EU+ 3v3 Non-Written Rules?

Hey quick game players,

I'd like to start a few EU+ 3v3 for casual players.

Are their some prevalent accepted rules as to starting countries?
I mean, we could compile stats for 100 games and deduce by ourselves a posteriori that no, we should not have a Germany-Turkey-Ukraine team, let's say. But ... why not take advantage of the huge quick community's experience on the matter?

So ... are there some no-nos in terms of teams? Any specific non-written rules we should follow to maximize the balance of those Eu+ games?

Thank you in advance

PS: Obviously, until turn 0 is programmed, we might have to adapt those "rules" (to compensate the extra turn of income before reinforcements, and/or the turn 1 movement of infantry, if allowed)

Hey,

- Turkey and Ukraine not in same team
- Germany and United Kingdom not in same team

You should pick :

-Turkey
-Ukraine
-Uk
-Germany
-France
-Spain

others possibility :

-Italy instead of spain or france
-Poland instead of spain or france, the best combo for poland is to be in team with Turkey ( you have a lot of money in the beginning ).

-Sweden and Russia Northwest are also rarely used but possible if you know what you do ( but probably not a good idea to start, you can fail easily ).

West countries have to fund east countries ( It's not mandatory but we do it generaly ).

Don't wf your opponents cities t1, don't rewall or serbwall.

The big problem with casual games for 3vs3 in eu+ is that uk and spain are useless without reinf, they can't take anything execpt portugal for spain, while germany is advantaged so it make it a little bit unbalanced. And for the one who host don't produce reinf turn 0

Each team picks one
these are the standard picks for 3v3
a. germany or uk
b. spain or france
c. turkey or ukr

a and c are most important because having two of those countries is seriously op

these are the standard picks for 2v2
a. germany, uk or france
b. turkey or ukr

other picks that work for 3v3 or 2v2
poland, sweden and italy

poland is VERY strong with the current strat meta.
a team of ukr and turk will always beat a team of uk and germ.
uk, spain and turk is generally the best standard 3v3 combination
uk and turk is generally the best standard 2v2 combination

no serb wall
no rewall
no t1 wf
no walling in another player's land

Napísal Apocalypse, 18.12.2018 at 11:58

wow nice stealing my thunder...

Napísal boywind2, 18.12.2018 at 12:01

Napísal Apocalypse, 18.12.2018 at 11:58

wow nice stealing my thunder...

Ahaha nice!

Thank you guys, you are awesome

Napísal boywind2, 18.12.2018 at 12:00

no walling in another player's land

Interesting, never heard that one before. Are you talking on t1 only, or ... anytime?

Napísal Noir Brillant, 18.12.2018 at 12:07

Napísal boywind2, 18.12.2018 at 12:00

no walling in another player's land

Interesting, never heard that one before. Are you talking on t1 only, or ... anytime?

Only in the first turn, it join the idea to not wf T1

Napísal Apocalypse, 18.12.2018 at 11:58

- Turkey and Ukraine not in same team
- Germany and United Kingdom not in same team

So ... just to be clear:
These are not mere suggestions, right?
If Team 1 picks Turkey, then Team 2 picks say Germany, and then Team 1 picks Ukraine, it's not a matter of Team 2 was stupid not to pick Ukraine before, and too bad for them. It's a valid reason to cancel the game, right? Team 2 was allowed to pick Germany KNOWING that Ukraine should still be available for them later. In other words, this is a RULE, not a suggestion, right?

Napísal Noir Brillant, 18.12.2018 at 12:14

Napísal Apocalypse, 18.12.2018 at 11:58

- Turkey and Ukraine not in same team
- Germany and United Kingdom not in same team

So ... just to be clear:
These are not mere suggestions, right?
If Team 1 picks Turkey, then Team 2 picks say Germany, and then Team 1 picks Ukraine, it's not a matter of Team 2 was stupid not to pick Ukraine before, and too bad for them. It's a valid reason to cancel the game, right? Team 2 was allowed to pick Germany KNOWING that Ukraine should still be available for them later. In other words, this is a RULE, not a suggestion, right?

Yes it's a rule! you can try anything you want for fun but it will not really be balanced, ukr and turk in same team is too strong, and same for germany and uk. So theorically you can pick ukraine in the last choice for example because everyone else is supposed to respect that rule, if your teamate already took turkey you don't take ukr!

Napísal Noir Brillant, 18.12.2018 at 12:14

Napísal Apocalypse, 18.12.2018 at 11:58

- Turkey and Ukraine not in same team
- Germany and United Kingdom not in same team

So ... just to be clear:
These are not mere suggestions, right?
If Team 1 picks Turkey, then Team 2 picks say Germany, and then Team 1 picks Ukraine, it's not a matter of Team 2 was stupid not to pick Ukraine before, and too bad for them. It's a valid reason to cancel the game, right? Team 2 was allowed to pick Germany KNOWING that Ukraine should still be available for them later. In other words, this is a RULE, not a suggestion, right?

This was a huge debate in the comp community some years ago and was never resolved, many clans took the stance that if you dont pick a spacific country on your turn then the other team is likely to steal it. IT was to stop teams from putting there power players in there strongest country every game. So for example Your team picks turkey, their team picks uk, well they should of taken Ukraine if they did not want you to take it. I dont care one way or the other, I just wanted to let you know it's not a unwritten rule some players just want it to be.

