Regarding Blockbox Garbage

[I_AM_SAND]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]the amount of garbage the player will send is based on the garbage system.[/quote]

yes, not sure what you're trying to say here.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]And your fair garbage system is based on better players winning against weaker players.
See the problem here?[/quote]

yes, because better players are suppose to beat weaker players. the game shouldn't try to even them out. winning should be based on skill alone.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Calling a game fair on unfair, makes no sense.[/quote]

it would totally be fair. not sure what you're saying.

[caffeine]

No need to dive into ontological metaphysics here, oliv. A game needs nothing more to be fair than for all players simply having equal opportunities to win (not equal outcomes of winning and losing).

Fair: Player A attacks and all other opponents receive the same number of garbage rows.

Unfair: Player A attacks and most of the opponents receive X garbage rows, but a couple receive Y. You can't make up for this later by making the next attack send to the player who's received the least garbage, or send the excess to a random player, or even take turns every attack. In this particular instance of the game, the garbage has been unfairly distributed period.

People have problems with "send 2 all" because games go by so fast. My solution was to reduce all attacks based on however many players are left. For example, if there are 5 players left, a Tetris sends 2 lines to everyone. When there are 4 players left, a Tetris sends 3 lines to everyone, and so on with the other attacks being reduced down as well. This keeps the game fair and enables games to last longer.

I've said before that I prefer games "super fast and brutally masochistic," but since people seem to like them drawn out, this is the best solution I can think of.

[meow]

tetris is ALL about sending lines. you downstack so you can send more lines.

anyways, deniax said we can test:

2/3 players:
4 lines send 4
3 lines send 2
2 lines send 1

4/5 players:
4 lines send 3
3 lines send 1
2 lines send .5

he's changing it pretty soon.

i feel that the suggested alternative above for 4/5 players will drag the match out... how about for 4/5 player games:
4 sends 3
3 sends 2
2 sends 1

we haven't seen how fast the matches end with unreduced lines nor do we know whether most people dislike the fast paced games. i know i hate being the first to lose in a 5 player match because i have to wait forever for the next round.

in tetrinet2, we had 6 players with unreduced garbage and downstacking was harder (personal opinion), but the game was still balanced and i rarely heard a complaint about the fast paced games. instead, we got a thrill each round trying as fast as we could do pull off tetrises and then hope to survive the incoming onslaught. the major difference between blockbox and tetrinet2 is that the fast players win more consistently in blockbox because they downstack faster. tetrinet2 had some random luck because the fast players could die easily themselves.

[exchliore]

@I AM SAND

The better player is not always the player who sends the most lines (although there is a correlation).  If games were determined by apm, then tetris game play would be drastically different.

In this respect, building a garbage distribution system for players who send the most lines would also be unfair.  There are many different types of competitive play, a "fair" garbage system should account for more than just sending lines.

A better player at a given game, is the player that wins the most

[clincher]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]i feel that the suggested alternative above for 4/5 players will drag the match out... how about for 4/5 player games:
4 sends 3
3 sends 2
2 sends 1[/quote]
Then tetrises wouldn't be so strong.
I don't like that maybe we should try Tnet style, no reduced garbage and garbage to all.

[jujube]

Then tetrises wouldn't be so strong.
I don't like that maybe we should try Tnet style, no reduced garbage and garbage to all.

well, meow's suggestion sounds like a good compromise. in a 5 player game, if the other 4 players all made tetrises you would get 12 lines, instead of 16 if full garbage was sent. 12 is something you can stack on top of, so you have the option to continue playing aggressively, or you can downstack. with 16 you can really only downstack.

and i think if a tetris sends 3, a triple has to send 2 (not 1). i don't see how clearing one extra line could make a tetris 3 times better, unless you're playing with a memoryless randomizer (and that's debatable too).

[oliv]

.