure quest game dok. I was going to do the same thing when I started reading this thread.

Before that game I had only played with treasure glyphs once or twice. I threw together a army at the last minute out of very limited figure because they needed one more player. I got a quick once over of the rule, then played dok. I got absolutely rolled. I had no idea what I was doing, the game was over in no time. I didn't complain, it wasn't treasure quest fault I brought a bad army and played bad.

[Foudzing]

A format where killing your own figures can give you the win is not a good format.

It's not very common tho because with 99% of the armies you can't kill your very last figure (only Deathstrike, Alastar, Azurite, Ulfrid, DW7000 can oo it easily and some figures with spalsh damage like DW9000 can do it too). Or if the opponent have mandatory power such as counterstrike.

So as you can't kill your last figure you can't end the game whenever you want.

That is said for the 1% I would vote against this format.

It's not its only drawback, it's very complicated for what it offers in my opinion.

Let's go back to basics. Kill stuff and win.

[vegietarian18]

Now that the week is over, I'm going to give my thoughts on Escape.

I feel Escape has a big fundamental issue that I'm not sure any of the rules changes can address. "Killing your own figures counts against you for Escape points" is a very fair rule, but it wouldn't have impacted any of the games. "No attacks on your own figures" should be a rule, but again, it would not have impacted any games (that I know of. I didn't see them all).

The problem is that in Escape, the amount of points Escaped doesn't actually impact the board state or give an actual advantage until all of one player's figures are gone. It doesn't actually matter if you escape Cyprien (until the game ends); it actually hurts you in the short term since you are essentially destroying your own figure by escaping it. So once you start escaping your figures, you begin to fall incredibly behind in board presence. Once you hit that point, the only viable strategy is suicide, to force the points you've escaped to matter.

(Now, the most effective suicidal strategy is not attacking your own figures, unless you have some way to eliminate your entire board in one turn. I was able to do that in my Esenwein Family Death Run game, but I would say that situations like that rarely occur. The best way to quickly end the game is to fling your own figures like projectiles at the enemy startzone. Take as many disengages as you need to get there; it doesn't matter because your figures are either dying or escaping and both of them get you closer to your win condition.)

But anyway, I don't think a format where killing your own guys is a top tier strategy is a good thing. Competitive Heroscape at its core is about finding advantages, and it is quite hard to find an advantage against an opponent who is just ignoring your army.

I also dislike formats where you can lose before you realize what your opponent's strategy is. You can say that belgarath should have seen my plan coming, but the fact is, after armies were chosen and order markers were set, he had a 0% chance of winning the game. Nothing he could have done or rolled could have stopped me once Marcu left his startzone, giving me the opening to score. I don't know if it's even possible to find another game where that is true.

[dok]

After the games that launched this discussion, there weren't any more self-kill fueled games. There were a number of tense endgames where it came down to whether a key hero could get out.

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

"Killing your own figures counts against you for Escape points" is a very fair rule, but it wouldn't have impacted any of the games. "No attacks on your own figures" should be a rule, but again, it would not have impacted any games (that I know of. I didn't see them all).

Well, it would have short-circuited some strategies, including the one you used. You can say you would have won anyway, but that's really not relevant to the question at hand.

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

The problem is that in Escape, the amount of points Escaped doesn't actually impact the board state or give an actual advantage until all of one player's figures are gone. It doesn't actually matter if you escape Cyprien (until the game ends); it actually hurts you in the short term since you are essentially destroying your own figure by escaping it.

That's a feature not a bug; the tension between escaping with a figure and keeping it around to do stuff is one of the things that makes the format interesting.

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

So once you start escaping your figures, you begin to fall incredibly behind in board presence. Once you hit that point, the only viable strategy is suicide, to force the points you've escaped to matter.

It doesn't always play out that way, but yes, once you have a lead you usually want to get your figures out to close the game out.

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

(Now, the most effective suicidal strategy is not attacking your own figures, unless you have some way to eliminate your entire board in one turn. I was able to do that in my Esenwein Family Death Run game, but I would say that situations like that rarely occur. The best way to quickly end the game is to fling your own figures like projectiles at the enemy startzone. Take as many disengages as you need to get there; it doesn't matter because your figures are either dying or escaping and both of them get you closer to your win condition.)

That's only true if your opponent is sitting on his hands, not doing any escapes of his own. In some games, that sacrificed board position can lead to giving up the lead in escaped points. (Kinseth had the lead, then Asher took the lead away before killing the last hero on his escape run.)

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

But anyway, I don't think a format where killing your own guys is a top tier strategy is a good thing. Competitive Heroscape at its core is about finding advantages, and it is quite hard to find an advantage against an opponent who is just ignoring your army.

Much like in Treasure Quest, there are ways to punish an opponent who tries to ignore your army.

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

I also dislike formats where you can lose before you realize what your opponent's strategy is.

I'm starting to think you dislike Treasure Quest too. (OK, I already thought that.)

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

You can say that belgarath should have seen my plan coming, but the fact is, after armies were chosen and order markers were set, he had a 0% chance of winning the game. Nothing he could have done or rolled could have stopped me once Marcu left his startzone, giving me the opening to score. I don't know if it's even possible to find another game where that is true.

Haha. There are plenty of formats where it's impossible to win if we assume that the other player does exactly the wrong thing for their first three turns.

Really, that game was lost when the armies were chosen, anyway. It's not an illustrative example, except that it shows the self-kill exploit that I would want to avoid in the future.

