Initial Troop Deployment *Pending*

[w3a2]

i like it.

[Molacole]

I saw this on the sticky post as pending! It's a good idea!

[ksslemp]

Post Bumped!

[everyone]

its a good idea. but i think there is one snag. what if 2 people want to have the same land? or are you saying that you get some lands randomly (with one army) and then you get to put exra armys on them. if the secnd one is right i reailly like your idea. good thinking. now it is like a proper game of risk

[ZawBanjito]

Even considering the prohibitive amount of time it would take to place all the pieces on the board I far prefer the CC rules to the actual Risk rules. They make the opening game far more uncertain and the play more interesting. The real Risk rules seem designed to speed the game up, at the sacrifice of gameplay. Speed isn't an issue with CC.

Still... I am partially interested in this "secret placement" concept. I think it would be exciting, but I've voted "no" because it's not yet a plan. It's just an idea saying, "wouldn't it be cool if?" There are myriad issues to be worked out... what if someone misses a turn during the placement stage? Is it to be a freestyle or sequential stage? What if two people place on the same country? There's nothing here to vote on yet. If you had a poll saying, "wouldn't it be cool if the map were 3D and you could fight with orbiting space stations?" a lot of people might agree, but how does the game play?

This isn't yet workable.

[everyone]

i like this idea i will really look forward to it being in the game cos i love this type of ideas

[Evil Semp]

It is a good idea. You mentioned 4 people placing in Aussie. That is very possible. I used to play Risk on the Zone and there were times 2 people placed all their armies in Aussie or SA. Each one hoping the other would leave without a fight. Sometimes they would fight to the death in round 1.

[Hoff]

I like the idea, but it should def. only be an option because it would prolong the games.

[Caleb the Cruel]

It would be a good option to be able to pick your beginning territories.
One way that it could be done is have everybody make a wish list before the game officially starts or is waiting for players. For example if there were three people playing a USA map:
Player1's List:
1. Pennsylvania
2. New England
3. New York
4. New Jersey
5. Michigan
6. Ohio
7. West Virginia
8. Indiana
9. Maryland
10. Virginia
11. Kentucky
...and they list on and on
Player2's List:
1. New England
2. Oregon
3. Washington
4. West Virginia
...and they list on and on
Player3's List:
1.New Jersey
2. California
3. Washington
4. Kentucky
...and they list on and on

So Player1 would not receive New England because they listed it as #2 but Player2 listed it as #1.
Player2 and 3 both put Washinton as #3, so in this case Player2 would receive it because they submitted their wish list first.
I know, it seems confusing, but it's hard to explain.

[aspalm]

I know this is an old post, but thought I would give it some new love.

I think overall conquer club is an amazing site, and great fun. However the one thing my friends and I really miss is the option to select where we put our troops in the beginning of the game. We used to have a set amount that you could play each "setup round", say, 3 troops. You would then go in order placing them on one of your predetermined locales. So you would end up with denser troop concentrations in some areas instead of others, but this just adds to the fun.

The problem with randomization, is that inevtiably, someone is put in a more enviable position than the next guy. Granted it is fun to be challenged sometimes, but once in a while it would be nice to be somewhat responsible for the overall lay of the land. And not have your strategy basically predetermined by the random draw and placement you've been given.

Does that make sense?

[sashab]

Hi! I'm new here, so forgive me if this has been brought up before or if I did something stupid. I was thinking that there might be a better way to handle the placement of the armies at the beginning of the game. Having exactly 3 armies on each territory may save time with the setup, but it creates a lot of problems for gameplay (at least that's how I see it). So, my idea is this: you could have a turn at the beginning where everyone can place their armies where they like, but without sight of any opponents' troops. This way, nobody gets an advantage by going first or waiting until last, the games would move faster, and it would be truer to the original game. Of course, the current system could be retained as an option for people who prefer it that way. Is there any reason why this couldn't work?


Edit: Since it seems like a lot of people are unclear on this, yes, the current system would be kept as an option!

grand strategy has this option. you know lack should just play over there a few games and adopt some grand strategy options.

[GreecePwns]

I like this idea also. A few of my games have been decided just on placement. One person could start with territories that were spread out, while another would have a continent almost given to them. This actually happened once in a game i was in. In a classic game (forgot the #), a person started w/territories from East Europe across the top of Asia in a chained fortification game. This made it easy for them to assemble a big army on the second turn and eventually have his team wipe the floor with us. Anyway, why don't i stop rambling about my noobish experience and say that this would be the best option to add right now.

[CreepyUncleAndy]

Hi! I'm new here, so forgive me if this has been brought up before or if I did something stupid. I was thinking that there might be a better way to handle the placement of the armies at the beginning of the game. Having exactly 3 armies on each territory may save time with the setup, but it creates a lot of problems for gameplay (at least that's how I see it). So, my idea is this: you could have a turn at the beginning where everyone can place their armies where they like, but without sight of any opponents' troops. This way, nobody gets an advantage by going first or waiting until last, the games would move faster, and it would be truer to the original game. Of course, the current system could be retained as an option for people who prefer it that way. Is there any reason why this couldn't work?


Edit: Since it seems like a lot of people are unclear on this, yes, the current system would be kept as an option!

Incredibly elegant, brilliantly simple, practically air-tight (with the exception of secret alliances, but with secret alliances, you're taking a risk at getting stabbed in the back anyways).

I vote YES on this option!

