Allow for a custom number of chained reinforcement movements

[markus Oralius]

I love the new custom round limits, lets bring the same thing to reinforcement counts!
I would love to have the option to set the number of chained and adjascent reinforcement movements to 2, 3, 5, 7, or 10 per turn.
Unlimitted reinforcements give the starting player too much of an advantage, and chained reinforcements slow the game down too much (especially 1 on 1's on large maps).
It would add a great new strategic dynamic, and make certain weak maps fun to play.

[chapcrap]

I like this.

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

[TheForgivenOne]

I like this.

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

So this could become unlimited... but just takes longer? "Reinforces to X, Reinforces to Y, Reinforces to Z (My stack)"

[chapcrap]

I like this.

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

So this could become unlimited... but just takes longer? "Reinforces to X, Reinforces to Y, Reinforces to Z (My stack)"

No, I mean that you can move them to one space from where they started.

On Classic, if you have 3 on each of the Oceania terts, you could move 2 from Perth to Jakarta and 2 from Port Moresby to Jakarta, but the 2 on Sydney could only be moved to either Perth or Port Moresby. Or split between the two, but those 2 troops could not move more than 1 space away from Sydney.

[TheForgivenOne]

I like this.

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

So this could become unlimited... but just takes longer? "Reinforces to X, Reinforces to Y, Reinforces to Z (My stack)"

No, I mean that you can move them to one space from where they started.

On Classic, if you have 3 on each of the Oceania terts, you could move 2 from Perth to Jakarta and 2 from Port Moresby to Jakarta, but the 2 on Sydney could only be moved to either Perth or Port Moresby. Or split between the two, but those 2 troops could not move more than 1 space away from Sydney.

I'm really not sure how that could be coded. Say you are in Africa on Classic, You start with 3 on Johannesburg, 3 on Cape Town, and 3 on Lagos. You reinforce the 2 from Johan to Cape Town. Now you wanted to move those 2 that were originally on Cape Town to Lagos. How will the game engine know that you can only reinforce 2 out of there? Because technically you hadn't reinforced out of Cape Town yet.

[chapcrap]

I like this.

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

So this could become unlimited... but just takes longer? "Reinforces to X, Reinforces to Y, Reinforces to Z (My stack)"

No, I mean that you can move them to one space from where they started.

On Classic, if you have 3 on each of the Oceania terts, you could move 2 from Perth to Jakarta and 2 from Port Moresby to Jakarta, but the 2 on Sydney could only be moved to either Perth or Port Moresby. Or split between the two, but those 2 troops could not move more than 1 space away from Sydney.

I'm really not sure how that could be coded. Say you are in Africa on Classic, You start with 3 on Johannesburg, 3 on Cape Town, and 3 on Lagos. You reinforce the 2 from Johan to Cape Town. Now you wanted to move those 2 that were originally on Cape Town to Lagos. How will the game engine know that you can only reinforce 2 out of there? Because technically you hadn't reinforced out of Cape Town yet.

This may be something that's difficult to program. I have played this way in real life and enjoy it, but I don't know how easy the mechanics of it are. Basically, you can think of it like this: at the end of each turn, wherever each troop is located is its home territory. When reinforcing, you can move troops all over, but troops can only move one space away from their home territory.

Another example. If A borders B and B borders C and C borders D, you A has 3 troops and the others all have 1, you could move 2 from A to B. Then you could move the one that was on B to C. Then you could move the one that was on C to D. Ending with 1 on A and C and 2 on B and D.

Maybe it's just a real like thing more than online. It might be difficult.

[chapcrap]

Actually, now that I think about it, it should be able to be programmed, because I got the idea from doing it on a computer Risk game made by Hasbro.

[markus Oralius]

Custom adjascent reinforcements would be great, but custom chained reinforcements is probably more useful if its easier to program. (Option to set 3, 5, or 7 chained reiforcements?)

[dwilhelmi]

I like this.

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

So this could become unlimited... but just takes longer? "Reinforces to X, Reinforces to Y, Reinforces to Z (My stack)"

No, I mean that you can move them to one space from where they started.

On Classic, if you have 3 on each of the Oceania terts, you could move 2 from Perth to Jakarta and 2 from Port Moresby to Jakarta, but the 2 on Sydney could only be moved to either Perth or Port Moresby. Or split between the two, but those 2 troops could not move more than 1 space away from Sydney.

I'm really not sure how that could be coded. Say you are in Africa on Classic, You start with 3 on Johannesburg, 3 on Cape Town, and 3 on Lagos. You reinforce the 2 from Johan to Cape Town. Now you wanted to move those 2 that were originally on Cape Town to Lagos. How will the game engine know that you can only reinforce 2 out of there? Because technically you hadn't reinforced out of Cape Town yet.

