Actual data will do a great deal towards backing up any claims or changes in this regard. Too many opinions, "obvious" pieces of common sense, and anecdotal confusion here I would suspect...
Brad
- eliminate neutrals
Some variation on that might be a format that means that it encourages
earlier declarations and keeps the mix of neutrals spread. So that you
don't get your 4:1 or 5:0 split (I take Laurence's point that you can win
with 14v11 but it's not likely in most cases).
I could check through the data to show that the split of Neutrals is the
determining factor in who wins games but that would take a lot of work to
do and even if I proved that there was a strong correlation (I'm pretty
sure it's the case btw) I'm not sure that it would convince players.
How would it show that it's the determining factor? Most players want to
win. Most neutrals are going to join, at the very least, a side they think
can win, probably the side they think's most likely to win. Neutrals make
it more likely that a side will win, but usually the side most likely to
win has already become apparent. They just make it more certain.
So if 95% of games are won by teams who have the most ex-neutrals, that
doesn't prove that that's why they won, any more than the fact that they
have more gold, armies and characters. They have all those things, and
used them to complete their victory, because they played better and
negotiated better.
I admit there are exceptions, having recently heard complaints about
neutrals in open games who were pre-decided, but I don't think that's
common. Even when it is, other neutrals often declare contrary to balance
early declarations if, and only if they believe they were pre-decided and
if they believe that the injured allegiance is in with a hope.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
···
At 19:22 26/05/2005, Brad Brunet wrote:
I could check through the data to show that the split of Neutrals is the
determining factor in who wins games but that would take a lot of work to
do and even if I proved that there was a strong correlation (I'm pretty
sure it's the case btw) I'm not sure that it would convince players.
