New game type: Capture the flag

[Kantankerous]

sounds like capitols

[risk master2000]

that sounds kind of like castle risk or in the newer games capital risk game play electing a capitol or castle, in this game play you on most vaqriations and in my brothers board game you get to nominate a territory to have a secret army cash that goes 1 higher then the current reinforcement tally and in the castle version the set of cards is always escalating as it is numbered on the board it also gives reinforcements as cards has 5 other types which when played effects the way the dice attack change whether you can attack somone for or turn or allows you to eliminate a card and 1 even allows you to attack from places you normally could not attack from. I learn how to play with my brother castle risk then later learned regular risk gameplay on the opposite side of the board(it is a 2 sided Board) I think if a variation could be made for CC people would love it and it would be nice to play it again since my bro is in NOrth carolina and I am in Cali.

[Samus]

that sounds kind of like castle risk or in the newer games capital risk game play electing a capitol or castle, in this game play you on most vaqriations and in my brothers board game you get to nominate a territory to have a secret army cash that goes 1 higher then the current reinforcement tally and in the castle version the set of cards is always escalating as it is numbered on the board it also gives reinforcements as cards has 5 other types which when played effects the way the dice attack change whether you can attack somone for or turn or allows you to eliminate a card and 1 even allows you to attack from places you normally could not attack from. I learn how to play with my brother castle risk then later learned regular risk gameplay on the opposite side of the board(it is a 2 sided Board) I think if a variation could be made for CC people would love it and it would be nice to play it again since my bro is in NOrth carolina and I am in Cali.

You can't change the dice or the rolls, that I'm certain about. New ideas for cards are more of a separate issue, there's no reason the 3 options we have now won't work with this game type to start with.

It's not that you guys don't have good ideas, but what I'm suggesting should be very easy to program. Just add 2 (or 3) pseudo-neutral territories which, if taken, trigger elimination for a team. Adding new turn phases and movement of the flag and all that is a lot more complicated.

[Sammy gags]

In RISK II this is called Capitals

[Aries]

All I have to say to this idea is

[CreepyUncleAndy]

Well, I was assuming each team would have a flag, not each player. If your team's flag gets killed, you're all eliminated.

Word....then the strongest member of the team could protect their flag at the most secure location.

There should be an option of how the flags work for new games: does each player get their own flag, or is there one flag per team?

[Sammy gags]

So if this will be approved so should heroes & fortresses

[CBlake]

Sounds like a GREAT so its just a neutral territory cannot attack with it?

[Samus]

Sounds like a GREAT so its just a neutral territory cannot attack with it?

Yeah, it cannot attack. It can only look pretty.

[CreepyUncleAndy]

Sounds like a GREAT so its just a neutral territory cannot attack with it?

Yeah, it cannot attack. It can only look pretty.

We should also consider allowing an option for invisible flags whose location is known only by the teams they represent.

[max is gr8]

sounds fun but the 500 in argentina would be a givaway

[CreepyUncleAndy]

We should probably subdivided this thread into multiple dedicated subthreads. I'll start one now.

Yeah, it cannot attack. It can only look pretty.

We should also consider allowing an option for invisible flags whose location is known only by the teams they represent.

sounds fun but the 500 in argentina would be a givawaySounds like a GREAT so its just a neutral territory cannot attack with it?

I did not intend invisible flags for your utterlyinsane 500 army "capitol/flag" game variation....

....I meant invisible flags for the "general/flag" game variation I suggested below:

Capture the Flag
This variation has the Flag as a unit (not an army, but another kind of unit).
The Flag is a unit but a new type of unit -- now there are two unit-types: Armies and Flags. You have ONE Flag per player (or team).
The Flag can be moved (one space at a time during a special Flag Movement Phase)
The Flag might possibly give some sort of bonus (like negating up to one casualty you would take from armies guarding guarding or accompanied by the flag during each attack roll or defense roll they make -- in other words, if your enemy scores ONE hit on you in a given attack/defense roll, you do not loose an army, but if your enemy scores TWO hits, you loose ONE army)

My concept of Conquer Club Capture the Flag is quite different from yours (which is also being discussed in this thread) and is further described below:

I also like the idea of being able to move the flag

I'm pretty sure Lack/Andy are going to say this can't be done. As I understand it, the site isn't set up to track specific armies like that, only territory ownership. I could be wrong though.