Napísal Helly, 19.12.2018 at 06:35

This was a huge debate in the comp community some years ago and was never resolved, many clans took the stance that if you dont pick a spacifc country on your turn then the other team is likely to steal it. IT was to stop teams from putting there power players in there strongest country every game. So for example Your team picks turkey, their team picks uk, well they should of taken Ukraine if they did not want you to take it. I dont care one way or the other, I just wanted to let you know it's not a unwritten rule some players just want it to be.

https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=14379&topicsearch=&page=1
tl;dr- we've been arguing about this since before 2013

Thanks HellRaiserX666X and Acquiesce

Yeah, I personally do not like the idea of having rules to dictate what players can or cannot pick.

But in the context of casual games, I don't know what would be best.

If, say, we organize a 3v3 Eu+ tournament.
Three buddies get together, enlist in the tournament, find opponents, one of them starts a game, and then ...
Obviously, the "Randomize and Balance Team" option must be disabled, since we do not want to prevent many players from the same team to join consecutively.
But then, obviously (again), a team could pick their 3 countries before any player of the other team picked a single one, probably leading to imbalanced games (I'm sure some would welcome the challenge, but ... I'm trying to find a fair solution here).

So I am afraid that as things stand right now, we would be stuck with forcing picks as mentioned above, something like:
a. germany or uk
b. spain or france
c. turkey or ukr

I said "as things stand right now", meaning without a turn 0.
But ... what would be the ideal turn 0? We talk about it often (well, at least, I do ), but it was never thoroughly defined.
Yes, it would be a "turn" where people join and pick countries whenever they connect, without actually playing the first turn.
If we limit the definition to that, it would be of great use for "regular", non-competitive casual games, where you join the game if you see a spot left to pick that pleases you. But for serious business like tournaments and CWs, we need a system to allow alternation of picks between teams. And that's not as simple as it looks (at least, with 3/4 of a bottle of wine gone ).

Say we have a 48h game, do we really want to allow a full period per player and alternate as follows:
- 48h for team A pick #1
- 48h for team B pick #1
- 48h for team A pick #2
- ...
That means 2 days per player before the game even starts: 12 days for a 3v3 game, 40 days for a 20 player World game!

Any ideas anyone? How can we create a viable, engaging turn 0 interface that would allow alternation of picks between teams, without delaying the start of the game by 2 days per player?



Edit: Maybe I should start a different thread with that topic...

One idea, similar to other online games (play diplomacy, for instance):
- we could join a game, order our country preferences from a drop down list, and let the programming behind the scene distributes the picks (with a random algorithm to break ties)
It is actually fun in the context of Diplomacy, you have a surprise every time, and it forces you to be versatile.

I don't know

Napísal Noir Brillant, 19.12.2018 at 21:46

Thanks HellRaiserX666X and Acquiesce

Yeah, I personally do not like the idea of having rules to dictate what players can or cannot pick.

But in the context of casual games, I don't know what would be best.

If, say, we organize a 3v3 Eu+ tournament.
Three buddies get together, enlist in the tournament, find opponents, one of them starts a game, and then ...
Obviously, the "Randomize and Balance Team" option must be disabled, since we do not want to prevent many players from the same team to join consecutively.
But then, obviously (again), a team could pick their 3 countries before any player of the other team picked a single one, probably leading to imbalanced games (I'm sure some would welcome the challenge, but ... I'm trying to find a fair solution here).

So I am afraid that as things stand right now, we would be stuck with forcing picks as mentioned above, something like:
a. germany or uk
b. spain or france
c. turkey or ukr

I said "as things stand right now", meaning without a turn 0.
But ... what would be the ideal turn 0? We talk about it often (well, at least, I do ), but it was never thoroughly defined.
Yes, it would be a "turn" where people join and pick countries whenever they connect, without actually playing the first turn.
If we limit the definition to that, it would be of great use for "regular", non-competitive casual games, where you join the game if you see a spot left to pick that pleases you. But for serious business like tournaments and CWs, we need a system to allow alternation of picks between teams. And that's not as simple as it looks (at least, with 3/4 of a bottle of wine gone ).

Say we have a 48h game, do we really want to allow a full period per player and alternate as follows:
- 48h for team A pick #1
- 48h for team B pick #1
- 48h for team A pick #2
- ...
That means 2 days per player before the game even starts: 12 days for a 3v3 game, 40 days for a 20 player World game!

Any ideas anyone? How can we create a viable, engaging turn 0 interface that would allow alternation of picks between teams, without delaying the start of the game by 2 days per player?



Edit: Maybe I should start a different thread with that topic...

it's complicated yes! With The musketeers we tried to do a 3vs3 casual, the simpliest system is to make a topic where the first who come choose their countries and the teams or definite by their choice (if the first choose ukr and the second turkey, they will not be in the same team ) or if you want preset teams each team have to choose between germ or uk, spain or france, turkey or ukr ( or whatever you want but that the idea ) that way even if all the team 1 choose first their choice it will still be balanced.

And for the problem of turn 0, the simpliest thing to do is that no one is allowed to moove in the first turn (except wall your countries if you want).

For me the best solution to open a meeting 3v3 on Europe + or other cards partly casual, would be created by a person not playing the game and this person would send the link to participants by private message.

The two teams should agree on their choice of countries, each turn by player alternating each team, this to avoid: Turkey Ukraine or Germany United Kingdom, in the same team.
It will take a little longer to start the game, of course.
but we have no choice, as long as a 0 round is not in place.
Unfortunately for CW this method is not possible, unless moderators can create this type of game and then send CW's link to 2 Coalitions. In the meantime can be the creation of turn 0.

A primordial rule should be established by his players too, no attack on the neutral countries on turn 1, it would be just possible to wall his own cities.

It's a rule that we have mid up in the bosom of my Coalition in our private parties, to prevent the host to an advantage over the other players, thanks to the reinforcements.
It works very well.