It actually wouldn't be hard to program at all. Have one array that holds all of the army values for each of the continents. Have a second array that holds all of the new army values for after reinforcement is finished. When an adjacent fort is made, reduce the army values in the first array and second array, but only increment the target continent in the second array. The second array is what gets displayed, while the first array is used for determining how many troops remain available for forting. When the player says they are done with reinforcements, save off the values in the second array.

[TheMoge]

I really like this idea (the idea of having an option to set a custom number of reinforcement movements), it's an option that - like the new round limit option that was recently introduced - would be something that could only enhance the CC experience. I would certainly enjoy occasionally playing with this option, but those who wouldn't want to would by no means be forced to.
The unlimited adjacent reinforcements idea is also a good idea.
In fact both of these ideas would be quite easy to program I'm sure, why has CC not already introduced options like these?

[s3xt0y]

It actually wouldn't be hard to program at all. Have one array that holds all of the army values for each of the continents. Have a second array that holds all of the new army values for after reinforcement is finished. When an adjacent fort is made, reduce the army values in the first array and second array, but only increment the target continent in the second array. The second array is what gets displayed, while the first array is used for determining how many troops remain available for forting. When the player says they are done with reinforcements, save off the values in the second array.

Easier than that. Just have the values stored at the beginning of reinforcement and only allow forts of that number, that way you would be allowed to fort back if you made a mistake. Since it is unlimited.

[Culs De Sac]

I see one downside to such implementation.. if you have a chain of territories connected.. wouldn't it be possible to move troops from the back of the chain to the front of the chain.. the fort just has to be made from adj to adj until they reach where you want them

[chapcrap]

I see one downside to such implementation.. if you have a chain of territories connected.. wouldn't it be possible to move troops from the back of the chain to the front of the chain.. the fort just has to be made from adj to adj until they reach where you want them

I have responded to this.

I have played this way in real life and enjoy it, but I don't know how easy the mechanics of it are. Basically, you can think of it like this: at the end of each turn, wherever each troop is located is its home territory. When reinforcing, you can move troops all over, but troops can only move one space away from their home territory.

Another example. If A borders B and B borders C and C borders D, you A has 3 troops and the others all have 1, you could move 2 from A to B. Then you could move the one that was on B to C. Then you could move the one that was on C to D. Ending with 1 on A and C and 2 on B and D.

Maybe it's just a real like thing more than online. It might be difficult.

Basically, you assign each troop a home territory and they can only move one space away from there.

[MrBoom]

This is how we play Risk at home. It's excellent fun.

[Criticalwinner]

It's a great idea, and it's easy enough to code. There would definitly be a few bugs in the beginning, but it would be good.

[ComposerNate]

I would def. play with "unlimited adjacent". Maybe the interface could look something like this:

Imagine I have all of Oceania on the classic map. 5 on Jakarta, 3 each on Port Moresby and Perth, 2 on Sydney.
The action panel displays the following:
Reinforce [menu] troops from Jakarta to [menu]
Reinforce [menu] troops from Perth to [menu]
Reinforce [menu] troops from Port Moresby to [menu]
Reinforce [menu] troops from Sydney to [menu]
[Go!]

The first menu includes numbers (0-4, 0-2, 0-2, 0-1 in this example) and the second menu contains territory names (for Jakarta it contains only Perth and Port Moresby, etc.). The button at the bottom says "Go" or "Reinforce" or something like that. You don't click it until you have all the menus adjusted. This should eliminate the possibility of doing a bunch of adjacent reinforcements to become the equivalent of one chained.

If we want to be able to reinforce different troops from one territory to other adjacent territories, then we would add a "split" button:

Reinforce [menu] troops from Jakarta to [menu] [split]
Reinforce [menu] troops from Perth to [menu] [split]
Reinforce [menu] troops from Port Moresby to [menu] [split]
Reinforce [menu] troops from Sydney to [menu]
[Go!]

If you click on split next to Jakarta, it would open up something like this:
Reinforce [menu] troops from Jakarta to Perth
Reinforce [menu] troops from Jakarta to Port Moresby

So that I could do 2 and 2 or 1 and 3. Note that there's no split by Sydney because in the example, I have 2 on Sydney so I can only reinforce one of them. There would also be no split button for a territory where I only had one adjacent territory. Like if I didn't have Perht, but had the other 3, no splits would be possible.

Sorry this is so lengthy, but I think it should be clear.

[ComposerNate]

FWIW, I also like the original idea of this thread, which is to have different numbers of chained or adjacent reinforcements without going to full-blown unlimited. Major Command allows 1, 3, and unlimited, and the "3" option is a nice middle ground setting. Combine it with chained and adjacent, and you get 6 possible reinforcement options. If we use more than just 1 and 3, we get even more. Just different ways to have to strategize, makes it interesting.

[agentcom]

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

Haha, I thought this was sarcasm when I first read it. For the same reasons as TFO.

