re: College Football Imperialism Map

quote:

---

I think it's just fine how it is

Some of y'all getting upset by weird shite

---

I'm upset because I disagree with you?


I'm just saying for a more accurate map, UAB shouldn't be worth half of Alabama. Beating UAB is worth more than beating some much bigger programs right now

quote:

---

Yeah, I dig it, except if you beat a team that lost the week before you get nothing. Risk everything and gain nothing on the map. I plan on following it every week. It is cooler than the belt one.

---

So, you could lose to a team...then beat a team that beat them, and get your territory back along with whatever territory both teams had acquired.

quote:

---

Let us try it this way, the person that created the map set the rules for how the land is distributed and how it is to be conquered. If you are not a fan of it make your own map.

---

He made a map with his rules and I suggested a way to improve on it. That's it. If you don't like it, then you can go read another thread

quote:

---

He made a map with his rules and I suggested a way to improve on it. That's it. If you don't like it, then you can go read another thread

---

You know what... I think I will but I'll be back... maybe.

quote:

---

There are a truckload of possibles for that. One way is Aggie beats USCw in a bowl, who beat UCLA.

---

Unless UCLA loses again to some random along the way.

quote:

---

I like maps. This one is pretty

---

Yeah but with how little they give Alabama in AL and Florida State in Florida it looks small and insignificant. Sorta like the guy in Risk who gets 3 of the 4 spots in Australia to start the game.

If you have played Risk enough, you know how this will end.

quote:

---

There are a truckload of possibles for that. One way is Aggie beats USCw in a bowl, who beat UCLA.

---

Not really how that works at all. In that scenario you're assuming UCLA doesn't lose until they play USCw at the end of the season. Also, you're assuming that USCw either doesn't make the Pac12 championship game, or wins it... it really is a rabbit hole in trying to determine most likely scenarios as to who ends up with what.

I have a few questions about how this works:

Is a team out for good when they lose?

If so, do they become a land acquisition machine for the team that beat them?

Is there any way for a team to win their own counties back outside of rematching the team that beat them or beating a team that beat that team?

quote:

---

I have a few questions about how this works:

Is a team out for good when they lose?

If so, do they become a land acquisition machine for the team that beat them?

Is there any way for a team to win their own counties back outside of rematching the team that beat them or beating a team that beat that team?

---

Negative. Team that lost in week 1 can beat a team in week 2... if that team won the previous week, they then earn their territories. Ultimately, it's beneficial to beat a team on a winning streak and/or beat a team that just *beat* another team on a winning streak.

They can win their original counties back, but it would have to pass from the team they lost to, to another team that beats them, and so on and so forth until they win them back. Let's take UT/GT for example. UT just took GT's territory. Pretend that UT goes undefeated until the UGA game. UGA wins that matchup and then doesn't lose another game until the Tech matchup. Now we own Tech's original territory and they have a chance to win it back... obviously a little far fetched, but that's just a simple hypothetical. It could get much more complex with multiple losses passing that territory to more teams before getting the chance to win it back. A rematch in a bowl game/conference championship wouldn't help unless the team that they lost to originally went undefeated between the loss and the rematch (later in the season would be more likely obviously).

This is pretty awesome.