I am a bit concerned that the flag would wind up blocking bonuses in the region it was in. I have no idea if that could be worked around.

All that needs to be done is a new object created and EITHER a new phase added just after the end attacks button is pushed OR some things added to the army movement steps:

The object might be called playerFlag, and would have four variables:

playerFlagID -- the owner of the flag; this value is static
playerFlagCON -- the current controller of the flag; changes when captured
playerFlagLOC -- the territory the flag currently occupies
playerFlagKILL -- equals FALSE until it occupies an enemy-owned territory containing an enemy flag owned by the same enemy player who occupies/controls that territory, at which point playerFlagKILL=TRUE and the dead flag's player is eliminated.

A new phase can be added between END ATTACKS and FORTIFY (I would add it between END FORTIFICATIONS and END TURNS, but that would require a special interrupt in the case of Adjacent and Chained fort. games).

FLAG MOVEMENT PHASE
You are allowed to move one flag under your control (yours or an enemies which you have captured). The chosen flag may be moved from its current territory to any adjacent territory (as per Adjacent Fortification rules for armies).

(You may move an enemy flag you have captured towards your own flag, or your own flag towards an enemy flag or away to safety.)

If, at the end of any given phase*, any two (or more) flags occupy the same territory, and that territory is owned by the owner of one of the flags, all flags in that territory not owned by the territory-owner or a member of his/her team are destroyed, and the players who own them are eliminated from the game -- their cards go to the victor, and their armies become neutral.

*: for now, it should check at the end of EVERY phase, but in the future when this is fine-tuned, the code can be made more efficient and only check at, say, the end of each attack/invasion and the end of the flag movement phase.

ADVANCING FLAG WITH ADVANCING ARMIES
It would make sense to carry your flag, your banner, at the front of the assembled hordes of your invading forces, as it inspires morale and puts you in more decisive control of the battle. Plus, it looks cool.

After conquering an enemy territory, you are asked how many armies you would like to advance. After pressing the advance button (and IF a flag is present in the territory you just attacked from), you should be asked:

Would you like to advance (your/the) Flag(s) from {attackingTerritory} to {conqueredTerritory}? YES / NO

If there happen to be more than one captured flags in the attacking territory, I guess they would all go with the advancing column. Or cause the game to crash? So maybe code some weavearounds to such an unlikely event (not a big deal, because captured enemy flags occupying the same territory you own as your own flag would go *poof* long before this).

Well, you see, it doesn't seem like all that much work. Lack? Andy?

[Samus]

This idea received a lot of positive response, and in fact spawned several other similar ideas. All of them have their own merit, but unlike those this idea does not require changing any of the fundamental rules of the site. Just create one neutral country per team with X armies which, if taken, results in the elimination of the respective team.

I would really like some form of official response here.

[alex_white101]

This idea received a lot of positive response, and in fact spawned several other similar ideas. All of them have their own merit, but unlike those this idea does not require changing any of the fundamental rules of the site. Just create one neutral country per team with X armies which, if taken, results in the elimination of the respective team.

I would really like some form of official response here.

yup, i think the simpler the better. however i say it should be minimum 30 armies, otherwise in a triples game if you get a good drop and you could fort loads of armies next to what youre trying to capture it could put people off the game. i personally think this was a very good suggestion and look forward to the day its implemented!

[Grizbr]

sounds like the capital version of the RiskII game. Why not let each player decide where their flag is placed? no need to limit the number of players.

[spinwizard]

yeah, decide where it is placed!

[CBlake]

who would get to pick?

[ender516]

With the introduction of the new losing conditions/requirements feature of the XML, a "capture the flag" map is now possible, and the Capital Competition is set to produce one of this type. I think we can mark this implemented.