1v1 Duels... what are fair nation matches?

[Maltrease]

I do like the idea B0rsuk. Of course the ultimate test of skill would be to play the same map again (but switch sides).

[hako]

I do like the idea with the ladder, duels will be great, and we can play them much faster that standard PBEMs, just to agree some hours and you can play lots of turns each day...
Only question, who's gonna arrange this legaue

[Gandalf Parker]

It sounds good but I suspect we would end up proving that there is rock-paper-scissors balance in the game. Without other nations to affect the ups and downs in the game, some combos would be pretty pre-decided. Especially since it would only represent the results of that nation on a small map which is very different.

What Id like to see are competitions of Ulm-vs-Ulm and Ermor-vs-Ermor. But that would be such an unusual situation that they would have to change their tactics and it wouldnt prove much.

Maybe someone could create a ladder mod that gives us a single nation which can support everyones play style, and use it as a standard base to test each other.

Or possibly, ladders of Player-vs-AI with a final score being recorded so that player A's score of Ermor-vs-AI could be compared against player B's score of Ermor-vs-AI. Use a very generic AI. Maybe a modded one using indepts.

[Maltrease]

I think if both people agree on map types you can come up with some fair matches. You might counter a strong bless rush nation vs a "take time to develop" nation by making indies relatively weak, and set the provences to 80 or 100 (for 2 people).

With b0rsuk's idea you would have 1 person pick all the variables for both nation and then let the second player pick the nation they want to play.

While a mirror match (with a mirror map) would be the ultimate balanced test it doesn't sound nearly as fun to me.

Another idea that might be a lot of fun is to have each person pick 2 nations. So its a 2v2 but each person controls their 2 sides. This might work out some of the rock paper scissors issues while still eliminating the unpredictable nature of diplomacy.

The nice thing about a 1v1 duel is even if you have a hard time cordinating a time to play together you still get to take 2 turns at a time.

[Saarud]

Great idea. I'd love to see a ladder of some kind. I think all of your ideas are great even though it sounds abit boring playing against an identical matchup.

I'd like more the concept of each player chosing a nation and then starting two games one with your choice of nation the other with your opponents choice of nation, playing both games at the same time and the first to lose either game lose the match.

Whatever system used what would be the most fair game settings all around?

edit: Perhaps starting with random nations would be a good idea because I think some people specializes in certain nation with bless rushing and that doesn't show anything about the skill of the game. Also playing random nations can be fun as you could get nations you don't often use.

[mathusalem]

Saarud, I don't like your solution, because it's force Fire 9/ Water 9 bless rush strategie

[Blofeld]

MA Ermor vs MA Pythium seems an interesting match.
Majority of their troops are the same, with variations in sacreds, elite infantry and lizard cataphracts.
Mages and reanimation make an obvious difference betwwen them, and the background story is perfect for a believable civil war scenario.

[Saarud]

mathusalem said:
Saarud, I don't like your solution, because it's force Fire 9/ Water 9 bless rush strategie

You have a point about F9W9 bless rush strategy but this applies to all 1v1 games. I think with the right settings this can be evened out abit (unless you play Vanheim that is ). It should be a viable strategy but not the only one.