Respectfully, first blood shouldn’t be more points than winning the game… because first game puppy legit just yolo’d for first blood knowing he’d lose after… this game he also rushes first blood because the chances someone kills multiple people and wins is kinda low…

Riding with randy at the end there had me dying 🤣🤣 love ya drongo

If Drongo is casting your game and you don’t mass ribauldequin, you’re not living right.

ZertoN losing the game because his villagers couldn't install furnishings in time

1:07:00 you're welcome

Don artie being savage in chats even after his demise 😂🔥❤️

Giving more points for 1st, 2nd and 3th kill is fine. But giving 10 is just a bit unbalanced. Iets maybe better to give +6, +4, +2 points

I have been watching this Outback Octagon in the past a few days and I have been enjoying it. Except this BO3 final. The rules are just too many.. Feels like an exam

For the next Octagon, I really think that, for the finals, the 2-3 players in last place should be able to pick their civs instead of it being random. This would keep things interesting and level the playing field a bit.

i have enjoyed watching don artie every step of the way... can't believe im about to reach the end of the outback octagon!

Wonders should count as another landmark. I know it probably wouldn't make any difference to any outcomes but someone getting knocked out while they still have the wonder feels a little anti-climactic.

I hate the new rules i enjoyed watching guys take on the 2v1s and win em made it more exciting

I watched this cast and also Beasty’s cast of the same game. Beasty pointed out that puppypaw not attacking wam after wiping out dinky was kinda sus. Kind of seemed like an unannounced non aggression pact, since puppypaw had easy access to both of wam’s landmarks, knew where they were, knew there were only 2, knew wam was fighting elsewhere, and had a lot of idle troops he could have sent immediately. Those troops just stood on dinkey’s grave for several minutes until matiz attacked them. Maybe puppypaw was afraid that getting involved in a 1:1 would be considered teaming, but ignoring someone’s exposed landmarks right outside your base seems even more suspicious. Can’t help but think about how wam is puppypaw’s brother, and it starts feeling a little weird knowing wam got away with his mistakes unpunished.

love this content feeling better than it did earlier, but in future ffa tournaments firstblood/kills shouldnt be worth so much relative to winning imo, winning should 100% be worth like 2/3 kills and not have first blood /2nd /3rd blood be each worth more than winning, but love the content keep it up (:

lol "it's like orange juice but not really"

Rus seem pretty strong for FFA's

Drongo the misderiction is not coming from don artie, firstly it started with puppy telling he dont know who to attack etc. so he started the misdirection and give other options to think for a easy win by themselves by distracting the others on smth else.... of course don played it afterwards with it but the manipulation and good one goes to puppy

Ok so a player gets 5 points or 10 points per kill. Wonder and sacret victory counts as killing the remaining players. Win with wonder and 3 enemies are alive counts as killing 3 people. Much eazier imo. And there are no points for killing 2 v 1, only 1 guy gets the points. So no need for alliances.

in ffa games i try very hard to kill a high distance neighbor to take his market

WAM IS TRADING 1ST

It’s a shame the rules were so reactive to one game at the end of the placement round. The finals scoring system is really whack. But regardless this series is incredible and hope to see more like this in the future! 1v1’s are great but there is something special about FFA

Chat is fun but no chat -> no diplomacy -> more aggression

i guess that's the cons of building forward bases everywhere. you run out of resources faster. truly, wam should've traded xD

I think the alliance rule is wonky. I think to better incentivice betrayal, it should be who ever last hits the last landmark even if the player surrenders and not divide the points. Also, everyone who makes the first wonder should have points if he defends at least 5 min. Of it even if he doesn't win.

no alliances rule and then when Don built a wonder players were allowed to communicate how to attack, okay cool it was in all their interest to kill Don however this is example of alliance and so players should be punished with -6 points....this system is kinda bad tbh

wam did not trade. the infamous trader hahahaha

What size map are these played on? I did an FFA on the size 8 map and all of us were way more spread out.

Martiz was very lucky, he doesn’t deserve this win. He was saved by wonder when puppypow start to attack him.

It's great to watch, but with these rules I wouldn't want to play ! xD

I can't get wonder tractor out of my head lolol

@aussiedrongo Why is matiz point so low didn't you say he get s 2 for killing don with wam and puppy also + 3 for killing puppy with wam

The 1v1 1v1 1v1 after the 30 minutes mark should have been judged the following way: Player A makes an alliance with players C, D, E, F (-24 points) Player B makes an alliance with players C, D, E, F (-24 points) Player C makes an alliance with players A, B, E, F (-24 points) Player D makes an alliance with players A, B, E, F (-24 points) Player E makes an alliance with players A, B, C, D (-24 points) Player F makes an alliance with players A, B, C, D (-24 points) Then, if anyone would've attacked someone instead, they would have gotten +9 points. Honesly, "misdirection" shouldn't be a thing with rules that have rigid social scoring.

Remove Names, Randomize colors, Approved chat by admin real time in game only. Found the teams more entertaining than these last 2 tbh. But I know it can be hard.

wat map this?

1v3 Don. Wasnt fair..

how about granting points per minute to the person with the highest ingame score? This will incentivise the players to always take out the strongest player toghether. You might even see the "interesting politics" of people willing to delete their own villagers/building so that they won't become a target, this create a dilemma where you would want to be as strong and agressive as possible but not too strong and agressive, you also don't need to have the wonky "alliance rule" (that could get loopholed around by people implicitly not attacking each other or using chat on other apps) anymore because alliances will always break up if one of the member get too strong, if you think that is too unfair and hard for the strongest player, you could go with 2 players with the highest score getting the points/minute, then when there's only 3 players left, change it into 1 player only. Or you could go 8:3 6:2 and 4:1. Also, the players will always fight each other, there will be no boring waiting time or "truce" between each fights, which make it more interesting. It also imitate the real life geopolitic of "if you get too strong or too agressive u'll be ganged up"