Blockading territories

[Emperor_Metalman]

There should be certain territories for which it would be necessary to control a "blockading" territory in order to attack/fortify. For example, if territory A and B were regular territories and territory C was a blockading territory, it would be necessary for one to control territory C in order to attack/foritfy from territory A to territory B.

Why blockading territories should be implemented
#1To accurately simulate naval warfare and the idea that an army can't cross a body of water dominated by enemy ships.

#2 De-facto truces. If Player 1 controls territory A and has 500 armies on it while Player 2 leaves only one army on territory B while he has 500 armies on territory C, there would be a De-facto truce. It would be more difficult for Player 1 and 2 to attack each other because they would need to fortify their armies or spend several turns building up in order to attack each other. De-facto truces would allow players to more easily focus on attacking a specific target instead of trying to play a build game.

I am thinking about making a Pacific ocean map based on blockading territorities if they are implemented

Suggestions are welcome

[bryguy]

You are obviously new to the map foundry, and I suggest you post all ideas like this into the Foundry Discussion


this should be moved there shortly

[InkL0sed]

There should be certain territories for which it would be necessary to control a "blockading" territory in order to attack/fortify. For example, if France, England were regular territories and the English Channel was a blokading territoy, it would be necessary for one to control the English Channel in order to attack/fortify from France to England.

This would be useful for implementing ideas such as naval warfare

I don't understand... how is that any different from current gameplay?

[bryguy]

There should be certain territories for which it would be necessary to control a "blockading" territory in order to attack/fortify. For example, if France, England were regular territories and the English Channel was a blokading territoy, it would be necessary for one to control the English Channel in order to attack/fortify from France to England.

This would be useful for implementing ideas such as naval warfare

I don't understand... how is that any different from current gameplay?

Far as i can tell, say english channel is 2 territs wide, and say its like this

----
.--.
----

. = nothing
- = territ
-- = channel
---- = one side of channel

and say you own both sides and one of the channel territs, then you cant fortify until you have the channel

[Mr Unbeatable]

Nah don't like it much sorry dude.

[Ogrecrusher]

Seems like a reasonable idea, not sure if it would really add much though.

[Sir. Ricco]

I don't think it would work to well man. I vote No.

[zimmah]

you have some potentially nice idea's, but you seem to be very bad at explaining the purpose of it.

do you mean, like you have 'the chanel' and 'the chanel' is like 2 or 3 territories wide, then you need the complete chanel in order to be able to 'cross' it savely? so if you only hold 1 territory, your enemy can 'intercept' you and therefore it is considered 'not save' to attack and therefore it is impossible to attack?

or am i wrong?