[vegietarian18]

Unfortunately, my dad and I only have two games we can play in. Just because everyone didn't use the strategy doesn't mean it isn't an issue. It seems your focus is on the fact that suicide isn't a top tier strategy. I feel it is; my dad and I both used it and won our games. I'm not really sure what more evidence I can give. There is more work needed to fix Escape than "you can't attack your own figures". I don't know what the solution is, but I would like to see more testing done with the changed format than was done with the original if it is to be used online again.

[dok]

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

Unfortunately, my dad and I only have two games we can play in. Just because everyone didn't use the strategy doesn't mean it isn't an issue.

Oh I see that, and I understand you only have your two games to look at. However, they were the most extreme games of the round by far, so do take that into account. Moreover, it's not as though nobody else considered this and you guys were just strategically ahead of us all. In most other games, this approach was simply not an option, due to the nature of the matchup and what the opposing player did.

Originally Posted by vegietarian18

It seems your focus is on the fact that suicide isn't a top tier strategy. I feel it is; my dad and I both used it and won our games. I'm not really sure what more evidence I can give.

No, I definitely see it as an issue; it's something I want to fix.

My point is more that if both players are aware of the implications of the format, and the armies are reasonably balanced, then there's a lot of strategy in taking down your opponent's potential escaping heroes, blocking escapes, and trying to get the game to end while you hold a lead. The self-kills are a problem, but IMO the reckless aggression once you have a lead is not.

When one player is underprepared or undermanned, then the format gets weird for sure, but I don't think your game was remotely representative of what happened across the entire round, nor of what the format would lead to if people played it a lot.

[Foudzing]

100% agree with Vegie. Once you have a good amount of escaped points you can just go cross map rushing the opponent's SZ like a retard and the opponent can do nothing but doing the same thing. Because if he kills your figures he loses the game and trying to block you from escaping is impossible because if he does he can't escape himself.
That leads to a ridiculous thing where both armies cross the map without fighting.

Also the full-scoring for the heroes makes this incredibly random.

Besides randomness and weird games (which could be fun I agree) I don't see what this format offers more than Capture the flag.

One thing you could do tho is making escaping more difficult for example by doing it at the beginning of the turn and not at the end.

Because as it's right now it's basically impossible to stop flying heroes from escaping with only 16 figures. They just have to find a place where there is only one or two squads figures adjacent, kill them and escape.

You say it's the same as Treasure Quest I don't agree at all. In treasure Quest an opponent who ignores your army and rush glyphs you kill his big hero and he's ****ed up. In escape an opponent who ignores your army and escape gives him 100% a lead in the game.

First Crack thing is cool tho. We should have more half first-crack/half bring 2 seasons in the future.

[Ixe]

Okay, let's see if I can sum this up so we're all on the same page. Ideally, this format should provide fun tension between short and long term goals during play. Having figures escape negatively impacts your immediate board presence but gets you points for the end game victory. Knowing when to escape figures sounds fun and it seems that at least a few games functioned as intended.

As @vegietarian18 has pointed out, a few players have recognized the conflict between short and long term goals and instead sought strategies with what they had available to bridge the gap between the two and force the end game as quickly as possible. This has been through the destruction of their own figures after escaping a certain number of points, but the argument is that it can extend to just having your remaining figures ignore the opponent and do a suicide run at the enemy start zone. Your opponent can't kill them else trigger the end of the game.

How do you counter these strategies? You can start scoring, too, but a game where you and your opponent just sprint past each other doesn't sound very fun or interactive. You can play a defensive strategy and gum up the start zone, but the argument appears to be that such a tactic is challenging with a low figure count to stop certain flying figures from getting through, and all the while these are figures you are not mobilizing to score. In any case, these available strategies seem to be largely set upon picking armies with little opportunity to adjust course given how your opponent plays.

Personally, I'd say that half-points at the end along with larger armies is probably what is needed, or at least would go a long way. Imagine how inappropriate this format would be if you only had something like 140 pt armies for each side. Almost nothing could stop a figure like Nicholas from immediately ending the game in the first turn. Larger armies with more figures would then be that much harder to mobilize and have escape, making the bridge between short term losses and long term payout that much harder to immediately gap. The half points for the remaining is extra insurance, since scoring early points and having some clever means of quickly clearing out the rest still won't insure victory. There is a balance to strike where it all doesn't devolve into a kill-'em-all, but squeezing figures through the cracks and having them escape instead of being destroyed does seem to be a good thing.

Even when the format was operating a little more as intended, however, it did feel a little strange to me. I had employed a strategy where I scored a certain number of points and then killed my opponent's army total below that number. Informing my opponent of my mathematical victory felt pretty anticlimactic, where it ended not with a bang but with a whimper. This is a risk for even classic kill-everything formats and I know others had tense game play throughout so I don't think it's necessarily significant. Maybe just something to keep an eye on if a lot of other games pan out that way.

[vegietarian18]

Well, Escape has been Improved. Gone are the days of reckless suicide towards your opponent’s start zone. I, for one, thought the format was much better, although I’m not sure why I’d play it over standard.

There’s still some fine-tuning to do though. Some players say that increased difficulty in escaping figures had led to the mindless turtling to prevent the opponent from scoring. This is a problem, because the podding player has nothing to do, so of course the rushing player's time is going to be longer. I’ve pasted the relevant content in this post so we can have a springboard for discussion on how to fix this.

[Kinseth]

My language wasn't the best last night, and I was heated. I would prefer that you not copy and paste my discussion in here given those circumstances. If you want to summarize my complaints, than that is fine.

Thanks in advance.