I like your idea.

In my opinion further complication would make it less appealing to many people, perhaps myself included! If your maps require extensive explanation, that could put people off.

An important philosophy of mathematics is that the most beautiful ideas are often the simplest.

no ...

well, its sounds nice but not everyones a mathematician

it doesn't take a mathematician to play a map such as i've proposed. it'd require knowing how to add sometimes, perhaps. but its really all about patterns, and simple diagrams could accompany the map to show people those patterns. anyway ...

http://www.htjh.tpc.edu.tw/math/images/ptreal1r.gif

one possible bonus, the hockey stick, is formed in many ways, so long as the numbers add up, like in the image below, where

1 + 12 = 13
1 + 6 + 26 + 56 = 84
1 + 7 + 28 + 84 + 210 + 462 + 924 = 1716

http://ptri1&#46 ...

some of those comments you posted, teegee, look different out of context. that said, i never claimed to be a saint. interpret my 4.9 rating however you like.

to really understand what i'm getting at here, you have to look beyond a few mere comments in a game. there are pm's, ratings, etc. look at ...

funny that the people who can only respond negatively to my post are the same people who can't figure out who i'm talking about.

how disrespectful does a person need to be? how insolent? how much fun must be ruined? how much foul language? how low a rating? how frequently indignant at the prospect of losing? just how bad does a player have to be to get jailed/banned around here? how long must they be this way? i happened ...

could it be made so that the number of neutrals in the desert areas change from game to game? maybe set a maximum for each territory, but otherwise randomize the deployment of neutrals. i'd like to see that on other maps, too. it would create more variations in gameplay from game to game. a good map ...

BUGGED. VERY BADLY BUGGED. See game 3661522. read chat for starters. we figured it out eventually. pretty sure you're not supposed to be able to attack 65 from oasis of prosperity.

add a concede button. who wants to keep playing a game that is already over? both the winner and loser know what the outcome will be, so give the loser the option to make it so.

Consolidating threads is censorship:

⋅ twice now my posts have been buried beneath a pile of so called 'similar' threads. apparently this is a forum policy

Specifics:

⋅ by bunching them all together you are effectively downplaying the whole idea, foregoing my freedom to ...

so i spent a great deal of time composing the following in another post and was pretty upset to find it buried amongst a hogwash of ill-informed, supposedly related incompetence. unbelievable. clearly mine is the most focused and comprehensive explanation of the gaming style, adapted for and ...

Are you referring to a setting that RISK 2 uses? I've never played it, but I've seen it suggested, and rejected numerous times.

yes, this is what i am referring to. anyone who has rejected the idea has either never tried it or, sadly, just doesn't get it. Same Time is remarkable for its natural ...

well, being new, i don't have a good idea how long a sequential game would take. i imagine the longest it could take is 1 day per person per turn? in other words, a game of 8 players could take 8 days max to complete one turn? my idea would take 3 days max to complete a turn, no matter how many are ...

*edit* OK, then. I guess my suspicion was correct. This should really revolutionize how games are played around here.

SAME TIME

As everyone here knows, a single turn consists of 3 phases

⋅ Deployment Phase
⋅ Attack Phase
⋅ Fortification Phase

Players ...