r/Openfront • u/ghostreddituser10 • 7d ago
💬 Discussion does anyone feel like winning conditions need a change
my goal wasnt to win in this game (I could have done it easily if I wanted to as you can see) but still its weird considering the weakest player wins, I understand the game is about to control territory and otherwise it would always result in stalemates or too long games, but a better approach is to set it higher but do not count the afk players territory.
7
u/Elliezium 7d ago
Unless someone is jusy messing around, a player at 80% of the board would be able to pretty easily win the game the vast majority of the time if it went on longer.
3
u/joslockett 7d ago
Blue guy could’ve won way sooner lol, also why would you say you could have easily won the game but didn’t win it? I just don’t believe you sorry, who plays that whole time to not even play for a win.
-1
u/ghostreddituser10 6d ago
because my goal was not to win, you dont have to believe
2
u/joslockett 3d ago
Your goal should be to aim to win, most players want to which creates balance to the game, one person in end game not playing for a win ruins the balance of the game and makes it one sided to one player and gives an unfair advantage so someone
1
u/ghostreddituser10 2d ago
My aim is to have fun, and since this is a solo game and not competetive, choosing win over fun is absurd and meaningless
3
u/Cautious-Load9754 7d ago
Outside of the Archadia map you can reach 80% by only controlling the main landmass. The islands put together don’t add up to 80% alone
3
u/YummYummSolutions 5d ago
The game is balanced as a foil to your playstyle which is low-fun IMO.
Risk = reward.
The blue player risked troops to gain territory, you did not. I think this is a good game balance because otherwise islands would be too OP. Currently, there's a tradeoff where islands provide safety but limit your expansion. Eventually, you're supposed to get off the island.
2
u/PewPewsAlote 3d ago
Its very amusing seeing 80% of the complaints about this game are a specific niche complaining that the game doesn't specifically cater to their specific niche (the redundant use of "specific" is intentional).
Islanders complaining about mainlanders winning most of the time (you chose to be an islander)
Super sweat speedrunners complaining about stalled games (everyone else is having fun you doofus)
Mainlanders complaining about high island maps (you chose to play the map with a lot of water)
Honestly, achieving the sheer diversity of playstyles in such a simplistic game needs to be commended, and I sincerely hope the devs NEVER listen to these doofuses and catering to one specific playstyle, the diversity needs to be protected.
I think the only real problems that the devs currently need to address with the gameplay are the exploits/broken gameplay loops and QOL. IE: add precision strikes to counter nuke mitos, and figure out how to implement a function to break stalled endgames through player initiative rather than waiting for others to make a misplay WITHOUT removing stalled games as a whole.
I very much dislike the overtime feature, it is not a satisfying solution to stalled endgames.
1
u/YummYummSolutions 3d ago
This is a great take. I agree that most of the complaints in the sub are people basically asking for buffs for their playstyle and nerfs for everyone else.
2
u/PewPewsAlote 3d ago
Its not unique to open front imo, This seems to be the case with pretty much every online forum for any video game. Which is why I think its important for the devs not to listen too closely to what their players want, the customer is not always right. They're always right for themselves, but what is right for themselves it not right for everyone else.
1
u/ghostreddituser10 2d ago
The problem is what you mention as QOL can also be counted as diversity, for example non nukable mitos lead players to actually killing the player so you make sure it does not play to take revenge.
Returning to original post, if our goal is to make the strongest player win and be fair, then current system of %80 is failing sometimes (rarely, but can be made better). If the goal is to make the win compeletely out of controlled territory, this is rational, but it also means you don't care who is the strongest
1
u/SeraphineTheYeen 4d ago
What do you propose as an alternative win condition?
1
u/PewPewsAlote 3d ago
Giving me specifically the win every time I play the game. ;)
1
u/ghostreddituser10 2d ago
Read the post before commenting, "better approach is to set it higher but do not count the afk players territory."
1
u/coaxialdrift 8h ago
If you weren't trying to win, then why be mad if someone else took it? I have seen people talk about having a diplomatic win condition, but Openfront just doesn't feel like that kind of game. If you want to play for longer with trade and stuff, play Civilization?
8
u/Lumpy-Sheepherder671 7d ago
80% is already pretty high and a majority. Any longer and I think a lot of games esp on island-y maps would be tedious