Just a quick question on how you get involved in high quality FFA games? So far I've mostly played in 1v1s, which are a fun way to pass 10 minutes or so but get a bit samey after a while, and the occasional FFA that I've spotted floating to the surface of the open games tab. Whilst these FFA games have been a lot of fun, I get the distinct impression that most of the players aren't trying all that hard.

So how do you go about getting stuck into a right bastard (excuse my French) of a bloodthirsty Free For All? I'm assuming it involves something to do with the clan system I've vaguely heard about, or the full on membership? Although if there's a way you can do it without these it'd be great ;).

I'd recommend playing in the ffa tournaments, or any tournament really if you want high quality games. After playing in some tournaments, you'll be added to peoples invite lists, and will get invited to tournaments that are not open to everyone.

You know it may sound crazy but every time I've looked at the tournaments page before I've quickly glanced at a sea of black and not noticed the "open tournaments" link :p. Cheers for the tip!

anyway, i dont know the reason but most expert players dont enjoy ffa games all that much, so u will always get a significant amount of bad players in ffa games

I think its because all ffas involve a certain amount of luck, take the scrabble game, usually in a 4 ffa 1 person will be on the top/bottom and 3 opposite, which pretty much gives a guaranteed win.
another scenario is a noob and 1 player on the bottom and 2 good players on the top, also making it fully based on luck.


Some ffa games are amazing, but they're pretty rare. One reliable way to get a really balanced ffa is to make a custom game, but even then it usually ends up with a lot of 2V1ing.

meaning: most exper players r smart enough not to be able to control more than 1 variable

It seems strange that the FFA (which is most like the game on which this site is based) isn't held in higher regard. 2v1s will happen a lot, yes, but surely the skill is making sure you're not the 1, or breaking up the 2 if you are?

Luck plays a large part in all games, but it can't play too huge a part in FFAs or changed name's stats wouldn't be so good.

i dont have any problems with 2v1, my problem is wqhen ppl play in ateam disregardless of what will ahppen to them, just giving the game away to their team amte..... that is not what i suppose dto happen. u have a team, while hopin to win: meaning, and many ppl will ahte me for this, u backstab

@ R+A=R: Well said, that man!

I've yet to understand why so many people here hate the idea of a stab in FFA when it's clear (at least to me) that a culture in which stabs are considered a positive tactic will breed far more enjoyable games. Have you ever played Diplomacy, out of interest?

Ps... Diplomacy is home to backstabbing and betrayal where that kind of play in encourage.

I give this quote credit to Octavious as he was the one who said it.

:)

BigPie speaks the truth :). Over on WebDiplomacy.net was where I heard of Warlight in the first place. A similar and yet very different sort of game.

i suggest just creating a game and playing around with the settings to make a game that you think is/encourages "quality".
i also assume multi-day-games usually have a higher quality then real-time, although i could be wrong in that, and tournaments have more quality then non-tournaments(especially after the first few rounds)

Quality, by my definition, just means difficult to win. Am I right in assuming that tournaments are usually multi-day affairs?

All tournaments are multi-day games, with the exception of Lolwut's live tournaments. Even those, though, are multi-day games where you agree to play in real time.

don't get me wrong, i wasn't complaining about how hard they were. i have a 70% win rate in 3 ffas (higher than my 64% in 1V1) because i almost always manipulate it so that each player thinks he's allied with me against the other while i grab bonuses and stockpile =p
my 4-6 player ffa stats range from 30-45%, and even though i've only won 1 huge ffa (a 17 player one) i arrive second relatively often.

i think that some maps work better in ffas than others, for example on the (older) roman map in 3 ffas every single game its 2 players on one side and 1 on the other. i usually win anyway, even if i have to beat them one after the other without them even meeting, but it makes things a lot harder =p

Ffa are for their own nature luck dependent. You can be an awesome player, but if you get unlucky picks you will lose, in this very cases the only choice is to alliate with people and then backstab them (it is ffa not team game so backstabbing is allowed) but then everybody starts to get mad, so my suggestion is to never make truces and if you have unlucky picks you just have to fight and lose, accepting the possible unluck in picking beacuse you joined a ffa.
This doesnt mean that ffa are totally luck dependent, sometimes ffa can become very balanced and then the stronger player is supposed to win. But once again if you are unlucky, skills are not so relevant in a ffa.
By this descrpition is not difficult to understand why good players dont play often ffas. But this of course doesnt mean that they are not funny.

I disagree. I win half my FFA games without backstabbing my ally. Betrayal is not the only way. You could be better off going solo if you think about it.

"if you get unlucky picks you will lose, in this very cases the only choice is to alliate with people and then backstab them" reading is not so difficult right?

It should be made very clear in the rules whether or not truces are allowed. I hate it when you end up beside someone who says that truces immoral while getting 3V1ed in a 5 ffa ^^

Truces are absolutely necessary in some games, in an ffa i just started with warlighters i ended up first turn in contact with someone (1 territory each to start) and neither of us has any quick access to bonuses, so it'd just be a waiting match if we didn't have a truce. instead, we decided to spread in our own direction and agreed not to backstab eachother without a 2 turn warning, since our positions are so exposed. RP made a tournament where backstabbing was encouraged, and i thought that was a really cool idea, since it allows for short term truces.

The only problem is that i somehow ended up as an orc who doesn't understand anything more complicated than "i kill you. you die. deal?" as diplomacy =(