I'm really not sure how that could be coded. Say you are in Africa on Classic, You start with 3 on Johannesburg, 3 on Cape Town, and 3 on Lagos. You reinforce the 2 from Johan to Cape Town. Now you wanted to move those 2 that were originally on Cape Town to Lagos. How will the game engine know that you can only reinforce 2 out of there? Because technically you hadn't reinforced out of Cape Town yet.

Well, it seems this particular problem is solvable.

[chapcrap]

Has unlimited adjacent been suggested before? You can move as much as you want, but only adjacently.

Haha, I thought this was sarcasm when I first read it. For the same reasons as TFO.

I'm really not sure how that could be coded. Say you are in Africa on Classic, You start with 3 on Johannesburg, 3 on Cape Town, and 3 on Lagos. You reinforce the 2 from Johan to Cape Town. Now you wanted to move those 2 that were originally on Cape Town to Lagos. How will the game engine know that you can only reinforce 2 out of there? Because technically you hadn't reinforced out of Cape Town yet.

Well, it seems this particular problem is solvable.

That's right, it can be coded. BOOM goes the dynamite! Bring it on!

[DoomYoshi]

Yea, reinforcements should be split into 2 options:
reinforcements per turn (1,3, unlimited is the classic example)
reinforcement length (1, 2, chained, anywhere i recall seeing on another risk-site)

[Jippd]

Devils advocate...the computer may be able to know via programming but how will the player know?

A has five troops
B has 3 troops
C has 1 troops.

A touches B
B touches C
A does not touch C

A forts 4 to B with this unlimited fort option then B becomes a 7 stack.

B wants to fort to C now but how many can be forted and how many have to stay?

If player clicks region B how will it be differentiated between what troops can go where?

In this one situation it may be easier to figure out but think of a bigger map and where you have done a lot of forting and stack sizes are bigger and more numerous.

Not only that but consider forting some to one spot here or there but then wanting to remix the original fort.

You may end up with a territory that had forts made to it from all surrounding territories. Now say you want to fort those back where they came from...how do you distinguish what troop came from where? If I select the region it selects the whole stack. But the problem is now there are troops that can get forted only back to certain spots...how is the player to know what goes where and how will the user select and differentiate between the different troop groups to select which ones to move.

I can see a trial and error process maybe working, but it will be user end confusing IMO.

I hope what I'm trying to say is getting across I can't think of how to word the explanation of the problem that I forsee with this.

None the less it's a digression from the original subject anyway which is a max fort limit. That wouldn't work though unless it was anything but unlimited forts. I could see it being a nice feature in chained/adjacent but low priority overall

[trekwest]

All for this...(thread bump)

I think increasing the number of chained or adjacent reinforcements would be an outstanding variation - and easy to code (?)

(With adjacent, it could feasibly then become a type of chained as you could string your adjacents together with one group ... a "blitzkrieg", as it were. Or scatter your adjacent moves among your stacks.)

Not get crazy with it - max 3 fort moves.

Legitimate if think of this in a realistic way. Why couldn't armies in various areas make simultaneous advances/retreats.

Adds another level of movement between the adjacent/chained(1 time moves) and unlimited fortifications.

[Flavordice]

I'm new here, so maybe this has been brought up before. If so, I apologize profusely.

But I've been playing a lot of larger maps with some friends (and enemies) and I've kinda been wishing that there were some more reinforcement options. Currently there are just 3 (Adjacent, Chained, and Unlimited). I wish that instead of "Unlimited" there was a toggle of some sort that would let the game creator choose the number of troop moves per turn. On big maps, one move a turn is just not enough, but "Unlimited" completely changes the nature of the game. Depending on the size of the map, I would have liked the option of 2 or 3.

Another possible alternative would be to have an "Unlimited Adjacent" option. Since, the unlimited option that currently exists is really just Unlimited Chained. With unlimited adjacent reinforcements at the end of your turn, you could make your isolated background troops mobile, but not rush the front and throw off the strategy of the game. Unlimited Adjacent movements would be perfect in a trenches game too, since it would keep with the movement restricted play style.

these are just my thoughts. Have these options been considered before? If so, is there a reason I'm not noticing, either gameplay wise or programming wise that would hinder what I believe would be a simple addition that would give a lot more options to the game.

[chapcrap]

Here is a thread for unlimited adjacent: https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 35&t=61323

Here is a thread for a custom number of chained reinforcements: https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 4&t=155485

There are other threads as well, such as paratroop reinforcements: https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 5&t=128729

And this one to improve adjacent reinforcements: https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 4&t=181657



Who it be ok with you to pick one of those threads to merge your thread with?

[Col. Wm. Colvill]

I love the idea of having multiple reinforcements without going all the way to unlimited!

Adding a Chained-3 and/or a Chained-5 option seems like it would be a relatively simple programming change that could be implemented pretty quickly.

I understand the issues/concerns/confusion surrounding adding a multiple-move option to adjacent, and I think those things warrant further discussion, but I don't think those discussions should hold up the addition of some multiple Chained options.