Remember, folks, c1arinetboy said that the game would not start until every player had a chance to deploy their armies at discression, and until the game began the map would only have 1 army appear in each territory (except for your own territories, which you could see the troop deployments for)....and I'm sure neutral territories would be displayed normally....

So, the game would not take any longer to start than a normal game.

[Bodmanbod]

hehe i was going to post a topic about this....

anyway the way i see it is:

Troop deployment is an option just like the options for the way cards are used. there would be 3 options: Evenly Distributed, Random and Player Deployed.


Random Mode:

in Random each player would get 1 army per territory and then the remaining armies would be distributed randomly across his territories (some having as little as 1 army had others having a maximum of 5). The amount of armies sitributed randomly would be equal to the number of territories multiplied by 2.

In this mode the intiall gameplay would be very much based on luck and could offer great challenges to experienced players.


Evenly distributed Mode:

This would be the way the current system works.


Player Deployed Mode:

In this mode the first 24 hours would be a blind freestyle. Each players territories would still be determined in the same way as other games and each territory would have a minimum of 1 army. The player can only see his own armies and would see who owns each territory but not how many armies are there. once the 24 hours are up the map would then show in the same way it does currently and anyone who has not deployed their armies will have them distributed radomly in the same way the random mode works.

This mode would offer a lot more control to the game at the beginning and give you more attacking / defending chance in specific areas at the beginning of the game.

[Moosegun]

An absolute YES from me

I agree that the current system can create very uneven games, where some players are spread all over the place (although it can be fun to try and fight these positions). I think if it was an additional option, implemented as suggested it would definately work and not cause any game delay.

As for people missing the first (setup) turn, if someone was to join a game with this deployment setting and then miss the deployment phase, they deserve to be kicked!

[Gash]

I would like to see where:

Every player takes a turn to place 3 armies on the province of his choice.

Just like the board game Risk.

The reason for this: and I have already talked about this,

Is to be able to accomplish my campaigns which I am doing with the buddies.

The person who wins germany map gets to place his units in germany on the Eruopean map. Same thing with British Isles - whoever wins those gets to place his units there and so on.


As long as it's a choice and people who like the random deployment aren,t forced to have turn based deployment then I see no harm in adding this feature to the gameplay.

Thank you

[Gash]

Still pending?

[magneticgoop]

It would be a good option to be able to pick your beginning territories.
One way that it could be done is have everybody make a wish list before the game officially starts or is waiting for players. For example if there were three people playing a USA map:
Player1's List:
1. Pennsylvania
2. New England
3. New York
4. New Jersey
5. Michigan
6. Ohio
7. West Virginia
8. Indiana
9. Maryland
10. Virginia
11. Kentucky
...and they list on and on
Player2's List:
1. New England
2. Oregon
3. Washington
4. West Virginia
...and they list on and on
Player3's List:
1.New Jersey
2. California
3. Washington
4. Kentucky
...and they list on and on

So Player1 would not receive New England because they listed it as #2 but Player2 listed it as #1.
Player2 and 3 both put Washinton as #3, so in this case Player2 would receive it because they submitted their wish list first.
I know, it seems confusing, but it's hard to explain.

almost like fantasy football, you make a premade list of territorys you want in a specific order, which you submit to receive these and you would
like he saidPlayer1 would not receive New England because they listed it as #2 but Player2 listed it as #1.
Player2 and 3 both put Washinton as #3, so in this case Player2 would receive it because they submitted their wish list first

added bonus it will encourage you to submit quickly

[Emperor_Metalman]

I was thinking the same thing. Having 3 armies per territory slows down the game. It also makes the game highly luck-dependent because of the territories you recieve.

[MOBAJOBG]

Well, this feature would definitely help with the popular 2-player games. As it is now, whoever goes first has a big advantage unless being hit by bad dice phenomenon.

[lt_oddball]

I'm all for it (including a setting a max of 5 armies).

Some may say that you'll eliminate the first round with the current system in which every player does this armies shifting anyway.

However, that is only possible with connected lands.
and more importantly, in your proposal you'll eliminate the advantage the first player(s) have in the current system; The last round player is mostly the sucker.

So Instead of being "an option" I would support it even in being a change of rule.

[magneticgoop]

I think someone suggested this before but could there be a new way to deploy armies. In this way a player would select 1 of their territories on their first round to be their "capital." All troops deployed must be connected to the capital by a chain of territories. If the capital is conquered then no troops may be deployed to any territory by the player with no capital until it is recovered. Additionally if a player takes another capital troops may be deployed in a chain of territories connected to either capital. It is needed for another game style with different strategies

Priority 2

[Unit_2]

i was going to suggest this..

[herndawg]

This would be great in Speed Games, much more real life. Seems it would extend games a lot in 24 hr turns with 8 players. I vote for it in speed games option at the least.

[krappleby]

this is actually a great optional idea,

i like it..

on the start of a new game, the system as like now automatically allocates territories, as with teh real game. Each player is given one unit in each territory, and then has 24 hours to allocate the remaining units (this is not seen by the other players) if a player misses his/her 24 hour deadline, the computer automatically allocates the 3 to a territory rule that is in play now, or devides the number of units/territories, to work out a fair amount of men, then allocates them.

once all units are allocated, the game goes into play mode, so all can see who is where.

if more than one player is looking for one area, then the fun begins, but at least they can only blame themselves..

however, one thing i would suggest is that the original 1 unit stays visible on the players screen when allocating. so that the player can see who is in the area, and how many territories they have..

ie.. if i have 1 in australia, i would like to know that one other player, has the other three territories.. not the number of units, just the territories..